Speculation: Boucher: to return or not to return, that is the question [Part 2]

[RAFI BOMB]

I could easily see Boucher as an assistant coach in the NHL for decades after this.

He's very good as a support coach. He's detail oriented and deals with the mental side of the game well. With someone above him dictating tean policy and lineup decisions, that takes away his greatest weakness.

Do you think he would even be willing to go that route? I get the impression that he will just try to take head coaching jobs wherever he can get them. I am not sure he would be willing to be an assistant.

But being an assistant would be good for him. I said last year that the best thing he could do for his career was to go find a very experienced and very reputable coach and work under them as an assistant. He knows a lot about hockey but he lacks practicality. He is more of a theoretical coach who gets bought into his theories and doesn't accept the practical limitations so it works perfectly in his head but not on ice. He could learn a lot from working with a reputable coach

Click to read more...

 

[RAFI BOMB]

I tend to disagree. any team that gets top 10 goaltending makes the playoffs. exceptions to that are few. any team with bottom 10 goaltending doesn't make the playoffs and there again exceptions are few.

in TB, Bishop emerged as the starter, played 60+ games and posted a > 920 save percentage. Bishop became a star. it's pretty unlikely that TB team coached by Cooper makes the playoffs with the sub 900 goaltending the Boucher got.

As a counter to your argument the senators over the last ten seasons have been in large part influenced by goaltending performance. We usually make the playoffs when our goalies are having strong seasons and must them if they don't . But if we look through a number of our previous coaches I think it would be difficult to argue that the majority were good or competent.

So if you argue that Boucher is an adequate coach and he was had the unfortunate luck of bad goaltending couldn't you make the same claim for our previous coaches?

If anything I think your position supports a different argument than the one you are making. From what you said it suggests that goaltending quality may be more important than coaching quality, at least in the short run.

Goaltending is a vital position and we have seen mediocre rosters perform well with elite goaltending such as in Montreal. We have also seen arguably average goaltending offset by an elite defence in Chicago during their cup runs and Anaheim in 2007.

As for coaching, I am not sure which data we could look at to make a proper evaluation. There is likely some minimum performance by goaltenders to make the playoffs and anything below that would make it impossible for a coach to be successful. There must be a handful of teams with average goaltending that were playoff calibre. If we identified them we could maybe assess what the coach did and how to evaluate a coach under those conditions.

 

[BonkTastic]

Do you think he would even be willing to go that route?

At first, probably not... but he's going to have a "come to Jesus" moment when he realizes he's waited for so long and no one has come calling with a HC job and there's no indication that anyone will, and come to terms with the fact that there's no shame in being an assistant coach in the best league in the world.

Jaques Martin has been an assistant for over a decade now, and he's managed to ha e a very long and respected career in that role. Boucher will figure out eventually that it's a perfectly fine career path.

 

[slamigo]

I could easily see Boucher as an assistant coach in the NHL for decades after this.

He's very good as a support coach. He's detail oriented and deals with the mental side of the game well. With someone above him dictating tean policy and lineup decisions, that takes away his greatest weakness.

I could not disagree more. The main thing you look for is judgment. Sound judgment. That is what gains the trust of players and allows them to venture outside their comfort zone and grow.
Boucher pigeon-holes people and consistently exercises poor judgment.
In your scenario, you’ve removed decision making. But I feel that is integral to being a good coach/manager/mentor.

 

[slamigo]

Jaques Martin has been an assistant for over a decade now, and he's managed to ha e a very long and respected career in that role. Boucher will figure out eventually that it's a perfectly fine career path.

I love Jacques Martin. He’s a teacher. I believe he is the prototype perfect asst coach. The guy even holds camps in summer to teach kids.
We are what we do. JM teaches hockey.

 

[DJB]

I love Jacques Martin. He’s a teacher. I believe he is the prototype perfect asst coach. The guy even holds camps in summer to teach kids.
We are what we do. JM teaches hockey.

Honestly id love to see Jacques take over this team right now. I think he'd be a great coach for our young guys

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

Back to Black 2D Jersey’s and Jacques Martin as coach. Let’s do it.

 

[otown]

Should Boucher leave coaching or not get hired with another team I could see the French network picking him up as a panel member for the playoffs.

 

[JD1]

As a counter to your argument the senators over the last ten seasons have been in large part influenced by goaltending performance. We usually make the playoffs when our goalies are having strong seasons and must them if they don't . But if we look through a number of our previous coaches I think it would be difficult to argue that the majority were good or competent.

So if you argue that Boucher is an adequate coach and he was had the unfortunate luck of bad goaltending couldn't you make the same claim for our previous coaches?

