News Article: Mclellan-set-to-become-kings-head-coach

[North]

Several players on the team took steps backward, in terms of performance when Hitchcock took over, despite having a full lineup.

Hitchcock didn’t have Strome who was traded shortly before he came aboard. Caggiula was traded and they didn’t get a forward back in the deal. Two d men got hurt after their hot start under Hitch.

Let’s not pretend Hitch had a better lineup than Todd did.

 

[MCMIL OIL]

Bob says hes out on Buffalo. All eat crow. Had a someone who I believe to be a "good" source that he was set to be the head coach. My bad. Wonder what it came down to.

 

[North]

You mean like Hitchcock did here?

When did Hitch staple Lucic to McDavid for games on end? Todd relied on vets to an exaggerated extent even before Chia kneecapped the roster.

 

[North]

Bob says hes out on Buffalo. All eat crow. Had a someone who I believe to be a "good" source that he was set to be the head coach. My bad. Wonder what it came down to.

LA probably met the contract demands.

He probably wants to stay in California and leveraged Buffalo to get a better offer from LA.

 

[Stoneman89]

Hitchcock didn’t have Strome who was traded shortly before he came aboard. Caggiula was traded and they didn’t get a forward back in the deal. Two d men got hurt after their hot start under Hitch.

Let’s not pretend Hitch had a better lineup than Todd did.

There's no pretending. Hitch had a full lineup the last 20-30 games. This included Sekera.Cagullia wasn't doing a lot when he was here, in and out of the lineup, so a non factor. Let's not pretend he was. Strome didn't exactly lite it up while he was here, and was replaced competently by Gagner. Let's not pretend that was such a huge loss.

How did Khaira do under Hitch? Reider?(at least he accumulated some assists early in the year. Larsson?

 

[joestevens29]

There's no pretending. Hitch had a full lineup the last 20-30 games. This included Sekera.Cagullia wasn't doing a lot when he was here, in and out of the lineup, so a non factor. Let's not pretend he was. Strome didn't exactly lite it up while he was here, and was replaced competently by Gagner. Let's not pretend that was such a huge loss.

How did Khaira do under Hitch? Reider?(at least he accumulated some assists early in the year. Larsson?

Strome was giving us a decent 3C and caggiula was 4th or 5th in goals while here. Nothing earth shattering, but if we would've kept those pieces we'd be in a lot better shape.

I do agree though that Hitch did end up with the healthy d

 

[Stoneman89]

When did Hitch staple Lucic to McDavid for games on end? Todd relied on vets to an exaggerated extent even before Chia kneecapped the roster.

Lucic played plenty on the top lines under Hitch. Seems to me Reider got played a fair bit by Hitch, and even had some time on the top lines. The guy didn't even deserve to be in the lineup, IMO.

There's no telling how TM would have used Lurch as the season went on. And we have no idea if Chiarelli put pressure on him to use his "prime signing" in the way that could justify that 6 million dollar price tag.

It was time for Todd to leave, I don't doubt that. Both he and the organization were at the end of their rope with each other. But to say Hitch came in here with some magic formula that turned the team around is absolute rubbish.

 

[North]

Lucic played plenty on the top lines under Hitch. Seems to me Reider got played a fair bit by Hitch, and even had some time on the top lines. The guy didn't even deserve to be in the lineup, IMO.

There's no telling how TM would have used Lurch as the season went on. And we have no idea if Chiarelli put pressure on him to use his "prime signing" in the way that could justify that 6 million dollar price tag.

It was time for Todd to leave, I don't doubt that. Both he and the organization were at the end of their rope with each other. But to say Hitch came in here with some magic formula that turned the team around is absolute rubbish.

Nobody said that. You’re arguing something on your own here.

Hitch didn’t do well but McLellan is the topic at hand and he wasn’t a good coach here.

 

[Stoneman89]

Strome was giving us a decent 3C and caggiula was 4th or 5th in goals while here. Nothing earth shattering, but if we would've kept those pieces we'd be in a lot better shape.

