Coach Discussion: Coaching Thread 3

[Hunter368]

I qualified the statement the same as you did. Many posters here are better. There are many astute people on this board distributed among the mods and the rest of us. Now, are they all Brian Munz-level students of the game? Well, I'll let the jury decide... Was Munz an unfair example? Hmmm...well there are always the great hockey minds of Paul Edmonds, Dennis Beyak and Kevin Sawyer to evaluate the local HF talent against...

I'm not sure how much softening of demand TNSE planned for...or how soon they expected it. Their actions certainly seem to suggest they were expecting the honeymoon to last forever, what with the way they shunned such foolish and frivolous notions like respect for, and retention of, their loyal customers.

Luckily, I think Chippy's so enthralled by his hockey-man cosplay, that he will endure some significant financial losses before he starts threatening the various levels of government with sale and relocation unless they pony up some more cash.

HFB does have some great posters and many bad ones as well......13 yrs old & up gains you entry sadly.

Do these HFB posters have the same access to NHL players, coaches, GM’s and scouts as the professional media? You think these media people form their entire opinion without influence from all the real NHL experts & players & scouts etc?

Your naming local minor media guys only, I don’t value their opinion much either......I’m talking the national media like Bobby MAC, Friedman, etc

To be clear, if we’re only talking local minor guys, then yes I completely agree with you they aren’t good.

 

[Whileee]

Crazy that he still manages to get jobs in the league - With how he apparantly leaves organizationa in shambles..

Fine, you don't like the man, but come on...

I think he's effective at jolting a team for a short period of success, but quickly wears out his welcome, often alienating players for the longer term. I don't think that's the right approach for the Jets in this market. As someone else mentioned, based on the discussion on this board, fans want the young talented players to play more, and they are greatly offended when Maurice plays vets and demotes young "stars". This board would be bonkers with Tortorella, who would bench Laine and Ehlers and elevate players like Lowry, Copp and other grinders way more than Maurice ever did. Basically, he has absolutely no interest in developing or coddling young players. Some still develop well, but many others go down the tubes.

 

[Whileee]

Many posters on this public forum are certainly better than NHL media...so there is also that fact.

Chipman can do what he wants...he's not immune from criticism though.

In general, I'm not sure which way things are going to go for ticket sales in the future. Things had already softened considerably. Now with the pandemic, who knows when things will return to normal - if ever? Maybe there will be a surge of pent up demand to see live sports and revenues will rebound quickly...or maybe the desire to spend hundreds of dollars watching a live event will lose its appeal for an extended period. For me, the inclination to spend that kind of money on a team that seems more interested in some strange concept of loyalty and management stability than winning seems to be gone forever.

I disagree with your interpretation of the goals and approaches of the franchise. They've been very clear about a couple of concepts:

1) They want to build a team that has durable quality, over an extended period of time, rather than a team that has strong "boom and bust" cycles. I think that's a good reading of the market and fan base. Consider how many hardcore fans on this board were bummed out because the Jets traded futures (picks / prospects) to try to go for a cup that last couple of seasons. Thread after thread on this board focuses on the draft and prospects, because fans want long-term success. I doubt that many Jets fans would want them to trade this year's #10 overall for a short-term solution to strengthen their team for the next couple of seasons, either.

2) There is a clear recognition that the Winnipeg market provides substantial constraints in the trade and free agent markets. Many potential trades that are discussed on this board are completely unrealistic because there is almost no chance that the player will consider waiving their trade protection to come to Winnipeg. When a relatively high profile player does agree to come to Winnipeg, there's great fanfare that he waived his NTC to come to Winnipeg, even if it's just for a playoff run (hello, Stastny). That leaves the Jets with a much narrower range of options for creating a consistent winner, relying more on draft and develop and trying to keep core players for reasonable contracts.

