Post-Game Talk: Pre-Season: Oilers Beat Jets 3-2

[Aerchon]

Around 10 players on this team had a horrible year last season. With several having career worst years.

Not invoking causality with this but if theres an Occams Razor deduction to be had here you look at the thing that changed.

What changed was a Rowan Atkinson clone as headcoach pretending to be a duck when he wasn't offended at some water on his back..

10 pro players here didn't entirely forget how to play hockey. They were usurped into an incompetent system.

I can't argue against that. Just hope Yak can bounce back or said duck improves or quickly pronounced dead in the water if things go like last year.

 

[Zihuatanejo]

Around 10 players on this team had a horrible year last season. With several having career worst years.

Not invoking causality with this but if theres an Occams Razor deduction to be had here you look at the thing that changed.

What changed was a Rowan Atkinson clone as headcoach pretending to be a duck when he wasn't offended at some water on his back..

10 pro players here didn't entirely forget how to play hockey. They were usurped into an incompetent system.

Not saying I disagree with you but personel being incapable of understanding a system or properly employing it does not necessarily imply its incompetence. I'm sure IT people the world over can attest to the truth of that.

Maybe Eakins is nothing but a fool with a dream of a system that won't work but I don't think having a system fail with the team iced last year is entirely proof of that.

 

[Replacement*]

Not saying I disagree with you but personel being incapable of understanding a system or properly employing it does not necessarily imply its incompetence. I'm sure IT people the world over can attest to the truth of that.

Maybe Eakins is nothing but a fool with a dream of a system that won't work but I don't think having a system fail with the team iced last year is entirely proof of that.

The manner of execution had its result. Coaches quite simply have a role of getting the best out of players and team that they can. This, in essence is their job.

In that endeavor Eakins failed miserably last season and no assumption or invocation is necessary to conclude that much. It was in fact Eakins that introduced the Swarm system and that much after the fact noted the players did not have the requisite background to play said system. Ultimately the culpability here is pretty clear.

Eakins would have done better to properly understand where this team, and its players, were defensively before applying a system with such requirement. Ironically, his oft quoted prodigy, Roger Neilson, would have done exactly that upon coming to a new team. Roger would have watched so much game film of the players that there would be NO confusion whatsoever at the level the players were at.

Again this is on Eakins and improper preparation and understanding of this team. Realizing suddenly in January that the club was contraprepared to play the system he instituted was gross incompetence.

 

[guymez]

Willing to bet a lot of good teams will have a rookie at C. Hell, I'd argue that four of the best teams in this league put teenagers in those roles during their turnaround seasons.

It's about insulating that centre. Need NHL experience in that other centre hole.

A lot of teams have much better depth than the Oilers do. Thats a problem.

I shudder to think what would happen if Gordon or RNH goes down early. I have to think that MacT has something on the back burner for a veteran centre.

 

[guymez]

Not saying I disagree with you but personel being incapable of understanding a system or properly employing it does not necessarily imply its incompetence. I'm sure IT people the world over can attest to the truth of that.

Maybe Eakins is nothing but a fool with a dream of a system that won't work but I don't think having a system fail with the team iced last year is entirely proof of that.

The issue is that no one has any idea of the specifics of the system play that was implemented last year and how well the team executed it.

Its all innuendo and guesswork based on little snippets of information that may have or may not have been properly reported.

The ridiculous part of all this is the multitude of opinions that spring up from all that in an endless barrage to incriminate Eakins. Were there issues...of course. Were they fatal...of course not.

Its the same crap over and over again by the same posters who struggle with moving on and seeing how the team comes together with the requisite changes.

 

[Replacement*]

The issue is that no one has any idea of the specifics of the system play that was implemented last year and how well the team executed it.

Its all innuendo and guesswork based on little snippets of information that may have or may not have been properly reported.

The ridiculous part of all this is the multitude of opinions that spring up from all that in an endless barrage to incriminate Eakins. Were there issues...of course. Were they fatal...of course not.

Its the same crap over and over again by the same posters who struggle with moving on and seeing how the team comes together with the requisite changes.