If anything I think your position supports a different argument than the one you are making. From what you said it suggests that goaltending quality may be more important than coaching quality, at least in the short run.

Goaltending is a vital position and we have seen mediocre rosters perform well with elite goaltending such as in Montreal. We have also seen arguably average goaltending offset by an elite defence in Chicago during their cup runs and Anaheim in 2007.

As for coaching, I am not sure which data we could look at to make a proper evaluation. There is likely some minimum performance by goaltenders to make the playoffs and anything below that would make it impossible for a coach to be successful. There must be a handful of teams with average goaltending that were playoff calibre. If we identified them we could maybe assess what the coach did and how to evaluate a coach under those conditions.

I agree with you that there is some minimum performance required by goaltending in order to make the playoffs. year 2 for Boucher both here and TB he didn't get numbers anywhere close to what the minimum performance would be. on the one hand it is valid to look at his year 2s and state they sucked. they clearly did. it's also valid to point at goaltending and simply claim you cannot be successful with that level of goaltending and you can't.

in 2017/18 the league average save percentage was 912 and ours was 899.

in 2011/12 the league average save percentage was 914 and TB's was 893.

no coach is going to survive let alone prosper getting that kind of goaltending.

if you look at it over a season, the gap between us and average goaltending would be around 35 goals pushing 45 goals with a bit better than average.

you end up chasing games you shouldn't. you end up tied in games you should be leading. losing games in OT you should have won in regulation. not getting a point in games you should have taken to overtime.

we gave up 12 empty net goals last year. without examining stats game by game, roughly half of those games we likely gave up an extra goal. that's 6 games that should have gone to OT and if you win half of those that's 9 points.

but what's worse than anything statistically is the players know the goaltending is weak.

 

[JD1]

Well of course there were overall differences, but I was making the point that if you look at the underlying numbers they were very similar between year 1 and year 2 (BTW, those numbers were not good). The only outlier was the goaltending.



Well sure, goaltending is a big factor on whether the team has a good year or not. But that's not the point. The point is that the team under Boucher was never good. It's just year 1 we were propped up by amazing goaltending.

we've never had amazing goaltending really. ever. arguably hasek's brief stint. but other than that our good years don't even really qualify as amazing. above sure. sure. good enough. but amazing ? no.

very small differences in goaltending lead to significant differences in year end totals and points

 

[pzeeman]

we've never had amazing goaltending really. ever. arguably hasek's brief stint. but other than that our good years don't even really qualify as amazing. above sure. sure. good enough. but amazing ? no.

very small differences in goaltending lead to significant differences in year end totals and points

What's the saying?

Show me a great coach, I'll show you a great goaltender.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Boucher did a lot this year to prove he's not a capable NHL coach. You can go through all the micromanaging and see how poorly the decisions resulted on the ice but just look at it more broadly and see how little he offers in his position.

Take Montreal and Ottawa as examples. Both teams pegged for the basement at the beginning of the season. One has a great NHL coach, the other is Ottawa. Montreal is now having a great year because a guy like Julien can get more out of little talent whereas Boucher has been carried by the likes of Karlsson, St Louis and Stamkos in his only winning seasons. Boucher's teams win in spite of him. Julien's win in large part due to his coaching.

Boucher is unlikely to ever get a head coaching job in the NHL again or at least for 5+ years. Back to the minors for him unless he wants to resign himself to a support role. Will have to learn how special teams work at this level and how not to defend in an archaic and destructive way. He hasn't evolved at all since entering the league so I don't expect him to.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

I agree with you that there is some minimum performance required by goaltending in order to make the playoffs. year 2 for Boucher both here and TB he didn't get numbers anywhere close to what the minimum performance would be. on the one hand it is valid to look at his year 2s and state they sucked. they clearly did. it's also valid to point at goaltending and simply claim you cannot be successful with that level of goaltending and you can't.

in 2017/18 the league average save percentage was 912 and ours was 899.

in 2011/12 the league average save percentage was 914 and TB's was 893.

no coach is going to survive let alone prosper getting that kind of goaltending.

if you look at it over a season, the gap between us and average goaltending would be around 35 goals pushing 45 goals with a bit better than average.

you end up chasing games you shouldn't. you end up tied in games you should be leading. losing games in OT you should have won in regulation. not getting a point in games you should have taken to overtime.

we gave up 12 empty net goals last year. without examining stats game by game, roughly half of those games we likely gave up an extra goal. that's 6 games that should have gone to OT and if you win half of those that's 9 points.

but what's worse than anything statistically is the players know the goaltending is weak.

