How important is coaching in the WCH?

[alko]

Inspiration came from NHL topic.

Lubo Visnovsky said in his recent interwiev, that when the Slovak Golden generation played their game, Jan Filc (head coach) let them play, what they wanted. He said them, make your own PP unit and play what you want. It worked. Guys like Palffy, Bondra, Satan, Hossa, Visnovsky, Demitra .... all knew what they can, what they cant.

Other example came from Boris Valabik, the new TV color commentator star. Last year, he said about Latvia team, that without Bob Hartley they would be demolished. That he made a system, that worked very well.

Click to read more...

 

[tony d]

I think it plays a factor. A coach's ways can oftentimes make or break a player.

 

[Balance]

Look at all the star names on the Russian teams. That guy who always coaches the national team is so incompetent. Don't even know his name. He literally picks the worst tactics I've ever seen. He must be kept in his position because of total corruption, he has some of the best teams in the world. You just watch Russia play and they have no organization whatsoever, its like a bunch of guys came to play pond hockey.

I tell you, the best thing Russia could ever do is hire a Canadian/American coach. Most of the guys play in the NHL anyway and are used to it. Coaching is so critical in a competition with a bunch of star players who have never or barely played with each other.

 

[ijuka]

Extremely important. Canada was a mess when coaching didn't work. Russia usually is super undisciplined and punches way below their weight when the coaching isn't in place, etc. Sweden is the best-coached national team and they keep winning.

 

[EK47]

Extremely important. Canada was a mess when coaching didn't work. Russia usually is super undisciplined and punches way below their weight when the coaching isn't in place, etc. Sweden is the best-coached national team and they keep winning.

Switzerland I’d say.

 

[Seiza]

Sweden has managed to win two straight gold medals despite having Grönborg as a coach.

Not only that, Sweden has also managed to win olympic and WCH gold with coaches such as Bengt-Åke Gustafsson (2006) and Per Mårts (2013). So in some cases, I would argue that coaching means nothing.

Then there are complete opposites where coaching is what makes the entire team succesful.

 

[Atas2000]

Inspiration came from NHL topic.

Lubo Visnovsky said in his recent interwiev, that when the Slovak Golden generation played their game, Jan Filc (head coach) let them play, what they wanted. He said them, make your own PP unit and play what you want. It worked. Guys like Palffy, Bondra, Satan, Hossa, Visnovsky, Demitra .... all knew what they can, what they cant.

Other example came from Boris Valabik, the new TV color commentator star. Last year, he said about Latvia team, that without Bob Hartley they would be demolished. That he made a system, that worked very well.

Very important. It is just a whole different animal than league coaching. You get a cast of stars so you coach egos. They aren't playing together regularily though. You have to find lines and pairings that work out of your magic hat quick. You have nearly no time for practice. Your round robin games are basically the practice you get. Then there are single elimination games. If you are not a great motivator who can get the team going for one game, or during intermission you can be the best coach ever in whatever league. Point being a coach who can quickly build a successful team out of superstars will have more success than the one who might be a great hockey mind for buiilding a league team and leading it to a championship with 16 playofff wins.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

Picking the right players to put on the ice is super important.

I know this after decades of dumb Swedish coaches who don't even pick the best players to represent us.

Then the willingness to bench those who don't perform, regardless who they are - AND actually using PP units and not just rolling the usual lines and D units during PP.

 

[Star Ocean]

Extremely important. Canada was a mess when coaching didn't work. Russia usually is super undisciplined and punches way below their weight when the coaching isn't in place, etc. Sweden is the best-coached national team and they keep winning.

Sweden won last year thanks to our roster, not our coach.

 

[Past Considerations]

Look at all the star names on the Russian teams. That guy who always coaches the national team is so incompetent. Don't even know his name. He literally picks the worst tactics I've ever seen. He must be kept in his position because of total corruption, he has some of the best teams in the world. You just watch Russia play and they have no organization whatsoever, its like a bunch of guys came to play pond hockey.

I tell you, the best thing Russia could ever do is hire a Canadian/American coach. Most of the guys play in the NHL anyway and are used to it. Coaching is so critical in a competition with a bunch of star players who have never or barely played with each other.

I think the coach you mean is Oleg Znarok (circa 2012-2018)?

He has been now replaced by Ilya Vorobiev.

Maybe I remember it wrong, but the teams under Vyacheslav Bykov (2007-2011 tournaments) seemed to have more of a teamplay look, and he seemed to be more of a modern coach rather than just letting the boys play just like in Soviet times.

I think they're too stubborn and proud to hire anyone not Russian, and also I'm not sure a North American would be a great idea for big ice tournaments anyway unless there's KHL experience. Quite many Finns have acted as KHL head coaches too.

 

[Esko6]

The Finnish coach Jalonen is know to have pretty elaborate tactics and long training camps, he even sends DVDs to players explaining how they will play. It has been suggested that the NHL and KHL players are not interested in joining his national teams because they have to learn and practice too much. There was a story about Selänne being bewildered and not understanding what Jalonen wanted them to do at the Vancouver olympics.

Jalonen is probably the greatest Finnish coach there is, so it is a bit difficult to say if it is worth it even if players are not committed to his schemes.

 

[Gianpaolo]

For me it is important also for weak teams like Italy. The coach did not realized how big the difference was between his team and Switzerland and did not make the team ready to deal with the difference (i.e. being always concentrated, playing defensively as well as possible, protecting the own goaltender). The disappointing loss in the first game and the lack of players with leadership in the team may have a tremendous impact on the whole WC.