Its innuendo that Eakins had a horrible coaching record last season, had the team out of contention within 2-3 weeks into the season, and had a #1 pick phoning his agent to intervene quickly in what was an eroding situation? No, those are knowns.

Heres the deal. A middling AHL coach has next to no value relatively speaking and maybe 200K/yr as a rookie NHL headcoach.

A Number 1 draft pick is typically worth countless millions. period. On a scale of 10 -100 times more worth than a coach. That's the nature of pro sports, it is what it is.

Its why that in most standoffs between ordinary dime a dozen coaches and star players that most orgs with any sense cut bait with the underperforming coach, and quickly salvage what they can before things spiral too far out of control. Which they did judging from MacT's own dressingroom chaos comment.

But no, nothing happened here, team was fine last year, crisis what crisis

 

[T-Funk]

A lot of teams have much better depth than the Oilers do. Thats a problem.

I shudder to think what would happen if Gordon or RNH goes down early. I have to think that MacT has something on the back burner for a veteran centre.

Has anyone in charge of this team EVER had anything on the backburner to come save the day? Our management likes failing.

 

[guymez]

Has anyone in charge of this team EVER had anything on the backburner to come save the day? Our management likes failing.

History agrees with you.

I think that MacT is a smart man...perhaps I am being too generous by giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I tend to give smart people a little leeway..another reason why I am cutting their rookie coach a little slack.
It may be misplaced but I am willing to wait and see how things play out instead of acting like I know what the outcome will be.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I'm not so sure teams have a "backup" plan when their best center goes down. At least not an adequate one.

If Toews or Kopitar goes down that's pretty big regardless.

 

[Replacement*]

History agrees with you.

I think that MacT is a smart man...perhaps I am being too generous by giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I tend to give smart people a little leeway..another reason why I am cutting their rookie coach a little slack.
It may be misplaced but I am willing to wait and see how things play out instead of acting like I know what the outcome will be.

This is interesting, and not to jump on your back but just because I feel you make interesting statements and arguments. Probably why we have so much dialog.

Smart? I used to be of the opinion that MacT was smart. At least in as much as it concerned the coaching realm.

But as we know in the world those that are good incumbent in one capacity are very often found wanting in differing capacities. Particularly when thrust up to increasing expectations and responsibilities involving myriad new requisite skillsets.

Next, is smart in this same sense a "static" consideration or is requisite knowledge, approach, technology, attribute, in flux with some being more or less profitable in an ever evolving performance based landscape?

Is anybody left behind, does acuity to perform a task decrease with age, mileage, lack of freshness, etc?

So no blind benefit of doubt for me. The credit will need to be earned. It isn't granted automatically.


I certainly don't find Eakins particularly smart relatively speaking as compared to his NHL brethren. I never have. He's a talker imo. Fool some of the people..

On the other hand I'm fairly convinced Eakins finds himself to be the brightest bulb. Self conception not necessarily equating with objective reality. Indeed I think a preconception of intelligence is somewhat responsible for the errors Eakins makes reinventing the wheel. Novel not always being indication of bright..

Eakins is imaginative, experimental, this is clear. But is his imagination, experimental tendencency selected for, or against, at this level of play? These are fair questions to ask.

 

[SK13]

This is interesting, and not to jump on your back but just because I feel you make interesting statements and arguments. Probably why we have so much dialog.

Smart? I used to be of the opinion that MacT was smart. At least in as much as it concerned the coaching realm.

But as we know in the world those that are good incumbent in one capacity are very often found wanting in differing capacities. Particularly when thrust up to increasing expectations and responsibilities involving myriad new requisite skillsets.

Next, is smart in this same sense a "static" consideration or is requisite knowledge, approach, technology, attribute, in flux with some being more or less profitable in an ever evolving performance based landscape?

Is anybody left behind, does acuity to perform a task decrease with age, mileage, lack of freshness, etc?

So no blind benefit of doubt for me. The credit will need to be earned. It isn't granted automatically.


I certainly don't find Eakins particularly smart relatively speaking as compared to his NHL brethren. I never have. He's a talker imo. Fool some of the people..