My interpretation is that the franchise / ownership concept around stability and "loyalty" is very much in response to meeting the above challenges. A rapid turnover of players, coaches and management is contrary to the concept of developing a consistently good team in an environment where many players don't want to stay long-term. So I see the stability and "loyalty" as a deliberate strategy to be able to combat some of the headwinds. Having players like Scheifele, Morrissey, Ehlers, Connor (and hopefully Laine) commit long-term to the Jets is built on developing a "team-first" culture, and a sense of commitment. That's a two-way street. Also, if you want a Head Coach that is willing to focus on developing young players and maintaining a strong commitment to the franchise by the key players, he has to approach coaching in a different way. For one, he needs to put aside "win at all costs" as a mentality in some seasons where the priority is youth development (like 2015/16 and 2016/17). Second, he might need to develop a strong relationship with the veteran leaders, since they are the ones that need to create a sense of loyalty to the Jets in the longer term. That's why an incendiary coach like Tortorella wouldn't work in this market - he would alienate players and make it much more difficult for the Jets to retain them, creating a revolving door for their prized young players that they've drafted and developed.

Clearly, the Jets have made mistakes in terms of player assessments, etc. But I don't think they are very wrong about their overall approach, and I certainly can't fault them for committing to loyalty and management stability. When I look around the NHL, coaching and management positions are filled by a revolving door of the same faces with new teams. Occasionally they succeed and become the shiny new object, and then they flame out and turn up somewhere else. I have yet to see a team put together a truly new and innovative management / coaching model that is reaping much superior results.

 

[SUX2BU]

already put my offer in, but the Jets said no.

my offer.... make me the head coach for 1 season, pay me $150,000. If I miss the playoffs I’ll give half of it back ( I still gotta eat ) , but if I make the playoffs the Jets owe me $1,000,000 after taxes and a pair of life time season tickets in the Loge.

this is the coaching thread, not the fantasy thread ....

 

[SUX2BU]

Wow the hate for Maurice is strong here, hopefully some on here put their resumes in when Maurice gets fired because apparently it's a easy job to do. Shouldn't Chevy be fired first though for extending Maurice?

well, this is the coaching thread where no prisoners are taken .....

 

[SUX2BU]

Unless they switch TV to pay per view. You'll still have to pay some (or maybe you won't watch) but you will pay less. And if you find yourself missing the arena experience, just get a friend to come over and sit in front of you so his head is blocking some of the TV screen.

But if he’s sitting beside you, you have to get up to let him by .....

 

[JetsUK]

This all the way. He is an inspiring motivational coach but he is being outclassed in strategy and doesn't adjust well in-game. Player deployment has never been a strong suit (I don't necessarily subscribe to the 'vet' favouritism theory, but he definitely has his favourites that seemingly do no wrong in his eyes). I still remember Petan's interview when he was sent down, and he was asked if the coach had given him advice on what to work on or how to crack the lineup, and he looked very frustrated and basically said he wasn't given any direction. I got the same sense from Niku - it was like Maurice just wasn't creative enough to use certain skillsets (he is stuck with 2 scoring lines, a grinding line, and a crap 4th line with minimal minutes; even when we had the horses to roll 3 scoring lines and a grinding line back in the Armia days it wasn't even tried).

No single person can do everything well - but his assistants are not doing enough to cover his weaknesses. We need someone new in the org that can take care of that for him, and he can continue to motivate and make players feel inspired and welcome in the organization, do damage control with the media and tell stories about the olden days that make everyone feel sentimental...

Great post. And I agree that some capable and creative assistants would be a real asset behind the Jets' bench -- so long as they don't try and run it -- but not sure how often that happens in a hockey culture where coaches generally get to choose their assistants and where there is likely a strong disincentive to pick someone who may bump you out of the job.

 

[QuietContrarian]

I think he's effective at jolting a team for a short period of success, but quickly wears out his welcome, often alienating players for the longer term. I don't think that's the right approach for the Jets in this market. As someone else mentioned, based on the discussion on this board, fans want the young talented players to play more, and they are greatly offended when Maurice plays vets and demotes young "stars". This board would be bonkers with Tortorella, who would bench Laine and Ehlers and elevate players like Lowry, Copp and other grinders way more than Maurice ever did. Basically, he has absolutely no interest in developing or coddling young players. Some still develop well, but many others go down the tubes.

I guess it’s just one of those cases of agree to disagree.

He did well with Tampa, NY and he is doing well in Columbus - I know alot of Jackets fans who really like him.

Also, I think he has handled PLD and Bjorkstrand very, very well.

I don’t think he will coddle ANYONE, which is a good thing, and this also includes coddling vets, which I think Mo is guilty of.

 

[SUX2BU]

I guess it’s just one of those cases of agree to disagree.

