Jeff Blashill (mod warning post #44)

[Oddbob]

To those who don't think firing Blashill at least has some merit, why do you say that? What other coach keeps his job after 4 years of losing and a 5th where he is losing again? We are not the only team in that scenario with bad rosters. Almost all losing teams have bad rosters, and I'm not sure of any coach on any of those teams who kept their job into a 5th season. If this was only the beginning of a 3rd season than I agree with you, but 5 years into a losing situation, I am not sure of what other coach had that kind of leash.

A new coach will bring in a fresh perspective, and might just get some of our lesser players to play harder and better, and maybe even get some of them to be a lot better. Patience is important in a rebuild and coaches should get more leash in those situations, however 5 years is beyond patience in the professional sports World.

 

[ricky0034]

To those who don't think firing Blashill at least has some merit, why do you say that? What other coach keeps his job after 4 years of losing and a 5th where he is losing again? We are not the only team in that scenario with bad rosters. Almost all losing teams have bad rosters, and I'm not sure of any coach on any of those teams who kept their job into a 5th season. If this was only the beginning of a 3rd season than I agree with you, but 5 years into a losing situation, I am not sure of what other coach had that kind of leash.

A new coach will bring in a fresh perspective, and might just get some of our lesser players to play harder and better, and maybe even get some of them to be a lot better. Patience is important in a rebuild and coaches should get more leash in those situations, however 5 years is beyond patience in the professional sports World.

people are just still too used to Hollands extreme loyalty to realize that keeping guys around until they literally decide to leave on their own is an extreme outlier way of doing things

 

[Mlotek]

people are just still too used to Hollands extreme loyalty to realize that keeping guys around until they literally decide to leave on their own is an extreme outlier way of doing things

Wasn't Dave Lewis let go after 2 years as head?

 

[Hen Kolland]

To those who don't think firing Blashill at least has some merit, why do you say that? What other coach keeps his job after 4 years of losing and a 5th where he is losing again? We are not the only team in that scenario with bad rosters. Almost all losing teams have bad rosters, and I'm not sure of any coach on any of those teams who kept their job into a 5th season. If this was only the beginning of a 3rd season than I agree with you, but 5 years into a losing situation, I am not sure of what other coach had that kind of leash.

A new coach will bring in a fresh perspective, and might just get some of our lesser players to play harder and better, and maybe even get some of them to be a lot better. Patience is important in a rebuild and coaches should get more leash in those situations, however 5 years is beyond patience in the professional sports World.

The merit in switching coaches doesn’t apply the same to this team as it does with contending teams like the Blues switching from Yeo to Berube.

The “spark” it may cause, what’s the benefit? A last place team wins a few games and becomes a bottom 5 team? That doesn’t seem like a value added. The only merit I can see in making a coaching move is if the coach of the future is available, and quite frankly, there isn’t a coach that I’m interested in to be that guy right now.

If we make the move and appoint Bylsma, odds are nothing changes and could potentially get worse. How long does it take for the same people to complain about Bylsma’s lines and the fact that the team is completely overmatched? If we hire externally (which we wouldn’t until season’s end but I’m playing in the hypothetical) and nothing changes because the team still doesn’t have any talent, how long do we wait until we fire that coach or the next one after that?

Sure, you can talk yourself into buying the merit of making the move, but there just isn’t a plan. The plan is to get rid of Blashill and proceed to continue throwing shit at a wall and being shocked when nothing sticks.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

The merit in switching coaches doesn’t apply the same to this team as it does with contending teams like the Blues switching from Yeo to Berube.

The “spark” it may cause, what’s the benefit? A last place team wins a few games and becomes a bottom 5 team? That doesn’t seem like a value added. The only merit I can see in making a coaching move is if the coach of the future is available, and quite frankly, there isn’t a coach that I’m interested in to be that guy right now.

If we make the move and appoint Bylsma, odds are nothing changes and could potentially get worse. How long does it take for the same people to complain about Bylsma’s lines and the fact that the team is completely overmatched? If we hire externally (which we wouldn’t until season’s end but I’m playing in the hypothetical) and nothing changes because the team still doesn’t have any talent, how long do we wait until we fire that coach or the next one after that?

