Fault: Trotz or Poile

[StarvinArvyn33]

Im to the point where I'm convinced no GM will trade us a top 3 forward due to us having rinne and weber. What GM would want to be the one to make us into a powerhouse in this already competitive league? Its going to take a ludicrous FA offer to get it done, and even then I think our rep around the league, being a tight knit, no BS club (Radulov-AK incident), may scare some of the more higher end talent as petty as it sounds I think it plays a part.

 

[StarvinArvyn33]

Los Angeles is a lower scoring team than we are.

Kopitar is a great forward, but he isn't a game changer. Neither are Richards or Carter. What LA does have, though, is good balance up front with some guys who are legitimate top six players to complement a strong defensive core and an elite goaltender.

Exactly what we need to be trying to do rather than hoping we can get one elite forward.

Agreed, which is why i was partial on trading leggy, he is a jack of all trades. He could've been our 3rd line center until he retires, due to him blending with our d first style.

 

[Gnashville]

Well this is interesting.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/2...0031/Poile-could-bring-change-Predators-style

Were Poile’s comments a shot at the coaching staff and the two-way style that Barry Trotz employs?

The two men have always displayed a united front, showing that they’re together in their views of the team. But when Poile fired assistant Peter Horachek last summer and hired Phil Housley, it was the first sign of discord between the two men in a long time.

Will Poile ask Trotz to coach a different way? Has he changed his view of Trotz, the only coach in team history?

It only took 15 years for management to realize that it is not 1998 anymore and the Devils way of winning by locking down every thing may not work. FYI teams are actually allowed to win games by scoring more goals than the opposition. Maybe the coaching staff will quit burying talented players on 4th lines while giving the grinders top minutes. Or maybe there will be a coaching change to someone that will allow some mistakes on D if they create offense? Either way I don't see Trotz lasting through next season. He will never allow young kids to develop. He will never stop preaching a Defensive two-way game, or a one-way game as along as it is Defense.

 

[Enoch]

I think Housely has brought a ton to this team. The defense is so much better than last year from a movement, transition, spacing, and offensive perspective. Ellis is putting it together. Josi has taken ANOTHER step forward. Weber's offensive game has been better. The powerplay is roling, and it is largely due to the defense...

Interesting speculation.

 

[dulzhok]

Los Angeles is a lower scoring team than we are.

Kopitar is a great forward, but he isn't a game changer. Neither are Richards or Carter. What LA does have, though, is good balance up front with some guys who are legitimate top six players to complement a strong defensive core and an elite goaltender.

Exactly what we need to be trying to do rather than hoping we can get one elite forward.

Kopitar, Richards, and Carter have all scored a PPG at one point in their career. Richard and Kopitar scored PPG in deep playoff runs.

We have no one close to that.

 

[ThirdManIn]

While that is pretty much true (Kopitar has never officially been at a PPG, but he's come one point away once, two points away one other time and six points away another), I would say a game changing forward is going to be one who is PPG every season, or at least way more often than not. Richards and Carter haven't done it since 2008-2009, so never with LA.

Those three are all on the very good end of the spectrum when it comes to offensive players, and I'd put Kopitar the closest to elite when you take into account he is the most consistent and he plays solid defensively. None of them are game changers, which was the point trying to be made.

We do need some very good offensive forwards. We don't need a game changer.

 

[dulzhok]

Kopitar is a game changer. May not be Crosby, but a step below.

20 point in 20 games, leading the Kings to Stanley Cup. That is game changer, no question.

But yes, Kings play fairly defensive and are built for playoffs.

 

[ThirdManIn]

Sounds to me like players they needed to get hot got hot at the right time. They were terrible offensively that entire season (the whole team).

It would be interesting to see the reaction of a lot of fans if we got forwards like Kopitar, Richard and Carter yet remained in the bottom 5 of the league in scoring two out of three years after putting them all together.

 

[dulzhok]

It would be interesting to see the reaction of a lot of fans if we got forwards like Kopitar, Richard and Carter yet remained in the bottom 5 of the league in scoring two out of three years after putting them all together.

Pretty sure winning a cup helps with people's reaction.

 

[jwhouk]

There was one other thing with the Kings, in case everyone forgot: the head coach who took them to the Cup wasn't the same one they started the season with.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

There was one other thing with the Kings, in case everyone forgot: the head coach who took them to the Cup wasn't the same one they started the season with.

They did get a bit of a lift when Sutter took over, though still only managed to come in as the 8th seed. Funny enough, one of the reasons Murray was fired was due to how horrible the offense was under him, and it hasn't really been much better under Sutter. I think Carter was as big a piece of the puzzle as Sutter was. The defense and Quick obviously played a humongous role as well. In 25 years of watching that team, it was one of the strangest seasons I've witnessed from them. So anti-climatically dominant in the playoffs, and so wildly inconsistent at other times.

 

[101st_fan]

It was an example of a game changer or a game changing play. How many guys in the league do this on a nightly basis? More than enough. Do we need to make a list?

I am so sick of the excuses or your answers are nebulous or he's a top 3 because he's in the top 90 in scoring or this or that. It's like the excuses the team makes on a continual basis. It's the excuses of injuries or Pekka being out or they were a higher seed or they were on a roll or whatever else we feel like coming up with. At the end of the day all we have is excuses.

Name me one freaking player that has played for this team in 15 years at the forward position that has been dominant for a season and has taken the team on his back to make plays or win games on his own or made others around him better on a nightly basis? It hasn't happened. Is the word dominant going to be too hard to understand for some? Elite? Would that do? Stud any better?

