Speculation: Gerard Gallant fired

[14ari13]

How many teams changed the coach and what is the result?

 

[kliq]

How many teams changed the coach and what is the result?

Depends on the team. St. Louis last year won a Stanley Cup after switching their coach, some seem slight improvement (Toronto) while other teams see no change at all.

 

[14ari13]

Depends on the team. St. Louis last year won a Stanley Cup after switching their coach, some seem slight improvement (Toronto) while other teams see no change at all.

Leafs played much better after the change, but now I am not sure if they are any better at all. Sharks are worse.

 

[kliq]

Leafs played much better after the change, but now I am not sure if they are any better at all. Sharks are worse.

Ya exactly, thats my point. A coaching change is completely situational and go in any direction.

 

[Henkka]

Ya exactly, thats my point. A coaching change is completely situational and go in any direction.

Usually it's an instant help, but if the roster is built in wrong way like Dubas has done, same problems will cumulate again after a transitions period, and then any coaching change won't save Dubas' ass from a fire.

 

[Henkka]

Depends on the team. St. Louis last year won a Stanley Cup after switching their coach, some seem slight improvement (Toronto) while other teams see no change at all.

Biggest thing for them was finding a legit goalie. Their former guys were just horrible black holes. St. Louis did have had great advanced stats and winning Hitchcock-culture very long and their goalie department was always their biggest problem. Then Binnington came and broke some Patrick Roy's playoff records. It was all him (of the change) and more of great long-term building for other parts on the roster.

 

[kliq]

Usually it's an instant help, but if the roster is built in wrong way like Dubas has done, same problems will cumulate again after a transitions period, and then any coaching change won't save Dubas' ass from a fire.

Well if the roster is built the wrong way, it is what it is. However, sometimes the roster is built the right way and a coaching change is what the team needed.

Look, bottom line is that to blindly think that firing a coach will fix all your problems is not smart mentality to have as a GM, but also, to blindly stick with your coach regardless of performance because you think its pointless is also not a smart mentality. Point being, its situational. Sometimes a coaching change is needed, sometimes a coaching change does nothing.

 

[kliq]

Biggest thing for them was finding a legit goalie. Their former guys were just horrible black holes. St. Louis did have had great advanced stats and winning Hitchcock-culture very long and their goalie department was always their biggest problem. Then Binnington came and broke some Patrick Roy's playoff records. It was all him (of the change) and more of great long-term building for other parts on the roster.

You're not giving the Blues the credit they deserve by saying it was all Binnington. 100%, he was a huge factor (maybe even the biggest), but if you watched the Blues in November, then watched them after the coaching change, they were a different team.

Here are two snipits from an article on NHL.com from February 2019:. These quotes help illustrate that it was more then just a hot goalie. (full article available below
Berube leads Blues to impressive turnaround

In the 41 games since Berube took over, the Blues have a shot differential of plus-181, which ranks first in the NHL. In the 19 games before Berube, the Blues had a minus-8 shot differential.

"From the start, the initial thing he hammered home was just to get back to work," defenseman Jay Bouwmeester said. "At the start of the year, frustrations were taking over and everyone was on a different page. He's done a good job of just getting us back (on the same page), reminding everybody how we've been successful and how we've had a team that's really been the sum of it's parts and hasn't relied on one or two guys to do everything… The message has been trust your work, trust your system - we have the personnel that if we do that, on a lot of nights, we give ourselves a chance to win."

Again to be clear, I'm not arguing against your points that roster construction and a goaltending change were the main factors, I agree they were. All I am saying is that I think you are underselling Berube and the players not named Binnington.

 

[Henkka]

You're not giving the Blues the credit they deserve by saying it was all Binnington. 100%, he was a huge factor (maybe even the biggest), but if you watched the Blues in November, then watched them after the coaching change, they were a different team.

Yeah, but finally everything is based on the goaltender, when he is not the guy who is blowing out the games anymore. Those Huttons and Allens were formerly horrible. Binnington keep them fighting and everybody will buy in. It reminds a lot of our games from this season, where we did play great, and then Howard absolutely sucked all energy out from the by letting several easy goals. Momemtum killer night after night.

I'm not trying to say we are at level of Blues anyways, but you can just see how the say story kills the motivation from our guys. Playing meaningful games - the thing. Of course Blues new coaching could add some gasoline on that fire, but Berube could not have done anykind of change on that scale without the revelation of Binnington.

Same happened with Penguins, when they got their confidence back with Murray after 6 disastrous playoff failures. Many also say that it was all Sullivan, I think with them it was more coach too. But Murray gave the confidence you build on, and the former playoff frustration was gone - 2 Cups.

The credit can go for the Coach/GM of bringing new goalie in. That's one thing you should have guts to bring a new guy in instead of a former struggling starter. Seems to be that every goalie is outcoahed after some short timeframe, like Jarry is not the shiny new toy at Penguing, after Murray has sucked at regular season workload.

