Coach Discussion: Paul Maurice: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

[ecolad]

After this year I really don't have a lot of issues with Maurice. His biggest achievement in my mind has been getting his team to play a style of game that suits it's abilities. He's also been able to get full buy in from his leadership, which has clearly benefited getting that same buy in from the youngsters. He's like most NHL coaches, I'm in the camp that very little separates the top from the bottom when it comes to NHL coaches. Good team, good goalie>good coach.

Having said all that I still think he could do better when playing his best talent, although I wouldn't outright call him out for that given how many young players already play big minutes on the team. Still, as well as Tanev has played, I'm still not convinced he was ever a better option than Roslovic. Hendricks shouldn't be playing ahead of Dano amd I'm almost to the point where I think Chevy needs to stop getting players like that to protect Maurice from himself.

I also echo your thoughts on his special teams stubborness at times, although he has adapted a little in that area.

Making decisions like he did earlier in the series by inserting Hendricks doesn't do him many favours, but he's done a great job with this team and them being talented shouldn't take anything away from him in that regard. Maurice isn't perfect, but who is. I guess I really just haven't heard anyone be able to convince me what a so called good coach or great coach does so much better than Maurice does.

I can easily agree with almost every thought you have offered up here Ducky10. Good post. But I suggest that the one in bold needs to be fleshed out a bit... My view is that Maurice has brought a predetermined particular style of game to the Jets and has been wildly successful in achieving results. The style was exactly right for, and was fully supported by, the veteran core, who then did a great job getting buy in from the talented youth at all differing role levels on the team. I hope you might understand my distinction though that the players were best fit based on ability to play the predetermined style - not the style derived from any thoughtful assessment of the player`s abilities. Could this team play even better hockey with a differing style? Simply not possible to know.Will the style need to change as the veteran core age out? Suspect so but don`t know. Will Maurice be that type of coach that can actually change the style based upon evaluation of the players provided him ? Probably not, coachs` with this ability are quite rare in the NHL . All IMO of course.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The only way I see it happening is if things go off the rails early and he loses the team. I would peg the chances of him losing this leadership group as fairly small.

Thus the (reasonably). He could lose the room - but not overnight. He could miss the playoffs next year - but you can be certain that, if he does it will involve things beyond his control that he won't be made to carry the can for.

He would need to be a horribad coach for the next 2 seasons to get fired and I think it is pretty clear that he is not that. He may be mediocre, he may even be slightly below avg. But he is not bad enough to **** up badly enough to lose his job in less than 2 years. I see that as a near zero possibility, very near zero.

I don't think he is a perfect coach by any means, or even just a great coach. He is a good enough coach and the right coach for this team at this time.

If he loses this series it will be partly on him and partly on the players - all of the players. There is no one who has been mistake free. But I don't think anyone has been so bad that we can say he should be fired over it.

 

[ERYX]

The fact that some people are even talking about Maurice getting fired when we are in game 7 versus the President's Trophy winners suggests to me that no matter what, Maurice will never be good enough to please some.

The biggest attack on him is the use of Hendricks. At least he didn't put him on the first line as Babcock did with Komorov ... as pointed out, it seems like most if not all NHL coaches share a love for glue guys. Including those seen as the best of the best (Babs, Q, etc). Note that Laviolette has been playing Hartnell who is slower than Hendricks yet people are talking about Maurice being out-coached. Seems to me that some people just look for excuses to dump on Maurice for whatever reason.

To me @Ducky10 hit the nail on the head. Maurice has gotten the team playing a style that suits their abilities and achieved a high level of success (2nd overall in the league and within a game of knocking off #1 in the playoffs). I'm really not sure what else can be expected of him???

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I think next season is the Jets lay an egg though he probably gets fired. Its easier to fire a coach then the entire team. But honestly I doubt that happens

 

[AmericanDream]

I am so confused now...I don't know who to believe!!

 

[cbcwpg]

Every single coach either gets fired or retires at some point. It doesn't matter who you are nor your track record.

