Miscellaneous NHL Discussion: 2016/17 Season, Part III

[MiamiScreamingEagles]

Continue here.

Part II -- http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=126188593#post126188593

Click to read more...

 

[Striiker]

Just gonna copy this here because I really want an answer.

Originally Posted by Falsetto Kaiba

So the winningest American coach of all time is a BAD coach. Just off top, right?

Im a little salty about the Jackets being this good too but let's not put down their personnel just for the sake of keeping egos intact

In short Torts is a better coach than peple give him credit for and so are the Jackets

No, not ego or being salty or anything like that, I'm just using common sense. Let me help you out a bit since apparently I'm expecting too much by assuming other people use common sense too.

Look at this page. Look at the points. Look at the shooting percentages. Comepare both to career averages. Tell me that's because of the coach. Tell me that isn't an unsustainable pace and that they're not just hot right now. Tell me you expect that to continue.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?aggr...,1&sort=points

Just another example of people overstating what coaches are responsible for and giving them credit for what the players do. Id love to hear the amazing difference between last year when they were trash and people expected him to be fired and this year when he's suddenly a genius. No way it's just the players being on a crazy hot streak right? Nah, that makes too much sense so let's forget that.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

And on top of all that, Torts is a massive ****head, so who cares if he gets any credit.

 

[Hiesenberg]

Torts has yet to deal with any animosity this year, that's usually when he loses his ****.

 

[Ruck Over]

Jumping in late, Torts is a good coach for the current times.

I'm not sure how well he'd translate to other eras, but he couldn't coach in those times so it's kinda moot.

Torts is definitely experiencing dumb luck with the current production of the Jackets. He hasn't developed a new system that is just catching people off guard, ala left-wing lock, the trap, etc. Inventing a new way to play the game is a sign of "good coaching". Had Guy Boucher been successful in Tampa with his 1-3-1, that would've been "good coaching".

The knocks on Torts, personality aside, is that he had a talented club in Vancouver and did less than squat with them. He had a decent squad (with a HHoF goalie, which should minimize his to emphasize defense first) in NYR, and had some success, but also drove that group batty and got himself canned.

But he won a cup, so he must be good forever right?

Torts = this generation's Mike Keenan.

 

[Hiesenberg]

I just saw a chart showing PDO, obviously if you are sitting in the cross axis you are pretty consistent and chances going forward are predictable. Minnesota & Columbus are way up in the top right in Good Luck and No Goals Against. And I mean WAY up in the corner.

 

[Lotusflower]

Just gonna copy this here because I really want an answer.



No, not ego or being salty or anything like that, I'm just using common sense. Let me help you out a bit since apparently I'm expecting too much by assuming other people use common sense too.

Look at this page. Look at the points. Look at the shooting percentages. Comepare both to career averages. Tell me that's because of the coach. Tell me that isn't an unsustainable pace and that they're not just hot right now. Tell me you expect that to continue.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?aggr...,1&sort=points

Just another example of people overstating what coaches are responsible for and giving them credit for what the players do. Id love to hear the amazing difference between last year when they were trash and people expected him to be fired and this year when he's suddenly a genius. No way it's just the players being on a crazy hot streak right? Nah, that makes too much sense so let's forget that.

Where did I say that Torts is a genius? I said that he and the Jackets are better than most give them credit for.

Most expected the Jackets to be a lottery team again and Torts to be on the chopping block.
Its about to be January 1st and the team in question is the best team in the league by record and their coach is the clear frontrunner for the Jack Adams.

They've done much better than people ever expected and that's what I said.

I can read NHL.com just fine. I know the numbers are unsustainable and like you I doubt they'll be the best team in the league come April but come on they've far exceeded all projections.

I know Coaching skill is pretty hard to quantify but you would have to be pretty *ahem* salty to say a 14 game win streak, what looks to be a likely shot at the playoffs and the best regular season of all time for the franchise has NOTHING to do with their coach.

Sorry I touched a nerve but what I said still rings true: Torts and the Jackets are better than people (like you) give them credit for

 

[BillDineen]

Torts is not better than people think. People realized, as he has shown in the past, he can have winning teams for a period of time before he loses his room due to the fact is a royal a hole. There is no mystery.

 

[Flyotes]

The scarier time in the NHL would be if Torts can overcome his history of starting strong with a team and then declining.

Honestly, as demanding as Torts is, in the NHL where some players are catered to, if he can find a roster that won't spoil on him, he could extend his coaching career.

Hell, I remember having the thought he could possibly be done at this level.

 

[Striiker]

You're salty and it must be an ego thing because that's the buzzword that set you off.

Where did I say that Torts is a genius? I said that he and the Jackets are better than most give them credit for.

Most expected the Jackets to be a lottery team again and Torts to be on the chopping block.
Its about to be January 1st and the team in question is the best team in the league by record and their coach is the clear frontrunner for the Jack Adams.