How about this, is there a guy that people have paid to see play the game for this team because they were that good? The biggest name in this town for years was Tootoo because of the checks he laid and the fights he got in to. That was the draw. No one ever said, hey, let's go to the Preds game tonight to go watch Legwand or Erat or Hornqvist or Fisher or Arnott or Dumont or Sullivan or Radulov or Hartnell. They were or still are good players but they are not main event status. They are not guys that you pay to see play the game.

I'm sure I've missed out on some other great cliche's or synonyms but I really don't care anymore. If you want to justify average or mediocrity, please feel free to go ahead and do just that. Some us expect more out of a pro franchise. Some of us want more than to just make it to the playoffs. Some of us want to spend money on an entertaining product on the ice.

BTW, JW, this wasn't directed at you for what it's worth, your post was just the straw that broke my back on this topic.

Glenn, you keep using subjective terms to describe other subjective terms after discounting the PPG career players (objective, measurable, quantifiable) that you made it quite clear you were not taking about. Not surprisingly, your Forsberg example uses one of those extremely rare players that averaged over a point per game for his career.

 

[101st_fan]

Get this offense into the top 10 in 2-3 years while the defense is starting to peak and watch the team climb the standings into honest-to-God contention.

So right back to where it was in 2011-12.

 

[dulzhok]

So right back to where it was in 2011-12.

Does this mean our first line is going to resemble SK-Fisher-Erat?

 

[glenngineer]

Glenn, you keep using subjective terms to describe other subjective terms after discounting the PPG career players (objective, measurable, quantifiable) that you made it quite clear you were not taking about. Not surprisingly, your Forsberg example uses one of those extremely rare players that averaged over a point per game for his career.

One word, intangibles.

 

[Viqsi]

One word, intangibles.

The ultimate in subjectivity! Awesome.

I hate "intangibles". Always have. Some people say "leadership", I say "no personality and no engagement". Some say "turns it on in the playoffs", I say "dogs it in the regular season." If you want to talk hockey IQ and the ability to use teammates well, that's one thing - that's part of what makes Toews legitimately good. But "intangibles" is pseudomystical hogwash.

 

[101st_fan]

One word, intangibles.

So intangibles to support subjective selection? Using your undefinable, ever changing definition that depends on subjective selection and "intangibles" I could list stretches of games where Legwand met your criteria.

 

[jwhouk]

The saying in baseball is "Momentum is tomorrow's starting pitcher." I'd say "Intangibles is tomorrow's starting goaltender."

 

[Ranskyre]

Did a Google search for "longevity of losing NHL coaches" and came across a statistical analysis from 2006. Basically said the older the coach and the longer tenure, the harder they are to get rid of. Kind of a no-brainer.
Interestingly, firing the coach mid season usually results in about a nine game DROP in performance, and then the team is back to where they were.
Winnipeg had an uptick, but now they're coming back.
I think Trotz should go, but I wouldn't expect miracles from the next guy.

 

[PredsV82]

Did a Google search for "longevity of losing NHL coaches" and came across a statistical analysis from 2006. Basically said the older the coach and the longer tenure, the harder they are to get rid of. Kind of a no-brainer.
Interestingly, firing the coach mid season usually results in about a nine game DROP in performance, and then the team is back to where they were.
Winnipeg had an uptick, but now they're coming back.
I think Trotz should go, but I wouldn't expect miracles from the next guy.

the problem with your line of thinking is, Trotz isn't a "losing" coach. He has a lifetime winning record, and is exactly .500 this year with a team missing its all star goaltender

 

[jwhouk]

The way to stay a coach/manager for a long time in pro sports is to win just enough to keep from being fired. Trotz has done this.

Strangely enough, this is also the only guaranteed way of keeping fans in the seats: be competitive, but not winning all the time. If the outcome is in doubt on a nightly basis, more fans are likely to show up.

 

[deanwormer]

The way to stay a coach/manager for a long time in pro sports is to win just enough to keep from being fired. Trotz has done this.

For you Titans fans, see Fisher, Jeff.

 

[Ranskyre]

the problem with your line of thinking is, Trotz isn't a "losing" coach. He has a lifetime winning record, and is exactly .500 this year with a team missing its all star goaltender

By my calculations, Trotz is .503 over his AHL/NHL career from '92 on. This year he is .426. My method was simple: wins divided by number of games played, excluding ties.

But, the point of my post was to highlight the study. It was to point out that were the Preds to fire Trotz immediately, if not sooner, based on the evidence, their level of play would go DOWN and then return to their current level. No big upswing.

The way to stay a coach/manager for a long time in pro sports is to win just enough to keep from being fired. Trotz has done this.

Strangely enough, this is also the only guaranteed way of keeping fans in the seats: be competitive, but not winning all the time. If the outcome is in doubt on a nightly basis, more fans are likely to show up.

Very true. Legwand's goal against NJ with 10 seconds to go definitely provided that riveting experience.

But, the last two games against Columbus and St. Louis have been less than riveting. Last night they were obviously tired. Columbus game?

 

[jwhouk]

It's also not a new observation: if you categorize baseball teams, for example, in terms of being "obvious pennant winners" (roughly 90 or more wins a season) and being "contenders" somewhere between .500 and 90 wins), teams in the latter category have higher average home attendance than the former.

See also "the Atlanta Braves" for further proof.

 

[token grinder]

the problem with your line of thinking is, Trotz isn't a "losing" coach. He has a lifetime winning record, and is exactly .500 this year with a team missing its all star goaltender

a winning record with an expansion team no less