On the other hand I'm fairly convinced Eakins finds himself to be the brightest bulb. Self conception not necessarily equating with objective reality. Indeed I think a preconception of intelligence is somewhat responsible for the errors Eakins makes reinventing the wheel. Novel not always being indication of bright..

Eakins is imaginative, experimental, this is clear. But is his imagination, experimental tendencency selected for, or against, at this level of play? These are fair questions to ask.

Dear lord....

 

[guymez]

This is interesting, and not to jump on your back but just because I feel you make interesting statements and arguments. Probably why we have so much dialog.

Smart? I used to be of the opinion that MacT was smart. At least in as much as it concerned the coaching realm.

But as we know in the world those that are good incumbent in one capacity are very often found wanting in differing capacities. Particularly when thrust up to increasing expectations and responsibilities involving myriad new requisite skillsets.

Next, is smart in this same sense a "static" consideration or is requisite knowledge, approach, technology, attribute, in flux with some being more or less profitable in an ever evolving performance based landscape?

Is anybody left behind, does acuity to perform a task decrease with age, mileage, lack of freshness, etc?

So no blind benefit of doubt for me. The credit will need to be earned. It isn't granted automatically.


I certainly don't find Eakins particularly smart relatively speaking as compared to his NHL brethren. I never have. He's a talker imo. Fool some of the people..

On the other hand I'm fairly convinced Eakins finds himself to be the brightest bulb. Self conception not necessarily equating with objective reality. Indeed I think a preconception of intelligence is somewhat responsible for the errors Eakins makes reinventing the wheel. Novel not always being indication of bright..

Eakins is imaginative, experimental, this is clear. But is his imagination, experimental tendencency selected for, or against, at this level of play? These are fair questions to ask.

One quality that determines how 'smart' someone is for me is their desire and ability to grow in a general sense as a person and also in terms of their skill sets. That includes an openness for self evaluation and extending oneself to avenues of growth as part of the process.

I always try to bet on smart people and rarely am I let down.

I see both MacT and Eakins in that light. The thing that I am affording them in their NEW positions is time...the very thing that you are restricting.

You have set up a limited structure in your definition and then use those limitations to shine a narrow beam on why you think you are right.
I see that as extremely narrow and your inability to broaden your perspective on that is somewhat illuminating as well..

 

[dobiezeke*]

This is interesting, and not to jump on your back but just because I feel you make interesting statements and arguments. Probably why we have so much dialog.

Smart? I used to be of the opinion that MacT was smart. At least in as much as it concerned the coaching realm.

But as we know in the world those that are good incumbent in one capacity are very often found wanting in differing capacities. Particularly when thrust up to increasing expectations and responsibilities involving myriad new requisite skillsets.

Next, is smart in this same sense a "static" consideration or is requisite knowledge, approach, technology, attribute, in flux with some being more or less profitable in an ever evolving performance based landscape?

Is anybody left behind, does acuity to perform a task decrease with age, mileage, lack of freshness, etc?

So no blind benefit of doubt for me. The credit will need to be earned. It isn't granted automatically.


I certainly don't find Eakins particularly smart relatively speaking as compared to his NHL brethren. I never have. He's a talker imo. Fool some of the people..

On the other hand I'm fairly convinced Eakins finds himself to be the brightest bulb. Self conception not necessarily equating with objective reality. Indeed I think a preconception of intelligence is somewhat responsible for the errors Eakins makes reinventing the wheel. Novel not always being indication of bright..

Eakins is imaginative, experimental, this is clear. But is his imagination, experimental tendencency selected for, or against, at this level of play? These are fair questions to ask.

Were you looking in a mirror when you posted this? At least Eakins recognized that he had handled Yak incorrectly and attempted to make amends with his reaching out in the off season. Yak stated he was appreciative and was happy that he was coming into camp knowing he was able to communicate with his coach.

Some people learn from their fallacies..

 

[Replacement*]

Dear lord....

haha. It was purposely written that way.

 

[Replacement*]

Were you looking in a mirror when you posted this? At least Eakins recognized that he had handled Yak incorrectly and attempted to make amends with his reaching out in the off season. Yak stated he was appreciative and was happy that he was coming into camp knowing he was able to communicate with his coach.