I guess the best question based on what you stated is: What role does coaching play in goaltending performance?

I am not sure if there is a clear answer to this. Coaches can influence style of play and tactics by goalies. They can almost certainly influence defensive tactics, shots against, scoring chances against, defensive breakdowns such as odd man rushes against and amount of time shorthanded (amount of penalties taken/time on PK both 5 on 4 and 5 on 3). They can influence line combinations, match ups, which players to put on the ice in key situations such as OT.

Certainly coaches could have the misfortune of having their goaltenders failing to perform but it seems more probable that goaltending performance is related to a myriad of factors such as the ones that I listed which are influenced by the coach.

Again, there isn't necessarily a clear or perfect answer here. Was Boucher unfortunate in having goaltenders that failed to perform? Or did Boucher do things that lead to the failing performance of the goaltenders? Can we free Boucher of blame or fault? Or did his tactics and strategies contribute to the poor performance of his teams?

 

[God Says No]

we've never had amazing goaltending really. ever. arguably hasek's brief stint. but other than that our good years don't even really qualify as amazing. above sure. sure. good enough. but amazing ? no.

very small differences in goaltending lead to significant differences in year end totals and points

I don't know, I'd consider the .926 that Anderson had in Boucher's first year amazing. He alone made Boucher look a lot better than he really is, which is a crappy coach. He should be fired already.

 

[JD1]

I don't know, I'd consider the .926 that Anderson had in Boucher's first year amazing. He alone made Boucher look a lot better than he really is, which is a crappy coach. He should be fired already.

Right but in the same year that Andy posted that 926 Condon posted that 914. Given both of their numbers before and since, it'd be hard to believe that the system deployed didn't have a positive impact on those numbers. Fast forward to year two of both his stints and you have goaltending collapses. What was andy last year? 902? Did Boucher forget how to coach?

 

[JD1]

I don't know, I'd consider the .926 that Anderson had in Boucher's first year amazing. He alone made Boucher look a lot better than he really is, which is a crappy coach. He should be fired already.

So that year there were 9 goalies that played more than 40 games that posted a save percentage > 920. Andy does it on a one off basis now and again, some do it with more regualrity. My point there is perfectly illustrated...we got upper end goaltending and the thought here is we were only successful because of it. Wouldn't it be nice to have a long run of high end goaltending? We've never had that.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

System definitely has an effect on goaltending. We've had a problem for years where the forwards aren't doing their share to help out their defense, and guys not taking away the most dangerous shots (and rebounds) in games. You can't expect any goalie to stand on his head forever.

 

[JD1]

I guess the best question based on what you stated is: What role does coaching play in goaltending performance?

I am not sure if there is a clear answer to this. Coaches can influence style of play and tactics by goalies. They can almost certainly influence defensive tactics, shots against, scoring chances against, defensive breakdowns such as odd man rushes against and amount of time shorthanded (amount of penalties taken/time on PK both 5 on 4 and 5 on 3). They can influence line combinations, match ups, which players to put on the ice in key situations such as OT.

Certainly coaches could have the misfortune of having their goaltenders failing to perform but it seems more probable that goaltending performance is related to a myriad of factors such as the ones that I listed which are influenced by the coach.

Again, there isn't necessarily a clear or perfect answer here. Was Boucher unfortunate in having goaltenders that failed to perform? Or did Boucher do things that lead to the failing performance of the goaltenders? Can we free Boucher of blame or fault? Or did his tactics and strategies contribute to the poor performance of his teams?

Look no further than Brodeur, the winningest goalie of all time, and ask where he ranks amongst the greatest at his position. Sure coaching influenes save percentage. But inadequate goaltending is inadequate and coaching cannot overcome it.

Just watching the game...forget stats...how often does it happen to our team in the last year and a half where we are in a game, play is back and forth or even and a sofy goal goes in. I'd guess that's hapapened 30 times in the last year and a half. Not only are you now chasing the game, it's deflating.

Look at the recent St. L game and the contoversial goal. I was screaming like everyone else but reality is that puck came free. Look at the Tarasenko goal from outside the top of the circle. Neither one is necessarily a bad goal but it's likely neither is on the highlight package as a 10 bell stop either. You gotta have one of those and ideally both. Getting one of them gets us a point amd a chance at 2 in OT.

Anderson has a 906 stat thus far this year. That's just not good enough. And many of those goals against change the game. It is not as simple as saying maybe we should have 15 more stops but we're negative 45 or whatever we are. It's how it changes the game.