But, there is NO WAY.... a team that has finally made the playoffs and won a game, won a first round series, and has gotten themselves into a 7th game in the second round... is going to fire their coach. Even if they crap the bed next season, Maurice is going to get a free pass because maybe a bad season next year is just a one-off. You never know.

Paul Maurice would have to get Chevy to extend Hendricks, name him as captain, and start him on the number 1 line with Dano and Tanev... and also claim Mason as the starting goalie next season to even be considered to be removed. And even then probably not...

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I am so confused now...I don't know who to believe!!

There is a history here

Those that believe True North and Mark Chipman are incompetent owners and Chevy was a bad choice as a GM. Maybe they have some things to be right about like the Claude Noel hiring but other things like our Assistant GM being a glorified equipment manager not so much.

You also had a group of what I think are/where some very smart young men who believed in the analytic side of things. I think they had/have a lot to offer to team building and player analysis but at the same time some posters took what they and others had to say to the extreme.

You also had guys like me, older guys who have a more traditional way of looking at hockey teams.

I think those 2 groups clashed early in the new Jets era. The fallout is there are some who want change and some who believe in the process. Both sets are fans are just that....fanatical.

I don't know if this years success will change everyone. Probably not. But some long term success will surely do that

 

[AmericanDream]

ahhhhh, now this feels more like home!! I knew it wasn't all rosy over here compared to my Hawks board!!!

 

[Jets4Life]

There is a history here

Those that believe True North and Mark Chipman are incompetent owners and Chevy was a bad choice as a GM. Maybe they have some things to be right about like the Claude Noel hiring but other things like our Assistant GM being a glorified equipment manager not so much.

You will be hard pressed to find any Jets fan who thinks hiring Chevy as GM was a mistake. Chevy did not have much say in the Noel hiring. That move was mainly Chipman, brought over from the Moose.

 

[White Out 902]

This has clearly become a toxic conversation, and, one that really has no merit at this point. Maurice and the Jets had a great year, and he's going no where. I would say that his job security is probably 100% next season. If the Jets crash and burn into the toilet he won't be let go until off season. But I don't think anyone is expecting that.

I don't see a lot of reason to debate Chevy and Maurice right now. We're 1 win away from the Western Final. Instead of going off the deep end and getting posts deleted for having little freak outs, let's just relax and enjoy the ride. We can burn this place to the ground in 8 hours if the game goes badly, or, we will have a celebration worthy of Star Wars Episode 6.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

You will be hard pressed to find any Jets fan who thinks hiring Chevy as GM was a mistake. Chevy did not have much say in the Noel hiring. That move was mainly Chipman, brought over from the Moose.

Go back in time and go through these boards. Man there was some dark times here. Honestly I can't blame people either because who doesn't want to win.

People considered Chevy a mistake because he had no experience. He was an Assistant GM and some felt we needed a GM with actual NHL experience to be our GM. Some felt it was the old home town/small town scenario taking effect

 

[DashingDane]

PoMo has done a tremendous job this season and I can't see him going anywhere for the next couple of years.

I think his biggest challenge going forward will be managing his skilled forwards. There are too many good skilled players to make everyone happy. Some players are going to be unhappy with their role and minutes going forward. That can create internal turmoil if they don't think it is fairly distributed. Litts and Frenchy might accept it because they are in their later career stages but I can't imagine the young guys having as much patience. Unless Pomo starts balancing the top 6 ice time better I see trouble down the line...

 

[Ducky10]

I can easily agree with almost every thought you have offered up here Ducky10. Good post. But I suggest that the one in bold needs to be fleshed out a bit... My view is that Maurice has brought a predetermined particular style of game to the Jets and has been wildly successful in achieving results. The style was exactly right for, and was fully supported by, the veteran core, who then did a great job getting buy in from the talented youth at all differing role levels on the team. I hope you might understand my distinction though that the players were best fit based on ability to play the predetermined style - not the style derived from any thoughtful assessment of the player`s abilities. Could this team play even better hockey with a differing style? Simply not possible to know.Will the style need to change as the veteran core age out? Suspect so but don`t know. Will Maurice be that type of coach that can actually change the style based upon evaluation of the players provided him ? Probably not, coachs` with this ability are quite rare in the NHL . All IMO of course.