I do agree though that Hitch did end up with the healthy d

I like Cagullia, one of my favourite players. But he wound up sitting or being out of the lineup by injury just as many games he played.

As for Strome, he contributed a goal and an assist in 18 games. What we got was shyte for him, but he was doing very little here in taking the scoring heat off the big boys. And now, because he went on a tear in New York, people are up in arms, thinking he would have done that here. Very unlikely, given the gong show that this place was. Sometimes a change of scenery has that affect on players. Hemay have just continued to stagnate here, but we'll never know. To say we'd be in a lot better shape with both of them is stretching it. They hardly moved the needle while they were here.

 

[joestevens29]

I like Cagullia, one of my favourite players. But he wound up sitting or being out of the lineup by injury just as many games he played.

As for Strome, he contributed a goal and an assist in 18 games. What we got was shyte for him, but he was doing very little here in taking the scoring heat off the big boys. And now, because he went on a tear in New York, people are up in arms, thinking he would have done that here. Very unlikely, given the gong show that this place was. Sometimes a change of scenery has that affect on players. Hemay have just continued to stagnate here, but we'll never know. To say we'd be in a lot better shape with both of them is stretching it. They hardly moved the needle while they were here.

I'm up in arms because it forced us to play guys like Khaira, Cave and Brodziak as 3C. Strome at least slotted in that spot and allowed others to play in the proper slot. I don't think he would've score all those goals here, but he added value in depth at the center position.

One of our biggest issues is lack of depth and playing guys out of position or too far up the lineup. Moving Strome forced yet another guy to do that.

 

[Stoneman89]

Nobody said that. You’re arguing something on your own here.

Hitch didn’t do well but McLellan is the topic at hand and he wasn’t a good coach here.

You joined the discussion with me, telling me how hard done Hitch was with the lineup he had, compared to McLellan. I countered that.

 

[North]

You joined the discussion with me, telling me how hard done Hitch was with the lineup he had, compared to McLellan. I countered that.

McLellan had the better forward group always. Hitch ended up with a healthy d but took awhile for that to happen.

Neither coach did great but McLellan has issues that he has taken from team to team, Sharks hid them until playoffs but we couldn’t.

Keep defending McLellan if you want.

 

[Stoneman89]

McLellan had the better forward group always. Hitch ended up with a healthy d but took awhile for that to happen.

Neither coach did great but McLellan has issues that he has taken from team to team, Sharks hid them until playoffs but we couldn’t.

Keep defending McLellan if you want.

Not defending him. He had crap to work with here just as Hitch did. Just as pretty much all the other guys before them. To my knowledge, Mclellan has only been a head coach for 2 teams, so not sure where the "team to team" comes from. Sharks problem in the playoffs was always substandard goaltending, and guys like Thorton and Marleau shrinking. That really hasn't changed, other than the one year.

Is he perfect? Not by a long shot, but I think, like so many of the others before him, that he was given the short end of the stick. So many people on here and elsewhere thought things would be better once he was gone, but the imperfections of the team remained and the results mirrored his.

 

[North]

Not defending him. He had crap to work with here just as Hitch did. Just as pretty much all the other guys before them. To my knowledge, Mclellan has only been a head coach for 2 teams, so not sure where the "team to team" comes from. Sharks problem in the playoffs was always substandard goaltending, and guys like Thorton and Marleau shrinking. That really hasn't changed, other than the one year.

Is he perfect? Not by a long shot, but I think, like so many of the others before him, that he was given the short end of the stick. So many people on here and elsewhere thought things would be better once he was gone, but the imperfections of the team remained and the results mirrored his.

Sorry no. There are weaknesses that he brought over from San Jose that have been mentioned numerous times. He is a coach that looks good with a stacked team but the weaknesses always come out. It wasn’t about bad goaltending only.

He’s a guy who doesn’t line match, can’t make in-game adjustments, doesn’t know when to take a time out, and gets stubborn (as evidenced by his power play).