He did well with Tampa, NY and he is doing well in Columbus - I know alot of Jackets fans who really like him.

Also, I think he has handled PLD and Bjorkstrand very, very well.

I don’t think he will coddle ANYONE, which is a good thing, and this also includes coddling vets, which I think Mo is guilty of.

agreed, it’s time that there is accountability whether it be a player, coach or GM

that may bend some noses out of joint but this is needed for this team to improve....

 

[surixon]

I disagree with your interpretation of the goals and approaches of the franchise. They've been very clear about a couple of concepts:

1) They want to build a team that has durable quality, over an extended period of time, rather than a team that has strong "boom and bust" cycles. I think that's a good reading of the market and fan base. Consider how many hardcore fans on this board were bummed out because the Jets traded futures (picks / prospects) to try to go for a cup that last couple of seasons. Thread after thread on this board focuses on the draft and prospects, because fans want long-term success. I doubt that many Jets fans would want them to trade this year's #10 overall for a short-term solution to strengthen their team for the next couple of seasons, either.

2) There is a clear recognition that the Winnipeg market provides substantial constraints in the trade and free agent markets. Many potential trades that are discussed on this board are completely unrealistic because there is almost no chance that the player will consider waiving their trade protection to come to Winnipeg. When a relatively high profile player does agree to come to Winnipeg, there's great fanfare that he waived his NTC to come to Winnipeg, even if it's just for a playoff run (hello, Stastny). That leaves the Jets with a much narrower range of options for creating a consistent winner, relying more on draft and develop and trying to keep core players for reasonable contracts.

My interpretation is that the franchise / ownership concept around stability and "loyalty" is very much in response to meeting the above challenges. A rapid turnover of players, coaches and management is contrary to the concept of developing a consistently good team in an environment where many players don't want to stay long-term. So I see the stability and "loyalty" as a deliberate strategy to be able to combat some of the headwinds. Having players like Scheifele, Morrissey, Ehlers, Connor (and hopefully Laine) commit long-term to the Jets is built on developing a "team-first" culture, and a sense of commitment. That's a two-way street. Also, if you want a Head Coach that is willing to focus on developing young players and maintaining a strong commitment to the franchise by the key players, he has to approach coaching in a different way. For one, he needs to put aside "win at all costs" as a mentality in some seasons where the priority is youth development (like 2015/16 and 2016/17). Second, he might need to develop a strong relationship with the veteran leaders, since they are the ones that need to create a sense of loyalty to the Jets in the longer term. That's why an incendiary coach like Tortorella wouldn't work in this market - he would alienate players and make it much more difficult for the Jets to retain them, creating a revolving door for their prized young players that they've drafted and developed.

Clearly, the Jets have made mistakes in terms of player assessments, etc. But I don't think they are very wrong about their overall approach, and I certainly can't fault them for committing to loyalty and management stability. When I look around the NHL, coaching and management positions are filled by a revolving door of the same faces with new teams. Occasionally they succeed and become the shiny new object, and then they flame out and turn up somewhere else. I have yet to see a team put together a truly new and innovative management / coaching model that is reaping much superior results.

Nice post. I totally understand the logic behind the type of culture that the org is trying to build. Having said that at some point sustained results are going to have to follow or the organization risks alienating the fan base.

 

[LowLefty]

Nice post. I totally understand the logic behind the type of culture that the org is trying to build. Having said that at some point sustained results are going to have to follow or the organization risks alienating the fan base.

When you consider the points Whileee has noted, they really have to follow the model that works in this market - the options might be considered limited. What we really need is a fan base that understands the restraints / limitations.

 

[Gm0ney]

I disagree with your interpretation of the goals and approaches of the franchise. They've been very clear about a couple of concepts:

1) They want to build a team that has durable quality, over an extended period of time, rather than a team that has strong "boom and bust" cycles. I think that's a good reading of the market and fan base. Consider how many hardcore fans on this board were bummed out because the Jets traded futures (picks / prospects) to try to go for a cup that last couple of seasons. Thread after thread on this board focuses on the draft and prospects, because fans want long-term success. I doubt that many Jets fans would want them to trade this year's #10 overall for a short-term solution to strengthen their team for the next couple of seasons, either.

