Coaching change??

[JCLA]

Never understood the Mo hate.

well considering we didn't make the playoffs 6/9 years and probably more if we didn't play in the shitshow that was the SE division. Hell we were winning divisions with 86 points

 

[StormCast]

well considering we didn't make the playoffs 6/9 years and probably more if we didn't play in the ****show that was the SE division. Hell we were winning divisions with 86 points

But we both know that much of the disdain centers on running the trap. The guy was given very little talent to work with in the pre-salary cap era. Was he great? No. But I don't think he deserves the negativity derived from false perceptions either.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Of course there will be BP hate but no coach has gotten the venom as Maurice has. It could be because of ties to the organization and being recycled but many have just developed a knee-jerk response and become haters by extension. Sure, his clutch-and-grab trap in the early 2000's was boring but with no salary cap how else would they compete with that roster?

He ran a modified system when he came back but so many chalked it up to the trap again, which it wasn't. Almost like a confirmation bias.

The bottom line is there’s a natural inclination to think that a group of players is better than it actually is. Coaches get the blame for a straightforward lack of player ability.

The roster was a tire fire during Mo’s second run. If it’s any better now, the margin is pretty slim. The only difference is they are younger. But as long as Slavin and Skinner (or Aho or whatever third-tier guy is hot this week) are the best players on a roster, that team is going nowhere. Coaching really doesn’t matter much

 

[JCLA]

But we both know that much of the disdain centers on running the trap. The guy was given very little talent to work with in the pre-salary cap era. Was he great? No. But I don't think he deserves the negativity derived from false perceptions either.

He deployed a boring system and the team wasn't wining. That's a perfect concoction for hate.

The coach gets blamed for the team performance, right or wrong. So when as the coach, you deploy a system that has proven very ineffective (5 playoff appearances in 19 years) you're going to receive hate.

Now we can argue until the rooster calls about whether or not he had the talent to make the playoffs. But he didn't make the playoffs, and rightly or wrongly, he's going to receive the hate for that

 

[tarheelhockey]

So when as the coach, you deploy a system that has proven very ineffective (5 playoff appearances in 19 years) you're going to receive hate.

Now we can argue until the rooster calls about whether or not he had the talent to make the playoffs.

I would say that the bolded are in conflict with each other. The system hasn't "proven very ineffective" if the jury's out on whether the team even had playoff level talent to begin with. What if 25% success is extraordinarily good?

 

[StormCast]

He deployed a boring system and the team wasn't wining. That's a perfect concoction for hate.

The coach gets blamed for the team performance, right or wrong. So when as the coach, you deploy a system that has proven very ineffective (5 playoff appearances in 19 years) you're going to receive hate.

Now we can argue until the rooster calls about whether or not he had the talent to make the playoffs. But he didn't make the playoffs, and rightly or wrongly, he's going to receive the hate for that

That may well be your view, though Maurice wasn't the coach for all those years and the Lavi era was a very exciting style, but I'm speaking about many in the fan base who simply equate him with the trap. His 08-09 was anything but boring and they didn't play the trap. But that's what a number of fans cited when he was fired a second time. No more complicated than that.

 

[StormCast]

I would say that the bolded are in conflict with each other. The system hasn't "proven very ineffective" if the jury's out on whether the team even had playoff level talent to begin with. What if 25% success is extraordinarily good?

Fair point and numbers get skewed with a 9 year playoff drought too.

 

[JCLA]

I would say that the bolded are in conflict with each other. The system hasn't "proven very ineffective" if the jury's out on whether the team even had playoff level talent to begin with. What if 25% success is extraordinarily good?

I was mostly just arguing to my point that losing regardless of roster conditions is going to be blamed on the coach whether it's right or wrong. Those two paragraphs weren't meant to be correlated but I get your point.

That may well be your view, though Maurice wasn't the coach for all those years and the Lavi era was a very exciting style, but I'm speaking about many in the fan base who simply equate him with the trap. His 08-09 was anything but boring and they didn't play the trap. But that's what a number of fans cited when he was fired a second time. No more complicated than that.