 

[chauron]

Finns have won all of their medals and championship titles with excellent teamwork, perfect tactics and quality coaching

 

[BullLund]

Finland, with these sorts of rosters (zero top-level international players, not necessarily even top-level domestic players), is not a top-tier team without good coaching. We saw that with the previous coach.

Finland was regularly losing to teams like France, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, etc.

 

[GaboriklessWild]

Look at all the star names on the Russian teams. That guy who always coaches the national team is so incompetent. Don't even know his name. He literally picks the worst tactics I've ever seen. He must be kept in his position because of total corruption, he has some of the best teams in the world. You just watch Russia play and they have no organization whatsoever, its like a bunch of guys came to play pond hockey.

I tell you, the best thing Russia could ever do is hire a Canadian/American coach. Most of the guys play in the NHL anyway and are used to it. Coaching is so critical in a competition with a bunch of star players who have never or barely played with each other.

Lmao dude. What are you talking about? The Latvian guy's coaching record is quite decent. [Mod]

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

How important is coaching period?

I did some research about 5 years on this looking for academic literature and studies on the subject in relation to the Canucks changing out AV.

The answer appears to be coaching has a minimal impact at best.

This gives a decent overview but I would invite people yo do their own research and look at the literature.

Is Changing the Coach Really the Answer? - Freakonomics

What does all this mean? Henry Abbott – of ESPN’s True Hoop – suggested in 2008 that the argument that NBA coaches don’t tend to change player productivity indicated that coaches could be replaced with “deck chairs.” These studies, though, don’t indicate that teams are better off without a coach. That is because none of these studies looked at a team with and without a coach.

What these studies did is look at teams or players with different coaches and failed to find much of a difference. That suggests that coaches in sports are not very different from each other.

It may be true (and more than likely very true) that you are better off with a professional coach than with a random person grabbed from the stands (or no one at all). But it doesn’t appear that the choice of professional coach matters much.

 

[LOFIN]

I think Finland has proven that yes, coaching does matter

 

[Raimo Sillanpää]

The Finnish coach Jalonen .. There was a story about Selänne being bewildered and not understanding what Jalonen wanted them to do at the Vancouver olympics.

This was a broken hardly able to walk Selänne, he blamed everybody except himself for his troubles.. the only line that didn’t work in Vancouver 2010 was Lehtinen-Koivu-Selänne

 

[gscorer]

Jukka Jalonen dominating WC tournaments

 

[czechmate]

Re-watching Finland-Russia will give you an answer.

 

[RageQuit77]

I admit there might be some blue-white glasses looking things now amidst heavy recency bias, but isn't just that. Jukka Jalonen has indeed some rare quality, especially as tournament coach. There have been a long time already some kind aura on him that causes cozy feeling and trust, even when Team Finland he has been coaching have been losing or not performing that well. He is proven Head coach and someway it all feels that he is going to better in his profession, elder he gets. Excellent tactician, excellent personnel management... [out of superlatives now].

When we look at the national teams he has coached to medals, we'll find nearly every most prominent Finnish hockey players from that pack. Now he is also proven he doesn't even need "big names" to pull up a successful team. Its truly amazing.

I think he would be excellent coaching coach for coaches too. Also, his systemic impact to the Finnish hockey as a whole is immeasurable.

So, yes. Answer to the topical question is yes. Its very important. But True Merlins are rare specimens among the wizards.

Elite Prospects - Jukka Jalonen Team Staff Profile

 

[torero]

How important is coaching period?

I did some research about 5 years on this looking for academic literature and studies on the subject in relation to the Canucks changing out AV.

The answer appears to be coaching has a minimal impact at best.

This gives a decent overview but I would invite people yo do their own research and look at the literature.

Is Changing the Coach Really the Answer? - Freakonomics

I understand what your article says and have no study to oppose to it. It's scope , however, would be more for a coach change during a championship ... when results are poor. not so much as an overall normal coach change between two seasons. with the limited info this articles provides (and i dindn't neither dig like hell to tell the truth) , the method seems not too convincing, and to tell the truth, changing the coach, to measure it , to eliminate the nois around just seems a dantesque task.
So i oppose a simple but real observation. And talking hockey and national teams.

Subject of observation :Switzerland (my country)

Speaking of serious coaches (many years) :
Ralph Kruger : played the trap with the roster available. Low talent (compared internationaly)
Sean Simpson : played more open game : roster available was of better quality
Patrick Fischer : plays an open, aggressif and pleasant hockey : talent is better than it ever was.

coaching shaped greatly the way the teams played !!

On the other hand one could argue that , they are coaches , meaning that one instead of the other would maybe have done the same with the available roster. ...

I DO BELIEVE THAT COACHING IS VERY IMPORTANT.

 

[Stubu]

Re-watching Finland-Russia will give you an answer.

You could expand that to Finland-Sweden as well. A stellar coach (who also had generous time for assembling and preparing the team) in Jalonen vs Gronborg and Vorobiev who both received a lot of flak for their in-game decisions.

Yep, coaching can be crucial.

 

[olop]

The Finnish coach Jalonen is know to have pretty elaborate tactics and long training camps, he even sends DVDs to players explaining how they will play. It has been suggested that the NHL and KHL players are not interested in joining his national teams because they have to learn and practice too much. There was a story about Selänne being bewildered and not understanding what Jalonen wanted them to do at the Vancouver olympics.

Jalonen is probably the greatest Finnish coach there is, so it is a bit difficult to say if it is worth it even if players are not committed to his schemes.

Luckily it seems that many of the younger Finnish NHL players seem to be a bit of hockey nerds. Barkov especially loves that stuff.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

Coaching isnt any more or less important just because its a separate tournament. Coaching is equally important everywhere in life - from sports to personal health

So I guess my answers is just as important as any other time