2) There is a clear recognition that the Winnipeg market provides substantial constraints in the trade and free agent markets. Many potential trades that are discussed on this board are completely unrealistic because there is almost no chance that the player will consider waiving their trade protection to come to Winnipeg. When a relatively high profile player does agree to come to Winnipeg, there's great fanfare that he waived his NTC to come to Winnipeg, even if it's just for a playoff run (hello, Stastny). That leaves the Jets with a much narrower range of options for creating a consistent winner, relying more on draft and develop and trying to keep core players for reasonable contracts.

My interpretation is that the franchise / ownership concept around stability and "loyalty" is very much in response to meeting the above challenges. A rapid turnover of players, coaches and management is contrary to the concept of developing a consistently good team in an environment where many players don't want to stay long-term. So I see the stability and "loyalty" as a deliberate strategy to be able to combat some of the headwinds. Having players like Scheifele, Morrissey, Ehlers, Connor (and hopefully Laine) commit long-term to the Jets is built on developing a "team-first" culture, and a sense of commitment. That's a two-way street. Also, if you want a Head Coach that is willing to focus on developing young players and maintaining a strong commitment to the franchise by the key players, he has to approach coaching in a different way. For one, he needs to put aside "win at all costs" as a mentality in some seasons where the priority is youth development (like 2015/16 and 2016/17). Second, he might need to develop a strong relationship with the veteran leaders, since they are the ones that need to create a sense of loyalty to the Jets in the longer term. That's why an incendiary coach like Tortorella wouldn't work in this market - he would alienate players and make it much more difficult for the Jets to retain them, creating a revolving door for their prized young players that they've drafted and developed.

Clearly, the Jets have made mistakes in terms of player assessments, etc. But I don't think they are very wrong about their overall approach, and I certainly can't fault them for committing to loyalty and management stability. When I look around the NHL, coaching and management positions are filled by a revolving door of the same faces with new teams. Occasionally they succeed and become the shiny new object, and then they flame out and turn up somewhere else. I have yet to see a team put together a truly new and innovative management / coaching model that is reaping much superior results.

Yeah I don't think having Tortorella - the least player-friendly coach - here would help. But at the same time, I don't think you need to give every coach and assistant lifetime tenure.

If no one's ever on the hotseat, well, good for them and this culture they're building, but not good for results...and how much is it really helping attract or retain players? There are a few Troubas out there who want to pick and choose where they go, but most players will stick around with the team that drafted and developed them.

Anyway, maybe the market can't handle boom and bust cycles...but the d&d+loyalty+keep coaches forever regardless of results policy seems like a path to interminable mediocrity.

 

[Gm0ney]

You think large capital projects in the 100+ million of dollars is planned and executed in one year? You realize many of those new revenue streams have been planned for years before you ever heard the first hint of them right? Surely you know that.......right?

Is TNS a new revenue stream to support the Jets, or were the Jets a foot in the door to leverage into lucrative, subsidized real estate developments in a special SHED tax zone that happens to encompass the arena, Centrepoint and now TNS. Perhaps shiny new buildings next to the arena, along with unfireable coaches and management and overpaying vets on the downslope of their careers will help attract and retain millionaire 20-somethings? It's the circle of life, Simba!

 

[Joe Hallenback]

Yeah I don't think having Tortorella - the least player-friendly coach - here would help. But at the same time, I don't think you need to give every coach and assistant lifetime tenure.

If no one's ever on the hotseat, well, good for them and this culture they're building, but not good for results...and how much is it really helping attract or retain players? There are a few Troubas out there who want to pick and choose where they go, but most players will stick around with the team that drafted and developed them.

Anyway, maybe the market can't handle boom and bust cycles...but the d&d+loyalty+keep coaches forever regardless of results policy seems like a path to interminable mediocrity.

So the smart thing to do is to
Get the coach that is least player friendly coach
Try to attract players to the least favorite city in the NHL
Try to get them to stay to the least favorite city in the NHL
Sounds like a solid plan

btw I don't hate Torts as a coach. In fact I think it would be hillarious if we were to hire him especially because he loves to play grind it out defensive first hockey.

 

[surixon]

When you consider the points Whileee has noted, they really have to follow the model that works in this market - the options might be considered limited. What we really need is a fan base that understands the restraints / limitations.

I understand the restraints and limitations but you still have to have personal accountability as well otherwise all you are setting up is a country club atmosphere where complacency creeps in.