Sure, you can talk yourself into buying the merit of making the move, but there just isn’t a plan. The plan is to get rid of Blashill and proceed to continue throwing **** at a wall and being shocked when nothing sticks.

Didn't he specifically say a losing team with a bad roster that is in its 5th season of losing?

That's Sabres, Oilers, hawks, pens, sens et al categories

 

[Hen Kolland]

Didn't he specifically say a losing team with a bad roster that is in its 5th season of losing?

That's Sabres, Oilers, hawks, pens, sens et al categories

And if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, would you do it too? And how many of those teams openly stated it was a rebuild like 2 seasons prior?

SY explicitly stated it was going to take time to rebuild and asked for patience, and it took no more than 7-10 games for people like to yell “abandon ship” and start diving into hot takes and rapid overreactions. I cannot for the life of me understand why people are bent out of shape over who is leading a bottom 5 team to a bottom 5 finish.

 

[Snuggs]

I just find it a really weak argument to say another coach couldn't do better... or would have the same outcome... You sure? Could he do... worst!?!?!

What's Blashill doing extremely well at this point with our guys?

 

[Henkka]

What's Blashill doing extremely well at this point with our guys?

What is he doing extremely bad?

 

[Oddbob]

What is he doing extremely bad?

For starters, we are a losing team, and he treats the kids not that great, unless they are extremely good ala Larkin. If you have guys like Cholowski, Svechnikov etc, on your roster and they make some mistakes, benching them serves no real purpose when the results are still us losing, because you are busy teaching "lessons". If we are losing, let the kids learn by playing after they make mistakes, because while teaching lessons is good if you are a competitive team, we are not, so let them play big minutes. We are losing and giving up 5 goals a game anyways, so let them play, literally can't get a whole lot worse.

Also he has odd loyalty to certain players, and while I know that every coach has their pet players that they love to play, Blashill's are a little weird. Right now, Hirose is not an NHL player, yet he hasn't even been scratched yet, and sees roughly the same ice time every night. In the past he has relied a lot more heavily on struggling Daley and Ericsson, and the results are roughly the same.

The biggest thing is how long he has been here and losing, like I said earlier, I am being honest in that I can't recall what other coach is in their 5th season of losing hockey. Is there even one in the NHL, because I can't recall one.

Changing coaches for our team wouldn't really be about adding more wins right now, but we already know that even the best coaches get tuned out eventually. It happened to Bowman, Quenneville and every coach, it is what happens, players eventually tire of hearing the same repeated message over and over. That happens on successful teams, and you have to imagine it is much quicker on a team that is losing.

 

[Henkka]

Steve Yzerman likes what Blashill does with young players. You guys want Babcock there to ice a vet roster?

So blaim Yzerman, if there's somebody to blaim.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Wasn't Dave Lewis let go after 2 years as head?

That was ....

**checks notes**

Fifteen years ago.

 

[TheClap]

Wasn't Dave Lewis let go after 2 years as head?

Early-mid 2000s Ken Holland was a very different person from Ken Holland 2016.
Ken Holland 2016 probably would have signed Marty Lapointe to that 3 year $16 million dollar deal instead of letting him walk.

 

[TheClap]

Steve Yzerman likes what Blashill does with young players. You guys want Babcock there to ice a vet roster?

So blaim Yzerman, if there's somebody to blaim.

Does he? Or is it lip service because a better option has come around yet?

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

For starters, we are a losing team, and he treats the kids not that great, unless they are extremely good ala Larkin. If you have guys like Cholowski, Svechnikov etc, on your roster and they make some mistakes, benching them serves no real purpose when the results are still us losing, because you are busy teaching "lessons". If we are losing, let the kids learn by playing after they make mistakes, because while teaching lessons is good if you are a competitive team, we are not, so let them play big minutes. We are losing and giving up 5 goals a game anyways, so let them play, literally can't get a whole lot worse.