Maybe so. I, personally, don't give a rats ass what kind of system you use as long as we win.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I was mostly just arguing to my point that losing regardless of roster conditions is going to be blamed on the coach whether it's right or wrong. Those two paragraphs weren't meant to be correlated but I get your point.

That's where I see it as being a lot like trying to be a goalie for this team. It's remarkable how many guys are at least moderately successful in other places then just completely bomb in Carolina, while we sit here talking about how we can't find a goalie.

 

[Joe McGrath]

That's where I see it as being a lot like trying to be a goalie for this team. It's remarkable how many guys are at least moderately successful in other places then just completely bomb in Carolina, while we sit here talking about how we can't find a goalie.

Maybe coaches don’t look good here because goalies can’t play here.

Whatever, everything is JRs fault, f*** that guy.

 

[JCLA]

That's where I see it as being a lot like trying to be a goalie for this team. It's remarkable how many guys are at least moderately successful in other places then just completely bomb in Carolina, while we sit here talking about how we can't find a goalie.

This is something I'll never understand.

 

[JCLA]

currently trying to find our goalie save percentage as a franchise and came across a table of team results since the team moved to raleigh and seeing all the red makes it really burn how often this team misses the playoffs

 

[Canes]

The thing is outside of a few years (2002, 2006, 2009), we've been pretty much been either an afterthought or an outright laughingstock of the league.

Yet we keep coaches and front office personnel around for so long like we're the 1990s Red Wings. I think that has more to do with our moves seemingly never working rather some kind of curse or bad luck. We're content with what we are as a franchise.

 

[RodTheBawd]

That's where I see it as being a lot like trying to be a goalie for this team. It's remarkable how many guys are at least moderately successful in other places then just completely bomb in Carolina, while we sit here talking about how we can't find a goalie.

Yet, they've all bombed everywhere else they went. Unless your point is that decent goalies with upside came here and were permanently ruined, which, at this point I can't say I can argue against.

 

[geehaad]

Four of the 5 times the Canes have made playoffs, they were Maurice-led teams. No, not greatness, but if success is your measure, then you should be shitting on the other coaches first.

As StormCast says, it's blind hate.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I can't think of any goalies outside of Khudobin's hot start this year that really succeeded after their time here, least as long as I've been a fan (2009 Leighton onward).

Mo and Lavi were who we thought they were. Mo can get the most out of a veteran group of guys, which is why, at long last, he's taking a decent Jets team to success ('cause they finally got goatlending). Lavi can get the most out of a team for 3-4 years, then they turn on him. Muller sucked, Peters....I like Peters, I think he'll get another job if he's canned here.

 

[JCLA]

Yet, they've all bombed everywhere else they went. Unless your point is that decent goalies with upside came here and were permanently ruined, which, at this point I can't say I can argue against.

This is how i interpreted it.

 

[JCLA]

Four of the 5 times the Canes have made playoffs, they were Maurice-led teams. No, not greatness, but if success is your measure, then you should be ****ting on the other coaches first.

As StormCast says, it's blind hate.

Well he had the most chances by a country mile

 

[bluedevil58]

I can't think of any goalies outside of Khudobin's hot start this year that really succeeded after their time here, least as long as I've been a fan (2009 Leighton onward).

Mo and Lavi were who we thought they were. Mo can get the most out of a veteran group of guys, which is why, at long last, he's taking a decent Jets team to success ('cause they finally got goatlending). Lavi can get the most out of a team for 3-4 years, then they turn on him. Muller sucked, Peters....I like Peters, I think he'll get another job if he's canned here.

Burke, Kidd,

 

[The Faulker 27]

That's where I see it as being a lot like trying to be a goalie for this team. It's remarkable how many guys are at least moderately successful in other places then just completely bomb in Carolina, while we sit here talking about how we can't find a goalie.