I am a supporter of Chevy and have for the most part like how he builds our rosters and is patient with our players.

I understand why the org likes Maurice as he is an charismatic speaker that seems to have a very good relationahip with most of the players who play for him. All things that can help attract and retain players. I wouldnt have as much of an issue with him if he wasn't so hierarchical and old old school. I also wouldn't have a much of an issue if he brought in someone and left the tactics to them.

 

[Whileee]

I understand the restraints and limitations but you still have to have personal accountability as well otherwise all you are setting up is a country club atmosphere where complacency creeps in.

I am a supporter of Chevy and have for the most part like how he builds our rosters and is patient with our players.

I understand why the org likes Maurice as he is an charismatic speaker that seems to have a very good relationahip with most of the players who play for him. All things that can help attract and retain players. I wouldnt have as much of an issue with him if he wasn't so hierarchical and old old school. I also wouldn't have a much of an issue if he brought in someone and left the tactics to them.

Good rosters make good coaches. Basically, good execution is more important than pure tactics. Many different coaching systems are successful if they have a good team... Consider how different these teams are in tactics...

Isles
Flyers
Caps
Vegas
Bruins
Blues

 

[surixon]

Good rosters make good coaches. Basically, good execution is more important than pure tactics. Many different coaching systems are successful if they have a good team... Consider how different these teams are in tactics...

Isles
Flyers
Caps
Vegas
Bruins
Blues

I really don't care which tactics are used as long as they are designed based on what types of players we have instead of what types of players we wished we had. Yes execution is a big factor but you need to be employing schemes that take advantage of the types of players you have. If the system comes naturally to a player then they don't have to think about the game, decisions are instinctual and execution follows. Imo what we incorporated last year was a pretty foreign concept to many of our players who are predominantly offensive first and used to playing aggressively on the forecheck and through the nz. We slowed things up and imo our players struggled to adapt which lead to crappy execution.

If we fix the defense I hope we go back to running a system that is more in line with how we played in 2017-18. That to me is Jets hockey, what we saw last year was nowhere near that.

 

[Gm0ney]

So the smart thing to do is to
Get the coach that is least player friendly coach
Try to attract players to the least favorite city in the NHL
Try to get them to stay to the least favorite city in the NHL
Sounds like a solid plan

btw I don't hate Torts as a coach. In fact I think it would be hillarious if we were to hire him especially because he loves to play grind it out defensive first hockey.

I believe I said Tortorella would be a bad choice if you're trying to attract players. But we can't do too much about the City of Winnipeg's innate appeal to 20-something millionaires. We could try to look like we're trying to win though, instead of turning the all the coaching jobs into Canadian Senate appointments.

Agent: The Jets called about a contract.
Player: Ugh, Winnipeg...
Agent: Well, they have employed Charlie Huddy for two straight decades.
Player:

 

[Whileee]

I really don't care which tactics are used as long as they are designed based on what types of players we have instead of what types of players we wished we had. Yes execution is a big factor but you need to be employing schemes that take advantage of the types of players you have. If the system comes naturally to a player then they don't have to think about the game, decisions are instinctual and execution follows. Imo what we incorporated last year was a pretty foreign concept to many of our players who are predominantly offensive first and used to playing aggressively on the forecheck and through the nz. We slowed things up and imo our players struggled to adapt which lead to crappy execution.

If we fix the defense I hope we go back to running a system that is more in line with how we played in 2017-18. That to me is Jets hockey, what we saw last year was nowhere near that.

As I recall, Maurice was the head coach of the Jets in 2017/18.

 

[Whileee]

I believe I said Tortorella would be a bad choice if you're trying to attract players. But we can't do too much about the City of Winnipeg's innate appeal to 20-something millionaires. We could try to look like we're trying to win though, instead of turning the all the coaching jobs into Canadian Senate appointments.

Agent: The Jets called about a contract.
Player: Ugh, Winnipeg...
Agent: Well, they have employed Charlie Huddy for two straight decades.
Player:

Because players like nothing better than a revolving door of coaches. Players realize better than fans what coaches are and are not responsible for. I'm pretty sure they don't think that only teams that keep switching coaches are trying to win.