Also he has odd loyalty to certain players, and while I know that every coach has their pet players that they love to play, Blashill's are a little weird. Right now, Hirose is not an NHL player, yet he hasn't even been scratched yet, and sees roughly the same ice time every night. In the past he has relied a lot more heavily on struggling Daley and Ericsson, and the results are roughly the same.

The biggest thing is how long he has been here and losing, like I said earlier, I am being honest in that I can't recall what other coach is in their 5th season of losing hockey. Is there even one in the NHL, because I can't recall one.

Changing coaches for our team wouldn't really be about adding more wins right now, but we already know that even the best coaches get tuned out eventually. It happened to Bowman, Quenneville and every coach, it is what happens, players eventually tire of hearing the same repeated message over and over. That happens on successful teams, and you have to imagine it is much quicker on a team that is losing.

Treats the kids not that great? What? Why the **** should he "treat them great" unless they're very good hockey players? And what do you mean by "treats them poorly"?
Benching a kid for making a mistake? What would you do? Let him come over and pat his ass and say "oh, I'm sorry, Geno, you'll get them next time?"

You're not taking time to "teach lessons" if you are a competitive team. Guess what you'd be doing. COMPETING.

And if you want to look at teams that ended up in similar scenarios... Barry Trotz in Nashville until they developed. Lindy Ruff in Buffalo. Dave Tippett in Arizona.

You cannot complain about our abject lack of talent and then point blame at the coach that your roster that lacks the very basics of elite talent necessary to consistently win is not able to consistently win. Blashill might be a good coach with a good team. We don't know because he's never had a good roster and he certainly does not have one now. Firing Blashill now would do literally nothing to materially change the situation of the Red Wings for now or for the future, as there is not a hotshot, no doubt coach of the future out there this second that they're missing out on nor could Scotty Bowman come in and make these worthless maggots a legitimate contender.

To wrap back around, I wanted to clarify about the "lessons". I want my coach to have the freedom to try to teach lessons on a good team, bad team, whatever. What on the ****ing Earth do you think they are there for? What do you think would happen if Scotty got the urge to coach again with the Wings or they'd pulled in Quennville? They certainly wouldn't be dolloping 18 minutes a night on Evgeny Svechnikov right out the gate, I can assure you that. Or do you forget the heavy use of Jason Williams or Brent Gilchrist or Greg Johnson etc. etc. etc. Or Michael Handzus, Michael Frolik, and Bryan Bickell in Chicago? Coaches do not give free ice time to kids to simply allow them to make mistakes... unless the kid is Patrick ****ing Kane and he makes it very very damn clear that he is worlds better than whoever you're playing. Not he'll get 15 points instead of a guy like Brandon Pirri getting 14. Kids in the NHL should be given a ton of leash when they show beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are studs. Not ones who scored one goal in the preseason and we want to be good.

 

[ridilon]

Ottawa fired Boucher
Arizona dumped Tippett
Oilers got rid of McClellan
Hawks jettisoned Quennville
Kings barely gave Stevens a chance.

Crap teams fire the coaches all the time. Usually before 5 years of losing.

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

Any criticism of Blashill is met with negativity from his supporters here

The lack of talent on our lineup excuse doesn’t work. Look at how Nielsen and Fil played before they got here.

People talk about how good he is with our youth but AA and Hirose right now...woof

 

[Winger98]

Ottawa fired Boucher
Arizona dumped Tippett
Oilers got rid of McClellan
Hawks jettisoned Quennville
Kings barely gave Stevens a chance.

Crap teams fire the coaches all the time. Usually before 5 years of losing.

No one is really questioning that it happens, but why it should happen with Blashill. Did canning any of those coaches change things on those teams? I'm just going from memory, but I think they all kept playing just about how they were playing before.

If a team wants their coach to win, give him better players. Other than that, if you're going to fire him, the win/loss record probably isn't the best barometer for if that should happen.

 

[Hen Kolland]

The lack of talent on our lineup excuse doesn’t work. Look at how Nielsen and Fil played before they got here.