 

[Cypress]

Not defending him. He had crap to work with here just as Hitch did. Just as pretty much all the other guys before them. To my knowledge, Mclellan has only been a head coach for 2 teams, so not sure where the "team to team" comes from. Sharks problem in the playoffs was always substandard goaltending, and guys like Thorton and Marleau shrinking. That really hasn't changed, other than the one year.

Is he perfect? Not by a long shot, but I think, like so many of the others before him, that he was given the short end of the stick. So many people on here and elsewhere thought things would be better once he was gone, but the imperfections of the team remained and the results mirrored his.

You have to have a team that's superior line to line overall in order for Mclellan's coaching style of just rolling the lines and making no adjustments to work, therefore he would need to have the best lineup in the NHL in order to win the cup, as long as he doesn't get out-coached along the way. Dude just chews gum and hopes they can't find a way of countering his game plan, because once they do he has nothing.

Thing is after you've been around for a while doing the same thing, the meta evolves and what once worked becomes a known approach that is kept in mind as something to beat when new strategies are designed. Hitchcock may have a similar problem in that his old bread and butter has already been accounted for in new strategy designs. Hitchcock at least shows signs of being able to adapt and adjust, though I'm not sure if he's capable of making enough of a style-change to get back to being elite. I like how Hitchcock at least tries to have an impact in-game. Mclellan just stands there chewing gum, might as well be in the pressbox.

 

[Cypress]

I'm up in arms because it forced us to play guys like Khaira, Cave and Brodziak as 3C. Strome at least slotted in that spot and allowed others to play in the proper slot. I don't think he would've score all those goals here, but he added value in depth at the center position.

One of our biggest issues is lack of depth and playing guys out of position or too far up the lineup. Moving Strome forced yet another guy to do that.

I'd like to have seen how Strome would've done under Hitchcock. On paper it seems like it would have been a good combination, as Strome was defensively sound.

 

[KCC]

Tmac does know that there are other divisions in the league, right? lol

 

[Messrules11]

Sorry no. There are weaknesses that he brought over from San Jose that have been mentioned numerous times. He is a coach that looks good with a stacked team but the weaknesses always come out. It wasn’t about bad goaltending only.

He’s a guy who doesn’t line match, can’t make in- game adjustments, doesn’t know when to take a time out, and gets stubborn (as evidenced by his power play).

Absolutely. Some people have such short memories, it seems every time we get rid of someone, be it a coach or player guys come out of the woodwork to defend them. It happens every time.

 

[McBeastMode]

 

[BigFuzzyDice]

as part of the interview process they gave him a square peg and a round hole, the interview ended when Todd opened up his toolbox and it only contained hammers.

 

[Stoneman89]

I would take Todd back but only for min salary.

Are you Darryl’s accountant?

 

[Stoneman89]

Absolutely. Some people have such short memories, it seems every time we get rid of someone, be it a coach or player guys come out of the woodwork to defend them. It happens every time.

Sure seems like it happens with Strome and Cagullia.

 

[48g90a138pts]

Thought this was supposed to be announced already. What's the hold up?

A 3rd round pick?

 

[Perfect_Drug]

As for Strome, he contributed a goal and an assist in 18 games. What we got was shyte for him, but he was doing very little here in taking the scoring heat off the big boys. And now, because he went on a tear in New York, people are up in arms, thinking he would have done that here. Very unlikely, given the gong show that this place was. Sometimes a change of scenery has that affect on players. Hemay have just continued to stagnate here, but we'll never know. To say we'd be in a lot better shape with both of them is stretching it. They hardly moved the needle while they were here.

They just put him on the wing in the top 6 instead of sandbagging him with players not even Drai or McD could produce with.

Imagine that eh? A decent player who is able to produce with adequate NHLers.


We never even tried to see if we had anything in him. Just traded him because he couldnt produce with Lucic JP Reider and Khaira.


Check all of the GDT's. Most of us that watched the games were very pleased with the way Strome played.

 

[dssource]

F'in NHL. We should get a pick back for this just as we gave one up for the exact same thing. But of course the rules changes right after we gave up the pick and now we'll get nothing. Joke of a league.