Some people learn from their fallacies..

I could well be.

Partly tongue in cheek as well which I knew you would enjoy.


All of our perspectives are distorted distillates. Of course including yours. (isn't discussion wonderful) Albeit it is interesting that you suggest one trial learning that takes one calendar year to arrive at the correct answer is indication of advanced intelligence.

I think amoeba may be known to display quicker adaptation in lab settings..

 

[Blue And Orange]

I also think Eakins having a proper support group will go a long way.

Eakins was forced to work with Buchberger, and Smith as head coaches. Everyone in this universe knows they're both useless and incompetent.

Hiring guys like Keith Acton and Craig Ramsay will bring a wealth of hockey knowledge and technicalities that should complement Eakins.

There was an article stating that Eakins and the assistant coaches (Bucky and Smith) weren't on the same page. For a team that desperately needs structure, when the head coach and the assistant coach can't stay on the same page, you're going to have problems.

Hopefully hiring Acton and Ramsay can put the ship on the correct course.

 

[dobiezeke*]

I could well be.

Partly tongue in cheek as well which I knew you would enjoy.


All of our perspectives are distorted distillates. Of course including yours. (isn't discussion wonderful) Albeit it is interesting that you suggest one trial learning that takes one calendar year to arrive at the correct answer is indication of advanced intelligence.

I think amoeba may be known to display quicker adaptation in lab settings..

To the bolded - tell me a coach who didn't make mistakes in their rookie season.

 

[Replacement*]

To the bolded - tell me a coach who didn't make mistakes in their rookie season.

A better question might be what kind of mistakes, what magnitude of mistakes, and what it cost them.

Would be interesting to see a statistical analysis of Rookie coaching record, longevity, survival. But I'm not quite bored enough.

 

[guymez]

To the bolded - tell me a coach who didn't make mistakes in their rookie season.

A little advice...don't engage him on this!

Unless you are ready to dance around in circles and watch him avoid any salient points that really challenge his perspective don't do this!

 

[Mr Positive]

Eakins' bad coaching last year was a trial by fire. It was awful at the time, but it did teach everyone things about the players, coaching, the GM, and even the fans. It can become a good thing in the end. For instance, it is possible that Yak's horrible year could damage him, but it could also be a wake up call, and be the instigating factor to him embracing a more complete style of play. Eakins was a bit arrogant and an average season would not have cured him of that, but he appears more humble now. Still, just like with the players, we won't know until the actual season begins

 

[oilinblood]

Clode had to ditch pretty much every first system he coached with new teams...including the bruins.

Stuff doesnt get executed on paper.

Then when the planned system isnt working you are reading plays, and players, and analyzing tape to try to find the adaptations you need to make to the system for the strengths of the team and their abilities.

Hockey is extremely fluid and cant be compared to any other sport. A dman can look great with one partner and horrendous with another;under the same system, facing the same competition, and playing the same minutes, with the same forwards. Change one thing for one guy and the whole team can pass or fail on that one change.

 

[Replacement*]

A little advice...don't engage him on this!

Unless you are ready to dance around in circles and watch him avoid any salient points that really challenge his perspective don't do this!

Be afraid, very afraid..

Danger Will Robinson...

 

[noeticfuzz]

To the bolded - tell me a coach who didn't make mistakes in their rookie season.

Well I've drank enough wine... and Eakins is a clown and I have always been confused why some people give him a free pass for ****ing up when he is supposed to be one of the 30 best people in the world at what they do.... as I am a bit bored...