They've done much better than people ever expected and that's what I said.

I can read NHL.com just fine. I know the numbers are unsustainable and like you I doubt they'll be the best team in the league come April but come on they've far exceeded all projections.

I know Coaching skill is pretty hard to quantify but you would have to be pretty *ahem* salty to say a 14 game win streak, what looks to be a likely shot at the playoffs and the best regular season of all time for the franchise has NOTHING to do with their coach.

Sorry I touched a nerve but what I said still rings true: Torts and the Jackets are better than people (like you) give them credit for

No, you didn't "touch a nerve". The words of a random person online wouldn't possibly mean less to me. I just don't have patience for people who lack common sense.

You're saying Torts is better then he's given credit for and obviously you're basing that off of this win streak since there's nothing else you could point to to back that up. My point was that if you look at those stats you can see that the win streak is thanks to luck and overachievers, not the coaching, which means the credit you think he's earned isn't legitimate.

I don't give Torts credit because he doesn't deserve it. If there was reason to believe that their current play was because of something he did (aka they had this record but their players weren't all so obviously overachieving) then you could give him credit, but that's not the case. So instead you're just lazily saying "well the jackets are playing well so Torts must be better than people say" which makes no sense.
He's the same coach who's been fired for failing miserably and it's not like he's suddenly became a different person. He's been fortunate enough to coach good teams and he's currently coaching a team thats playing better than they really are. He's not making any big difference, which is why when he was suddenly on a bad team (Canucks) he didn't make any positive difference and was quickly given the boot. I'm not putting their failures on him, like I said the performance (good or bad) of any team is 90% on the players, but it just shows he isn't a difference maker. Wasn't then and isn't now.

 

[BillDineen]

Isles put Halak on waivers.

 

[kudymen]

I will be absolutely off topic but this caught my not-native ear: is "winningest" a real word?

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

I will be absolutely off topic but this caught my not-native ear: is "winningest" a real word?

"Most winningest" is the proper term.

But yeah, apparently winningest is an actual word.

 

[kudymen]

"Most winningest" is the proper term.

But yeah, apparently winningest is an actual word.

Ha, thanks. Something new every day...

(Dave confused me again )

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

"Most winningest" is the proper term.

But yeah, apparently winningest is an actual word.

Haha Most winning

 

[Random Forest]

"Most winningest" is the proper term.

I'm pretty sure that's redundant since "winningest" is already in superlative form.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I'm pretty sure that's redundant since "winningest" is already in superlative form.

HC just had a typo. It's not any more stupider than that

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

I typed it up being sarcastic thinking it wasn't a real word, but then I looked it up and it was a real word to my surprise.

 

[kudymen]

Honestly, I googled it because I still did not fully believe you guys... The results were my surprise of the day (week)

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Not that long ago Snow signed Halak, Grabovski, Kulemin, Boychuck (after trading for his rights) and was applauded as a genius and Isles as up and coming contender.
Oh, how the tides have turned.

 

[Striiker]

Bet those cocky Isles fans I wasted so much time arguing with feel pretty stupid now. At least I hope they do.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Honestly, I googled it because I still did not fully believe you guys... The results were my surprise of the day (week)

It's like a double negative - you wouldn't say "There is not nothing to eat" because you only need one negative, so you say "There is not anything to eat" - you only need one comparative or superlative, so you don't say "more prettier or most prettiest," you say "more pretty/most pretty" - here endeth the lesson

 

[kudymen]

It's like a double negative - you wouldn't say "There is not nothing to eat" because you only need one negative, so you say "There is not anything to eat" - you only need one comparative or superlative, so you don't say "more prettier or most prettiest," you say "more pretty/most pretty" - here endeth the lesson

The Untouchables is my favorite movie... ever.

Anyway, I see what you mean, I was mainly interested in the word "winningest". Usage of superlatives and the idea of double negatives have never been a problem to me, thankfully

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Bet those cocky Isles fans I wasted so much time arguing with feel pretty stupid now. At least I hope they do.

Looking at that I'm so glad we have Hexy. Otherwise we could very much be in similar position. Homer already gave us Amac and Vinnie. God knows what he could have done if given more time, hell he even might very well outbid Isles for Ladd. Even a lesser players that in my eyes were seen like reasonable choice have gone to become turd like Pouliot or Boedker. Free agency really is a fickle *****.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

The Untouchables is my favorite movie... ever.

Anyway, I see what you mean, I was mainly interested in the word "winningest". Usage of superlatives and the idea of double negatives have never been a problem to me, thankfully

I figured as much and I tried not to be condescending lol - but I'm an English teacher and the teaching just kind of comes out of me involuntarily, whether it's needed or not

And "The Untouchables" is AWESOME.

"What did you say?"
"I said your friend died screaming like a stuck Irish pig."
(pushes him off the roof)
"Did he sound anything like that?"