Remember when Gallant was a bum, then a genius in Vegas, then canned? Now they have retread DeBoer, and everyone is acting like he's a genius after he was run out of San Jose and joined Vegas.

As far as I can tell, franchises with a lot of turnover in management and coaching tend to be the basket cases in the league.

 

[surixon]

As I recall, Maurice was the head coach of the Jets in 2017/18.

Well then hopefully he does another analytics deep dive and derives something good for this group. I would like to see good play from this team more then once every 3 years.

 

[surixon]

Because players like nothing better than a revolving door of coaches. Players realize better than fans what coaches are and are not responsible for. I'm pretty sure they don't think that only teams that keep switching coaches are trying to win.

Remember when Gallant was a bum, then a genius in Vegas, then canned? Now they have retread DeBoer, and everyone is acting like he's a genius after he was run out of San Jose and joined Vegas.

As far as I can tell, franchises with a lot of turnover in management and coaching tend to be the basket cases in the league.

Yup Buffalo and Edmonton Stick out like a sore thumb there. The best run orgs have employed either 2 or 3 head coaches the last 10 years.

 

[LowLefty]

I really don't care which tactics are used as long as they are designed based on what types of players we have instead of what types of players we wished we had. Yes execution is a big factor but you need to be employing schemes that take advantage of the types of players you have. If the system comes naturally to a player then they don't have to think about the game, decisions are instinctual and execution follows. Imo what we incorporated last year was a pretty foreign concept to many of our players who are predominantly offensive first and used to playing aggressively on the forecheck and through the nz. We slowed things up and imo our players struggled to adapt which lead to crappy execution.

If we fix the defense I hope we go back to running a system that is more in line with how we played in 2017-18. That to me is Jets hockey, what we saw last year was nowhere near that.

If we want to stay in the present, I'd say your last paragraph pretty much explains why we needed to change tactics.
You can't continue down the same road if you don't have the team to support the plan - and we didn't last season.

When you lose most of your effective Dmen, the game is going to change - you're offensive players are going to be asked to play the game differently - they have to. We can't play an offensive game without the puck. Simply asking everyone to play to their strengths and ignore the fact that they need to first get the puck, is a tough sell. The Dmen play a huge role in puck retrieval in our end - and if you don't have the horses, you are playing without the puck. Our offensive minded skilled forwards are pretty much useless in that environment.

Now if you were to tell me we need to play a more aggressive checking game with an emphasis on puck pursuit and speed, we'd be aligned. That's exactly what we needed to do but didn't. Do you think the coach asked the guys to play a slower with a less aggressive check and pursuit? I know he didn't because that's the game he's been pushing since day one - 2017-18 was a great example.
Lose your Dcore and that type of game evaporates - you need the guys on the back end to be able to get things rolling - they need to create the turnovers and the quick outlets - didn't happen and the reason is obvious.

Help is coming on the back end - hopefully a center is part of the equation - and it won't happen over night. But when it does, watch what happens when you don't spend most of the shift in your own end trying to gain possession. Your skilled O players will actually have enough gas in the tank to drive offense. This isn't about systems - it's about holes in the line up that force you to change game plans even if the plan is not suited to the players you have.

So the answer is, patch up the weak areas - draft, trade, develop.
There's lots of good discussion taking place on how best to do this including the above along with time lines. I'm in the camp that thinks the org will take their time fixing this - probably via draft and develop.I'm OK with that.

 

[QuietContrarian]

So the smart thing to do is to
Get the coach that is least player friendly coach
Try to attract players to the least favorite city in the NHL
Try to get them to stay to the least favorite city in the NHL
Sounds like a solid plan

btw I don't hate Torts as a coach. In fact I think it would be hillarious if we were to hire him especially because he loves to play grind it out defensive first hockey.

I think people are misunderstanding - I like Torts, but I do not think he is the best fit here.

I would love someone new, an up and commer, a risktaker - Torts is none of those!
But I still think he is a good coach!

I think we just really need some winds of change here - We are stale as a week old potato chip!

 

[QuietContrarian]

We just have to build a huge glass dome over Winnipeg and one over lake winnipeg.

Color the water azure blue, dig out sandy beaches, build a few luxury highrises, a few nightclubs, a world class pga rated golf course.

Then we just need to raise the avg. temp to around LA temps.


EASY FIX - Boom True North is now the most wanted place to stay for hockey players!