You mean when Filppula was a 30 point forward on a playoff team with enough depth to support a 34 year old declining player? Or when Nielsen was a 40-50 point forward in New York and has declined with age becoming 32 year old 40 point player to now as a 34 year old mid-30 point player in Detroit with no supporting depth?

The lack of talent in our lineup absolutely holds water. You cited two progressively older players getting progressively worse when they joined a worse team than they were on.

People talk about how good he is with our youth but AA and Hirose right now...woof

Hirose is not an NHL caliber player at this point, and is clearly in over his head. Any pragmatic individual will acknowledge that. Athanasiou is struggling hard this year, but we are still talking about someone who eclipsed 30 goals under Blashill last year. I know a certain someone will be here within the hour to tell me that Athanasiou scored 30 in spite of Blashill, but let's just say that he and I don't see eye to eye on many things.

I can immediately discredit any argument from a person who will sit here and suggest that the lack of talent is not the absolute most damning thing to this team (and to the perception of Blashill). You want to talk about Blashill being a problem and go down that road, then I can respect the feeling that you want to move on, but to say that the lack of talent isn't a factor is ludicrous. Fact of the matter is, if Blashill was given the keys to a Red Wings team with the talent that we see in Tampa and coached them consistently to the playoffs, none of you would be saying a f***ing thing, but instead he has a team with quite possibly the worst roster in hockey.

 

[MBH]

No one is really questioning that it happens, but why it should happen with Blashill. Did canning any of those coaches change things on those teams? I'm just going from memory, but I think they all kept playing just about how they were playing before.

If a team wants their coach to win, give him better players. Other than that, if you're going to fire him, the win/loss record probably isn't the best barometer for if that should happen.

Are you suggesting that if Detroit sucks in the talent department for 5 more years, Yzerman should keep Blashill has coach for 5 more losing years?

 

[TheClap]

You mean when Filppula was a 30 point forward on a playoff team with enough depth to support a 34 year old declining player? Or when Nielsen was a 40-50 point forward in New York and has declined with age becoming 32 year old 40 point player to now as a 34 year old mid-30 point player in Detroit with no supporting depth?

The lack of talent in our lineup absolutely holds water. You cited two progressively older players getting progressively worse when they joined a worse team than they were on.



Hirose is not an NHL caliber player at this point, and is clearly in over his head. Any pragmatic individual will acknowledge that. Athanasiou is struggling hard this year, but we are still talking about someone who eclipsed 30 goals under Blashill last year. I know a certain someone will be here within the hour to tell me that Athanasiou scored 30 in spite of Blashill, but let's just say that he and I don't see eye to eye on many things.

I can immediately discredit any argument from a person who will sit here and suggest that the lack of talent is not the absolute most damning thing to this team (and to the perception of Blashill). You want to talk about Blashill being a problem and go down that road, then I can respect the feeling that you want to move on, but to say that the lack of talent isn't a factor is ludicrous. Fact of the matter is, if Blashill was given the keys to a Red Wings team with the talent that we see in Tampa and coached them consistently to the playoffs, none of you would be saying a ****ing thing, but instead he has a team with quite possibly the worst roster in hockey.

Not true... if Blashill was given the keys to a Red Wings team with that talent... and then proceeded to constantly underachieve in the regular season and consistently suffered first round playoff exits with questionable coaching decisions and choke jobs like a certain coaching "legend" up in Toronto, you can damn well be sure people would be pretty vocal, just as Toronto fans are now. Just as I'm sure some lightning fans are upset over their first round exit last spring.

 

[Mlotek]

You mean when Filppula was a 30 point forward on a playoff team with enough depth to support a 34 year old declining player? Or when Nielsen was a 40-50 point forward in New York and has declined with age becoming 32 year old 40 point player to now as a 34 year old mid-30 point player in Detroit with no supporting depth?

The lack of talent in our lineup absolutely holds water. You cited two progressively older players getting progressively worse when they joined a worse team than they were on.



Hirose is not an NHL caliber player at this point, and is clearly in over his head. Any pragmatic individual will acknowledge that. Athanasiou is struggling hard this year, but we are still talking about someone who eclipsed 30 goals under Blashill last year. I know a certain someone will be here within the hour to tell me that Athanasiou scored 30 in spite of Blashill, but let's just say that he and I don't see eye to eye on many things.