I beleive Maurice structured the style the Jets play, based on the skill sets they possess and that the coaching staff is aware of. They play a style that takes advantage of their skating, speed, and puck handling ability. You can see it in all three zones.

The style may have to change but I think it's a long ways from that. They have speed and skill throughout the organization, just more players who suit this game. With guys like Hendricks gone, it should be even better.

 

[Bigfish]

I don't think Paul Maurice is going anywhere any time soon although i am not a fan.
I think Paul Maurice's coaching record of 648 wins, 700 loses and 99 ties tells you exactly how good a coach he is. He never makes the veteran players like Buff and Wheeler answer for their stupid/lazy penalties. He rarely plays his best players (see Hendricks) and his teams always struggle on special teams although the Jets did well this year on special teams. I thought that we should have made the playoffs last year, even with the amount of injuries we had, and with the team Chevy put together this year you would have to be a lot worse coach than Maurice to not make the playoffs. I don't hate Paul Maurice. He seems like a nice guy and gives a good interview. I just don't think that he is as good a coach as a lot of people around here do.

 

[Hunter368]

People need to calm down, this is a fictional conversation. Agree or disagree or ignore it, but trolling & flaming will not be tolerated. A person can simply ignore threads they don’t agree with, pretty simple. Failing to follow the rules will earn you a warning or thread ban. Enough already.....bunch of posts deleted, next step is warnings or thread ban.

 

[rkp]

If PoMo is such a great coach as some profess....explain the previous 2 seasons when most have predicted the Jets to be in the playoffs with all the talent on the team.

 

[Jedub]

If PoMo is such a great coach as some profess....explain the previous 2 seasons when most have predicted the Jets to be in the playoffs with all the talent on the team.

Goaltending. Remember?

 

[surixon]

I beleive Maurice structured the style the Jets play, based on the skill sets they possess and that the coaching staff is aware of. They play a style that takes advantage of their skating, speed, and puck handling ability. You can see it in all three zones.

The style may have to change but I think it's a long ways from that. They have speed and skill throughout the organization, just more players who suit this game. With guys like Hendricks gone, it should be even better.

I think there is one aspect where he isn't correctly assessing talent or implementing systems and that is with regards to offense generated off the rush. As the below indicates we don't generate very much offense off the rush.

Breaking down how the Winnipeg Jets matchup against the Nashville Predators - Sportsnet.ca

Given the speed and talent we have up front, coupled with the puck movement from our backend we should be pretty dominant in that regard but we are fairly average there.

That is one area where I feel Moe hasn't adjusted his philosophy. Right from the beginning Moe has preferrd to employ a hard forecheck/coupled with deriving offense off the cycle. He's still employing the same philosophy but with a more robust system. So in the end I think both you and Ecolad are correct. Moe has adapted his systems within the confines of his philosophy to better match our talent but he hasn't really changed the essence of how the team plays if that makes sense.

Or at least that is how I see it.

 

[KingBogo]

I don't think Paul Maurice is going anywhere any time soon although i am not a fan.
I think Paul Maurice's coaching record of 648 wins, 700 loses and 99 ties tells you exactly how good a coach he is. He never makes the veteran players like Buff and Wheeler answer for their stupid/lazy penalties. He rarely plays his best players (see Hendricks) and his teams always struggle on special teams although the Jets did well this year on special teams. I thought that we should have made the playoffs last year, even with the amount of injuries we had, and with the team Chevy put together this year you would have to be a lot worse coach than Maurice to not make the playoffs. I don't hate Paul Maurice. He seems like a nice guy and gives a good interview. I just don't think that he is as good a coach as a lot of people around here do.

You can criticize Maurice's record all you want but we are all bound by the official stats of a league, we can't just decide we don't like something and unilaterally change it. Maurice's official record is:

648 Wins
589 Loses
99 Ties
111 OTL

To do otherwise then distorts coaching records for those who coached prior to overtime being introduced. For Example this would suggest that none of the 314 ties Scotty Bowman got would have resulted in an OTL. It is legitimate to compare win% if you would like.