The goalie situation doesn't really add up, but I think the chicken or egg conundrum at least plays a factor. We don't have prolonged success so it affects all aspects of the game, and team, including the goal tender, but we need goal tending to be consistent to have success. If you're a goalie and your getting 2 on 1'd 2-3 times per game, I'm sure it tears you down mentally. Not to mention you might make 1 or 2 great saves, only to watch your inept teammates standing around with their thumbs up their asses while they go for the 3rd rebound, and score. I also think we've had poor luck with goal tenders that have been unable to find their game here. Maybe coaching is issue, but I doubt it. Who knows Cam may have been much better off on another team with better talent, wins, and playoff appearances. We'll never know. Unless he pulls a Tim Thomas somewhere else. That would be the icing on the cake.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

Of course there will be BP hate but no coach has gotten the venom as Maurice has. It could be because of ties to the organization and being recycled but many have just developed a knee-jerk response and become haters by extension. Sure, his clutch-and-grab trap in the early 2000's was boring but with no salary cap how else would they compete with that roster?

He ran a modified system when he came back but so many chalked it up to the trap again, which it wasn't. Almost like a confirmation bias.

A lot of posters really hated how they played with the lead in the 3rd period, often saying it was too defensive and the team lost too many 3rd period leads. I remember looking it up one specific year, deep in the season. It had become a real bone of contention among a few specific guys (don't remember who, unfortunately). It was hilarious seeing that the record was something like 19-1-2, something crazy good. Of course, back in those days it was a little easier to play with the lead than it is today, but it was still an impressive record. Anyways. Yeah. Confirmation bias, or something else.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I also think we've had poor luck with goal tenders that have been unable to find their game here. Maybe coaching is issue, but I doubt it.

This is another of those categories where poorly-resourced ownership leads to all kinds of wacky effects within an organization. There’s so much more to life in the NHL than what we see on the ice.

Imagine playing goalie for a team that hasn’t finished in the top 16 in a decade. One which is also probably the cash-poorest team in the league... practices at a local skating rink... almost never makes truly aggressive upgrades in any aspect of the organization... has a history of breaking their goalies...

At a position where even the slightest distraction upsets the apple cart, this does not seem like an environment where someone is likely to come in here and play lights-out for a long time.

 

[Unsustainable]

This is another of those categories where poorly-resourced ownership leads to all kinds of wacky effects within an organization. There’s so much more to life in the NHL than what we see on the ice.

Imagine playing goalie for a team that hasn’t finished in the top 16 in a decade. One which is also probably the cash-poorest team in the league... practices at a local skating rink... almost never makes truly aggressive upgrades in any aspect of the organization... has a history of breaking their goalies...

At a position where even the slightest distraction upsets the apple cart, this does not seem like an environment where someone is likely to come in here and play lights-out for a long time.

Now that PK is no longer the majority owner, hopefully Dundon opens the check book.

After Thewes died, PK didn’t have the revenue flow to run the Canes like they did before.

 

[Negan4Coach]

This is another of those categories where poorly-resourced ownership leads to all kinds of wacky effects within an organization. There’s so much more to life in the NHL than what we see on the ice.

Imagine playing goalie for a team that hasn’t finished in the top 16 in a decade. One which is also probably the cash-poorest team in the league... practices at a local skating rink... almost never makes truly aggressive upgrades in any aspect of the organization... has a history of breaking their goalies...

At a position where even the slightest distraction upsets the apple cart, this does not seem like an environment where someone is likely to come in here and play lights-out for a long time.

I believe this to a certain extent, but what in Hades did they do in Philly to get Leighton to play lights out? HJs between periods?

 

[StormCast]

A lot of posters really hated how they played with the lead in the 3rd period, often saying it was too defensive and the team lost too many 3rd period leads. I remember looking it up one specific year, deep in the season. It had become a real bone of contention among a few specific guys (don't remember who, unfortunately). It was hilarious seeing that the record was something like 19-1-2, something crazy good. Of course, back in those days it was a little easier to play with the lead than it is today, but it was still an impressive record. Anyways. Yeah. Confirmation bias, or something else.

Yes and whether it's players or coaches, they have "shelf lives" with fans. Sometimes it's just a fatigue factor, sometimes a label or branding issue and sometimes just a need for a change. Regardless, I do find it amusing as well.