I can immediately discredit any argument from a person who will sit here and suggest that the lack of talent is not the absolute most damning thing to this team (and to the perception of Blashill). You want to talk about Blashill being a problem and go down that road, then I can respect the feeling that you want to move on, but to say that the lack of talent isn't a factor is ludicrous. Fact of the matter is, if Blashill was given the keys to a Red Wings team with the talent that we see in Tampa and coached them consistently to the playoffs, none of you would be saying a ****ing thing, but instead he has a team with quite possibly the worst roster in hockey.

Blashill has also shown he can't deliver results at the World Championship with one of the power houses of the tournament. Remember, this is a guy whose team USA got shutout by a Finland team with almost 0 NHL players.

Blash is a smart guy, but by no means is he a motivator. Last year FSD broadcast a couple of his motivational talks to the team and it was the equivalent of taking a handful of sleeping pills.

Look, sometimes a coach is NOT a fit for a team.

So how many consecutive losses will it take for you to concede that Blash is probably not the guy for Detroit? I'm sure he would quickly find another coaching job somewhere else in the NHL, perhaps prove all his 'haters' wrong.

 

[Winger98]

Are you suggesting that if Detroit sucks in the talent department for 5 more years, Yzerman should keep Blashill has coach for 5 more losing years?

If Detroit is this bad in the talent department for 5 more years, I would suggest their problems run a lot deeper than Blashill. But if the talent isn't there, it's not there. This club is this bad for five more years, though, and I think we're seeing a new GM and a whole lot of turnover.

 

[MBH]

If Detroit is this bad in the talent department for 5 more years, I would suggest their problems run a lot deeper than Blashill. But if the talent isn't there, it's not there. This club is this bad for five more years, though, and I think we're seeing a new GM and a whole lot of turnover.

You didn't answer the question.
Because if you do, you're admitting that you can't keep losing forever with Blashill.
And once you admit that, the question is, when is enough?

I think by NHL standards, he's already hit "when."


And I disagree. This team could easily struggle for the next five years - new coach or not. We've got a lot of youngish NHL talent. And a lot of them will probably turn into legit NHLers. But I don't know that we have an elite player in our organization. And I don't know that guys like Zadina, Svech, Rasmussen, Veleno and Cholo are going to be that great.
I also don't have a ton of faith that Seider is going to be some kind of game-changer, either.

I look around the league and I see teams with as much talent as we might have one day. And some of those teams still suck.

Realistically, let's assume we don't pass up on a difference-making forward this year.
And let's assume Seider turns into a Parayko-style defenseman. I still think we're 4 years away, minimum, from making the playoffs.

 

[Hammettf2b]

Could you please break down why Blashil is a worse coach than most NHL coaches? What should Blashil do to turn this pile of feces into a playoff team? Any specific lines or schemes?

He's doing exactly what Babcock did while he was here and currently doing in Toronto and this forum was ready for Babs to move on because of it. The only difference is Blashil isn't as good a coach as Babcock is/was.

 

[Gniwder]

Also he has odd loyalty to certain players, and while I know that every coach has their pet players that they love to play, Blashill's are a little weird. Right now, Hirose is not an NHL player, yet he hasn't even been scratched yet, and sees roughly the same ice time every night. In the past he has relied a lot more heavily on struggling Daley and Ericsson, and the results are roughly the same.

It's not odd for coaches to be loyal to players, but Blashill is loyal to odd players. Right now it's Hirose (as you mentioned), Ehn, Bernie, and Green. My only guess is that he's hoping Hirose and Green will start playing like they did last year if he gives them enough ice time. I think that's a pipe dream. (Bernie sucked last season and Ehn can't score, so I have no idea why he keeps playing them.)

This player loyalty thing is one of the reason why coaches have a shelf life with a team. I'm sure Disco Dan already has his favorites, but I'm not sure I want to know who they are. I'd rather see some fresh eyes after the season is over.