What's sad is you could use this quote for Babcock and it would be true as well.
OT: Never Doubt the #RandyEffect
- Thread starter zeke
- Start date
What's sad is you could use this quote for Babcock and it would be true as well.
Babcock teams have always had less than average possession as well as bad home records. If he didn't coach Canada he wouldn't be considered a top 5 coach.
The only cup he won was when he had a top 4 D that consisted of Chelios, Rafalski, Kronwall, and Lidstrom with Osgood, and Hasek in net. So he's basically won with teams that are absolutely stacked (Canada/Wings), but hasn't been able to do anything with a roster less than amazing.
Matthews34
Registered User
Matthews34
Registered User
Except take a team that finished dead last the season before into the playoffs two seasons in a row when teams in similar situations have remained stalled. Everything Babcock preaches is the blueprint for winning hockey games and when his team executes they look unbeatable. Consistency is the issue but that’s the price of youth. The lack of a quality blue line hurts too. Babcock’s system relies on centres and defencemen quite a bit. Fans need to manage their expectations for a young that was dead last two years ago. Look at Washington as an example it took them 10 years to win. That’s because it’s 2018 NHL not 1967. It’s actually very difficult to win cups when you’re completing against 30 other teams instead of 5.
I sorta feel like being a good coach is half "doing something obvious that nobody else has tried yet" or "not doing something stupid that everyone is scared not to do because everyone does it," and so every coach tries random shit, and if something works they do well and they win and they have a great reputation. In the last 50 years, there have been a bunch of teams to win Cups with different coaches in a 4-5 year span, but only Scotty Bowman has won the Cup with multiple franchises.
Eventually that coach rests on his laurels cuz he won and doesn't change even though the game has adapted to them. That's why you should just go with as young a coach as possible. Anyway, this definitely has nothing to do with the stretch pass, dumping the puck, or giving Nazem Kadri ultra-heavy minutes or anything. Nope. Not at all. Don't want you to think about some western Canadian guy in his 30s who hasn't been a real player for years getting a chance in the top-six before Kapanen, who had been witing two years. This is ALL about Randy.
Community
44 is Rielly good
Some people really dislike Babcock for the smallest of reasons and forget the massive faults of some of our former coaches huge faults.
The biggest thing I have seen with Babcock is that he challenges his players to work on the weak side of their game while giving proper motivation and situational play to make them grow as players. He absolutely resurrected Kadri's game that R.C. had left to rot and did a great job of molding Rielly.
He is doing the same with Marner on the PK (which has made Marner a way better defensive player at even strength this year), Dermott getting opportunities while also being sheltered, etc.
Carlyle did a terrible job of trying to mold and grow players games. He would either thrust players into positions they couldn't handle (almost every Phaneuf partner comes to mind) or leave offensive players to offense and defensive players to defense which means you have short-term success and long-term failure.
TL;dr I firmly believe that Carlyle doesnt do a good job of improving/molding/challenging players which leads to short term success and long term failure.
pucksakes666
Registered User
- Mar 8, 2018
- 661
- 289
Sweet Leaf
Registered User
You should have left this one out.
Any intimation that Horachek was a better coach than Carlyle in any sort of way undermines the entire post.
Sweet Leaf
Registered User
Carlysle was Vince Lombardi compared to Wilson/Horachek.
Carlyle's first full year we make the playoffs after how many misses? And the team was garbage, Bozak was our #1 center OK? We came as close to beating Boston in the playoffs with that crappy team as we have with what we have now.
I don't think Carlysle is an elite coach or anything but let's not pretend he's the worst coach we've seen here. It's not close. His Leaf record of 85-69 is pretty good when you consider what happened immediately before and after him with a lot of the same core (Ie Kessel, Phaneuf, Bozak, Lupul).
Carlyle's first full year we make the playoffs after how many misses? And the team was garbage, Bozak was our #1 center OK? We came as close to beating Boston in the playoffs with that crappy team as we have with what we have now.
I don't think Carlysle is an elite coach or anything but let's not pretend he's the worst coach we've seen here. It's not close. His Leaf record of 85-69 is pretty good when you consider what happened immediately before and after him with a lot of the same core (Ie Kessel, Phaneuf, Bozak, Lupul).
Last edited:
DarkKnight
Professional Amateur
- Jan 17, 2017
- 31,878
- 48,885
Kitty Carlyle might be the first head coach to be fired this season. His Ducks have done poorly for the past six games, all losses.
MSZ
Car guy
Some people really dislike Babcock for the smallest of reasons and forget the massive faults of some of our former coaches huge faults.
The biggest thing I have seen with Babcock is that he challenges his players to work on the weak side of their game while giving proper motivation and situational play to make them grow as players. He absolutely resurrected Kadri's game that R.C. had left to rot and did a great job of molding Rielly.
He is doing the same with Marner on the PK (which has made Marner a way better defensive player at even strength this year), Dermott getting opportunities while also being sheltered, etc.
Carlyle did a terrible job of trying to mold and grow players games. He would either thrust players into positions they couldn't handle (almost every Phaneuf partner comes to mind) or leave offensive players to offense and defensive players to defense which means you have short-term success and long-term failure.
TL;dr I firmly believe that Carlyle doesnt do a good job of improving/molding/challenging players which leads to short term success and long term failure.
Look, I can see why people like Babcock as a coach. But since his last cup was so long ago, my recent memory of Babcock's success was how he turned into a group of super elites into full grinders mode in the 2014 Olympic. That team couldn't score goals at all, and you couldn't find a gold metal winning team more boring to watch than that team.
I hope he can turn this Leaf team around, but since they are officially in a win now mode, if we see another first round exit this season, he has to go IMO.
Ducks 16/17 - 18/19
Pre: 53.0cf% (#2), 53.2xgf% (#5)
Yr1: 50.3cf% (#16), 52.2xgf% (#6)
Yr2: 49.2cf% (#20), 48.5xgf% (#22)
Yr3: 41.5cf% (#31), 35.3xgf% (#31)
Leafs 12/13 - 14/15
Pre: 48.7cf% (#21), 47.6xgf% (#26) - last 20gms under Carlyle, ranked higher before that
Yr1: 45.5cf% (#28), 44.3xgf% (#28)
Yr2: 43.4cf% (#29), 43.7xgf% (#29)
Yr3: 46.3cf% (#27), 44.4xgf% (#28) --- half of this season was under Horachek, and they were actually a solid possession team that half
Ducks 05/06 - 11/12
Yr1: +1.9 shot diff (#8)
Yr2: +4.1 shot diff (#3)
Yr3: 50.8cf% (#13), 48.8xgf% (#21)
Yr4: 50.9cf% (#11), 51.2xgf% (#11)
Yr5: 47.5cf% (#25), 45.9xgf% (#30)
Yr6: 44.3cf% (#30), 44.2xgf% (#30)
Yr7: 48.5cf% (#21), 47.2xgf% (#27) --- only 24gms under Randy, performance immediately spiked back up after he was fired.
it's fricken amazing how terrible he is.
i actually don't understand or have ever heard of a single one of those statistics
cf and xgcf 17%... or xgf or whatever they call it...yup