 

[Board Bard]

You can criticize Maurice's record all you want but we are all bound by the official stats of a league, we can't just decide we don't like something and unilaterally change it. Maurice's official record is:

648 Wins
589 Loses
99 Ties
111 OTL

To do otherwise then distorts coaching records for those who coached prior to overtime being introduced. For Example this would suggest that none of the 314 ties Scotty Bowman got would have resulted in an OTL. It is legitimate to compare win% if you would like.

Okay, but if we're going to differentiate overtime losses and pretend they aren't losses, we're going to have to remove overtime wins and pretend they aren't wins.

 

[Bigfish]

You can criticize Maurice's record all you want but we are all bound by the official stats of a league, we can't just decide we don't like something and unilaterally change it. Maurice's official record is:

648 Wins
589 Loses
99 Ties
111 OTL

To do otherwise then distorts coaching records for those who coached prior to overtime being introduced. For Example this would suggest that none of the 314 ties Scotty Bowman got would have resulted in an OTL. It is legitimate to compare win% if you would like.

All I did was add OTL to loses. I figure if OT wins count as wins OT loses should count as loses. Scotty Bowman has 314 ties and Paul Maurice has 99 ties. A tie is a tie.

 

[Ducky10]

I think there is one aspect where he isn't correctly assessing talent or implementing systems and that is with regards to offense generated off the rush. As the below indicates we don't generate very much offense off the rush.

Breaking down how the Winnipeg Jets matchup against the Nashville Predators - Sportsnet.ca

Given the speed and talent we have up front, coupled with the puck movement from our backend we should be pretty dominant in that regard but we are fairly average there.

That is one area where I feel Moe hasn't adjusted his philosophy. Right from the beginning Moe has preferrd to employ a hard forecheck/coupled with deriving offense off the cycle. He's still employing the same philosophy but with a more robust system. So in the end I think both you and Ecolad are correct. Moe has adapted his systems within the confines of his philosophy to better match our talent but he hasn't really changed the essence of how the team plays if that makes sense.

Or at least that is how I see it.

But why does it need to change its approach to scoring off the rush? Why is that better.

Not sure it's fair to judge a guy for not changing a certain philosophy just for the sake of using another one. I'll wait to see whether it becomes a necessity and whether he's successful changing it at that point.

 

[Bristo]

Okay, but if we're going to differentiate overtime losses and pretend they aren't losses, we're going to have to remove overtime wins and pretend they aren't wins.

Actually no. I appreciate your perspective, but it's flies into conflict with the way the league assigns points for these each of these different results. You get a point for an overtime loss. You don't for a regulation loss. You have to live within that world because that is the NHL, whatever your personal feelings are.

 

[pucka lucka]

PoMo is a method coach. He is very weak behind the bench. He gets out coached a lot. See our PP last game for a clear example.

 

[surixon]

But why does it need to change its approach to scoring off the rush? Why is that better.

Not sure it's fair to judge a guy for not changing a certain philosophy just for the sake of using another one. I'll wait to see whether it becomes a necessity and whether he's successful changing it at that point.

Maybe I wasn't clear, I am In no way shape or form arguing that we should abandon the forecheck in favor of the rush. We are one of the deadliest teams in the league off the cycle so it absolutey should be emphasized and part of the repitore. My point wasn't to discredit what he's doing but to highlight an area where this team has the horses to add another dynamic layer to its game plan.

How difficult would we be to stop if we where just as deadly off the rush as we are off the cycle?

Perhaps there wasn't enough time to becone proficient at everything and he choose to focus on defense and on our cycle game. From attending a number of practices this line of thought is substantiated from the fact that Maurice Didn't put that much emphasis into our transition and rush game. He spent the bulk of his time working on our 5 man unit play both defensively and offensively in the attacking/defending zone. It' hard to argue with our results at preventing high danger chances and generating off the cycle.

Maybe he adds the transition element next year once since those other systems will be much more ingrained.