I respectfully disagree E-P
It’s not difficult to read a teams “jump” or level of preparedness for games. Effort or work ethic are also easily identified. Skill is not a priority for a hard working team. And if you believe your team has no skill all reason more reason to have practiced this and build it into your game plan. And look, many teams come out with a lacklustre game occasionally but wow, Laval’s starts are more often than not, slow & struggeling. It’s obviously not JFH strong suit or it’s not a priority regarding his coaching style. I want Laval to succeed and be a developmental hotbed. All the success that our developing young players have displayed has been under the tutelage of MSL. I have no emotional bias toward Houle. Some do & that’s okay. I like MSL as a person/HHOF and despite being a very “green” head coach, MSL is doing a tremendous job and has shown the ability to learn & adapt. He also has a connection with the young players who are eager to be coached by him. Back to your point, blaming the “skill” level of young players & some lock-step organizational conformity is truly the low hanging fruit. I don’t see HuGo restricting a coach’s creativity, at any level. I have a hard time believing you are pleased with the past 3 years cumulating this playoff run. There’s enough talent on that team to make the AHL playoffs, come on man?
cheers.
I think the success or lack thereof of Laval from a win/loss perspective is a red herring. It is not the purpose of this team to win Calder Cups, it is strictly developmental with winning being a preferable result of the development but not a reflection of development.
The AHL is gross, ugly hockey that I have to pinch my nose to watch as the collective IQ is abysmal and winning teams consist of veteran career AHLers playing in the most basic systems. MSL's system that Houle is implementing is extremely reliant on IQ and talent which leaves Houle at a huge disadvantage in a league where anyone with both of those traits is quickly promoted to the NHL.
There are all sorts of accusations and suggestions about Houle that are entirely without merit and most stem from an acute misunderstanding of the game and are much closer to witch burning mob behaviour than objective analysis. I am not saying that you in particular fit this description but you are definitely conflating the fundamental differences between success at the NHL level with success at the AHL level. They are both fundamentally different in their definitions and importance both from an organizational perspective and a tactical, systemic perspective.
Nobody here knows anything at all about Houle's tactical approach or interpersonal approach and the conclusions drawn from anecdotal evidence is being heavily filtered through people's bias. I understand and believe you that you do not think that you are speaking from bias but I would respectively suggest that you carefully consider the validity of the information from which you are drawing your conclusions from.
The Mysak situation really exemplified the disconnect between reality and objective thinking where people somehow misconstrued Houle's advice to Mysak as being a soul crushing, career derailing event. Clearly it was a coach explaining to a player the way that he needs to play to further his career and potentially make it to the NHL and it was absolutely needed. The result of course was Mysak turning his game around and suddenly started scoring but the mob framed it as Mysak showing Houle that he was wrong which of course is and was utter nonsense. Houle understood what approach would work for Mysak and as counter intuitive as this was for some it proved to be true which further shows the disparity in knowledge between Houle and his detractors. This was another example of posters putting the win/loss column in Laval over the development of an NHL player and that is not the purpose of the Laval Rockets and this is not the task that has been asked of Houle. I wonder if Houle's detractors would tie themselves into an intellectual pretzel trying to find a way to blame Houle for Mysak's abysmal performance in San Diego? The disparity between evidence and the anti-Houle movement is hilarious, if only John Stewart was a hockey analyst he would have so much material here.
There quite literally is zero evidence that Houle detractors can objectively site that supports their claims. The vitriol is largely conspiracy theory level drivel that is understandably born from frustration of watching the Rocket lose. This is not how I work in my professional or personal life. I require evidence that I procure directly from the most knowledgeable sources and while I can speculate on causes for issues I certainly would never state them as fact without being an expert in the field and/or not having consulted with experts in the field. Making a conclusion about a subjective problem without empirical evidence and/or expert testimony is 100% of the time bias driven whether we want to admit it or not as it is the only thing that can tip the scale one way or another.
I am not dismissing you opinion as I often agree with you but am only urging you to look a little closer and to consider the type of evidence that is actually required to reach bold conclusions. Sometimes it is just better to say "I don't know", until better evidence presents itself.
The truth is that I don't know either and am only pushing back against the assertion of blame where there is a clear lack of evidence to support the blame and clear evidence to counter these assertions from the success of Laval player's assimilating into MSL's system. I have no dog in this partricular fight to ascertain whether Houle is a good coach or not. My fight always has been and always will be with things that are not demonstrably true that are being presented as such through agendas that are harmful to civil discourse due to their lack of empirical evidence and disregard for the procurement of testimony from the most qualified sources.