But Binnington, for me, is more legit than any recent Stanley Cup winning goalie. Maybe he gets worn out in 3-4 seasons too. Then Berube will get fired. No matter how good he will coach.

 

[Fil Larkmanthanasiou]

Depends on the team. St. Louis last year won a Stanley Cup after switching their coach, some seem slight improvement (Toronto) while other teams see no change at all.

Leafs were 9-10-4 with a -8 goal differential under Babcock and have gone 19-9-3 with a +23 differntial since. That's a little more than just a slight improvement.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Well if the roster is built the wrong way, it is what it is. However, sometimes the roster is built the right way and a coaching change is what the team needed.

Look, bottom line is that to blindly think that firing a coach will fix all your problems is not smart mentality to have as a GM, but also, to blindly stick with your coach regardless of performance because you think its pointless is also not a smart mentality. Point being, its situational. Sometimes a coaching change is needed, sometimes a coaching change does nothing.

If you are a team with Stanley Cup aspirations, then you don't have the time to let things play out with a coach not getting the job done. Taking on the deadweight contract of a fired coach, on top of the contract of the new coach, is a fee you pay for the run to the Cup.

Contrast with a team in the Red Wings situation. Why would ownership sign off on paying two coaches, regardless of how short the overlap is, when if they are lucky the new coach is going to net maybe 3-5 more wins? Again, that's if you are lucky. Ownership and management know that they are icing the worst roster in the league by a country mile, and odds are making a change will not yield a significantly different result.

 

[Fil Larkmanthanasiou]

Leafs played much better after the change, but now I am not sure if they are any better at all. Sharks are worse.

They were on pace for an 85 point season and a -31 goal differential under Babcock. They have been on a 108 point pace and on pace for a +60 differential after Babcock was fired.
I would say they are a little better.

 

[14ari13]

They were on pace for an 85 point season and a -31 goal differential under Babcock. They have been on a 108 point pace and on pace for a +60 differential after Babcock was fired.
I would say they are a little better.

Fair enough.
What was their record under babcock last season?

 

[Fil Larkmanthanasiou]

Fair enough.
What was their record under babcock last season?

100 points +35 and yet another first round defeat

 

[14ari13]

100 points +35 and yet another first round defeat

I think it was obvious they did not want to play for him anymore. It was the right decision to fire him.

 

[kliq]

Leafs were 9-10-4 with a -8 goal differential under Babcock and have gone 19-9-3 with a +23 differntial since. That's a little more than just a slight improvement.

Thanks for looking that up, even more to my point. I know more of the wins were from the beginning, but this is a perfect example of how it can help.

 

[kliq]

If you are a team with Stanley Cup aspirations, then you don't have the time to let things play out with a coach not getting the job done. Taking on the deadweight contract of a fired coach, on top of the contract of the new coach, is a fee you pay for the run to the Cup.

Contrast with a team in the Red Wings situation. Why would ownership sign off on paying two coaches, regardless of how short the overlap is, when if they are lucky the new coach is going to net maybe 3-5 more wins? Again, that's if you are lucky. Ownership and management know that they are icing the worst roster in the league by a country mile, and odds are making a change will not yield a significantly different result.

Agreed. If Wings make a coaching change, it makes more sense to me that they wait until the Summer

 

[ridilon]

Plenty of examples where coaching change was the final move. Wings, Penguins, Canes, Kings & Blackhawks to name a few in the last 15 years or so.

 

[Squirrel in the Hole]

From what I've read, it seems that Gallant is happy to have some time with the grandkids while getting paid for doing nothing the rest of the year. And, we just beat Buffalo in a shootout, so happy days.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Yeah, but finally everything is based on the goaltender, when he is not the guy who is blowing out the games anymore. Those Huttons and Allens were formerly horrible. Binnington keep them fighting and everybody will buy in. It reminds a lot of our games from this season, where we did play great, and then Howard absolutely sucked all energy out from the by letting several easy goals. Momemtum killer night after night.

Hutton was kind of inconsistent, but kept the Blues in the playoff race in 17-18 when they gave him more of a starters workload. That's why he apparently had multiple teams chasing him as a potential starter in the UFA market, Detroit being one of them. He's been bad for Buffalo, but that wasn't the case for the Blues.

I'm assuming you meant Chad Johnson? That was where the Blues really screwed up on goaltending. Allen had struggled, they lost Hutton and they decided to sign Chad Johnson (who had been garbage in Buffalo) over guys that could potentially carry a heavier workload if Allen still struggled like Bernier or Halak.

 

[lilidk]

Leafs played much better after the change, but now I am not sure if they are any better at all. Sharks are worse.

they were happy without dictator , now they slowly become RW like.

 

[TCNorthstars]

they were happy without dictator , now they slowly become RW like.