We're down 2 to 1. 8 minutes left. We're pressing. Boom soft goal against. Empty netter. We lose 4 to1. Happens way too much with this team unfortunately

 

[BonkTastic]

I could not disagree more. The main thing you look for is judgment. Sound judgment. That is what gains the trust of players and allows them to venture outside their comfort zone and grow.
Boucher pigeon-holes people and consistently exercises poor judgment.
In your scenario, you’ve removed decision making. But I feel that is integral to being a good coach/manager/mentor.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

 

[God Says No]

Right but in the same year that Andy posted that 926 Condon posted that 914. Given both of their numbers before and since, it'd be hard to believe that the system deployed didn't have a positive impact on those numbers. Fast forward to year two of both his stints and you have goaltending collapses. What was andy last year? 902? Did Boucher forget how to coach?

Nope. He doesn't know how to coach. You seem to be missing my point. Andy had a career year. But that wasn't due to Boucher. The team still gave up a lot of shots and high danger chances against, we still couldn't exit the zone without Karlsson, we still didn't maintain any regular offensive zone time. It was just that Andy had his best year of his career that year. I don't attribute that much to Boucher's system. Condon was just lightning in the bottle, a la Hammond.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Well of course there were overall differences, but I was making the point that if you look at the underlying numbers they were very similar between year 1 and year 2 (BTW, those numbers were not good). The only outlier was the goaltending.

Yeah, the team in 17-18 was a carbon copy of the 16-17 team because the underlying numbers are similar

Listen, no one will argue that Anderson and Condon were any good last year. What is funny is you claiming that because the underlying numbers are comparable outside of goaltending that goaltending was the only reason the team performed well in the regular season and got to double OT of the ECF.

Karlsson. BOOM, there goes your entire analysis.

 

[Korpse]

Nope. He doesn't know how to coach. You seem to be missing my point. Andy had a career year. But that wasn't due to Boucher. The team still gave up a lot of shots and high danger chances against, we still couldn't exit the zone without Karlsson, we still didn't maintain any regular offensive zone time. It was just that Andy had his best year of his career that year. I don't attribute that much to Boucher's system. Condon was just lightning in the bottle, a la Hammond.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that both goaltenders overachieved to a degree. I don’t know how you can look at two seasons and say they were similar. In 2016/2017 they limited outman rushes and eliminated second chance opportunities in front of the net. That goes a long way in making your goaltender looking good, there were a good number of easy nights for the goaltenders. It was a complete team buy in. Everyone was out there giving it their all and they were a hard team to play against. You had to fight for your space against them.

If you want to look at underlying numbers. Look at how the rank gets better as you progress from CA>FA>SA>HDCA. It paints a pretty telling picture, they were a team that gave up quantity to eliminate quality. You mention that they gave up a lot of shots and high danger scoring chances, yet they ranked 13th in both categories.

 

[JD1]

Nope. He doesn't know how to coach. You seem to be missing my point. Andy had a career year. But that wasn't due to Boucher. The team still gave up a lot of shots and high danger chances against, we still couldn't exit the zone without Karlsson, we still didn't maintain any regular offensive zone time. It was just that Andy had his best year of his career that year. I don't attribute that much to Boucher's system. Condon was just lightning in the bottle, a la Hammond.

I'm not missing your point. I don't agree with it Andy played well. not career year well. he's had several stretches during his career where he has posted better than 920 goaltending over a prolonged period.

the rest of your points I agree with. then we had TDL upgrades which didn't impact the team because of a pile of injuries at the time. we hit the playoffs healthy and deserved that run which included Anderson playing well

 

[DJB]

I no longer think hes getting canned in season now.

To me it would have happened by now if it was going to happen.

 

[Ice-Tray]

we've never had amazing goaltending really. ever. arguably hasek's brief stint. but other than that our good years don't even really qualify as amazing. above sure. sure. good enough. but amazing ? no.

very small differences in goaltending lead to significant differences in year end totals and points

Actually the best goaltending we’ve ever had has been Anderson.

He had an 18 game stint in 2011 after arriving from Col where he put up a .939 S%.... those are epic numbers.

He then followed it up a few years later playing only 24 games for us (chicken year?), but posting a sparkling .941 s% over those 24 games. That is I think the second highest s% ever posted over that many games.

4th all time in playoff S% is also indicative of some elite goaltending in the post season for this team. If we had Andy in net instead of Hasek, we would have been an even better team, and with Andy’s playoff numbers we would have been as close to a shoe in for a cup as possible.

In sum, Andy has definitely had amazing stretches of goaltending, the problem is that he has totally been a season on, season off guy.