As they come, as they did, in their first ever crack at the can (ever, not current):

Brucey B: Inherited 6-14 team, then won division

Dave Tip: Missed playoffs prior, then won division

Claude J: Mid season 12-16 and missed, made playoffs following first whole season

Ted Nolan: 33-42 missed, next year won division

Bob Hart: won division and advanced deeper than Crawford yr before

Peters: First season, 3 yrs with the Wings as Asst, graduated 8 players from the AHL to Stanley Cup Champ Hawks

Joe Q: took over for Sub .500 Keenan and made playoffs

Pat Roy: Beat up glass and had his guys backs and got them to play for him, told regress to mean to **** off for a bit

Todd Rich: 2 games above .500 but failed to qualify, came from Calder cup winner and time with the Sharks

Lucky Lindy: Conference Finals

Some Mike Bab Guy: Stanley Cup Finalist

Dynamic Dallas: Combed his hair and blew up at the best player on his team for giving a **** and getting water on him

Gerry Gallant: took over for Maclean performed much better but still bad in grand scope

Dharma Sutter: 1st in the Division

Mike Yeo: under .500 by a game and missed, made playoffs following year

Michelle Therrien: took over for 5-13 AV and finished better but missed, made playoffs first full year

Pete Lav: 2nd in Div

Pete DB: 11 games over .500 but missed playoffs

Jack Cap: Took over 4-10 and finished 3 games under and missed playoffs

AV: made playoffs and better record than year before

Walrus Face: 2nd in division where they sucked year before

Berube: 3rd in Div and Playoffs

Mike Johnston: First year, much better resume than Dynamic heading in

Mr. Shark: 1st in Div

Hitch: took over mid year and missed, first full year 1st in Div

Coops: took over late and missed, first full yr 2nd in div

Carlyle: Conference Finals

Will D: First full season, coming with a bunch of memorial and calder cups

Barry Trotz: sucked for 7 yrs until he made the palyoffs

Maurice: sucked for 3 yrs with the Canes until he made the playoffs

I see one (tops 3 guys) of the current lot who had a worse introduction to coaching at the NHL level than Dynamic Dallas

 

[Replacement*]

^

Loving these posts btw, thanks for the legwork.

lol at Patrick Roy quip

 

[Oiltankjob Fail]

Well I've drank enough wine... and Eakins is a clown and I have always been confused why some people give him a free pass for ****ing up when he is supposed to be one of the 30 best people in the world at what they do.... as I am a bit bored...

As they come, as they did, in their first ever crack at the can (ever, not current):

Brucey B: Inherited 6-14 team, then won division

Dave Tip: Missed playoffs prior, then won division

Claude J: Mid season 12-16 and missed, made playoffs following first whole season

Ted Nolan: 33-42 missed, next year won division

Bob Hart: won division and advanced deeper than Crawford yr before

Peters: First season, 3 yrs with the Wings as Asst, graduated 8 players from the AHL to Stanley Cup Champ Hawks

Joe Q: took over for Sub .500 Keenan and made playoffs

Pat Roy: Beat up glass and had his guys backs and got them to play for him, told regress to mean to **** off for a bit

Todd Rich: 2 games above .500 but failed to qualify, came from Calder cup winner and time with the Sharks

Lucky Lindy: Conference Finals

Some Mike Bab Guy: Stanley Cup Finalist

Dynamic Dallas: Combed his hair and blew up at the best player on his team for giving a **** and getting water on him

Gerry Gallant: took over for Maclean performed much better but still bad in grand scope

Dharma Sutter: 1st in the Division

Mike Yeo: under .500 by a game and missed, made playoffs following year

Michelle Therrien: took over for 5-13 AV and finished better but missed, made playoffs first full year

Pete Lav: 2nd in Div

Pete DB: 11 games over .500 but missed playoffs

Jack Cap: Took over 4-10 and finished 3 games under and missed playoffs

AV: made playoffs and better record than year before

Walrus Face: 2nd in division where they sucked year before

Berube: 3rd in Div and Playoffs

Mike Johnston: First year, much better resume than Dynamic heading in

Mr. Shark: 1st in Div

Hitch: took over mid year and missed, first full year 1st in Div

Coops: took over late and missed, first full yr 2nd in div

Carlyle: Conference Finals

Will D: First full season, coming with a bunch of memorial and calder cups

Barry Trotz: sucked for 7 yrs until he made the palyoffs

Maurice: sucked for 3 yrs with the Canes until he made the playoffs

I see one (tops 3 guys) of the current lot who had a worse introduction to coaching at the NHL level than Dynamic Dallas