Talking Tocchet

[RABBIT]

Cobra this is an honest question, no jab, nothing. Do you think Keller would be getting 21 minutes a night and PPG in his career under Tippett?

Click to read more...

 

[RABBIT]

Tocchet may not be the guy for the Coyotes, but I am a firm believer that Tippett wasn't either. If Tip was/is a highly coveted coach, I think we would've seen him find a job by now. Kind of how Julien was fired, then hired/signed to a new extension within 72 hours

 

[CC96]

I'm glad you guys all got your wish of Tip being gone (and Smith too). working out great isn't it ? If Tip was still here we wouldn't be 0-10, and I couldn't care less about Keller's minutes. Way better roster, way easier schedule, and way worse results first 10 games. The hardest thing to do is admit your mistakes. The smartest thing to do is correct them asap.

There's a very large gray area between, Dave Tippett being head coach of the Coyotes and Rick Tocchet being head coach of the Coyotes. Surely, if we did fire Tocchet too soon tomorrow, or never hired him in the first place, there's another option that's not, "hey let's bring back the trainwreck moron from the last 5 years, who derailed everything in the first place." All those lonely nights without the Tip must be taking their toll.

 

[Hinterland]

There's a very large gray area between, Dave Tippett being head coach of the Coyotes and Rick Tocchet being head coach of the Coyotes. Surely, if we did fire Tocchet too soon tomorrow, or never hired him in the first place, there's another option that's not, "hey let's bring back the trainwreck moron from the last 5 years, who derailed everything in the first place." All those lonely nights without the Tip must be taking their toll.

I agree. Smith and Tippett can stay right where they are. Having said that, some heads need to roll or the nightmare will continue.

 

[Sinurgy]

 

[cobra427]

This is the worst post I've ever read. Tippett did a wonderful job "righting the ship" the last five seasons didn't he?

Go read some of your own posts again. You and many others thought any change in coaches would be a huge uptick. I said it was risky and we didn't know that Tocc would be a better coach. I always thought Tip did a good job with the roster he had. Tocc is proving that now. How can you draw any other conclusion so far? I get that Raanta is out. Again, he is not a proven starter like Smith. Raanta might be the answer, maybe not. I hope Tocc gets his arms around the team soon, he clearly doesn't and its not just about goal tending. Maybe Tip knew going with an all youth forward line up and an unproven goalie might be a disaster?

 

[BUX7PHX]

He seems to have a plan, and he just hasn't been able to execute it yet due to injuries. I really wonder where this team would be if Raanta were healthy. We were firing on all cylinders and game one versus the Ducks. If Raanta was in net, would we have allowed five goals? Who knows. What I do know is if we had won that game, I have a funny feeling we would have won a couple more after that. Also the games against Dallas, if we hadn't had to start a goalie that has never played in an NHL game...back-to-back vs. the same team, would we have had a different results? Who knows.

It's clear that Hill has some raw talent, but is way too shaky to assume an NHL job right now. The fact that he has started three of our first 10 games is pretty indicative of our record. We are talking a rookie goaltender... playing against the established Powerhouse teams.

So during, and immediately after we lose a game, my first reaction is who needs to be fired or traded? But then after calming down and watching the interviews, I realize that Toc is extremely patient and confident in this team. It's refreshing, and I want to give him a chance to execute his plan before making a final judgment.

I agree with quite a bit of what you are saying, but the bolded has me befuddled. You are talking about injuries making us less talented to execute the system. Right now, injuries have little to do with the actual execution. Injuries only give us a weaker lineup to start with, but if the weaker players are at least executing some, we'd see longer and more sustainable offensive and defensive prowess.

Honestly, this is kind of what should happen when the focus becomes up-tempo offense and defense. We will continually string games like this together where we have a close loss and things appear to be coming together. Then we play a team that is slightly more comfortable operating in their system and we start to chase the game.

Listening to the Rangers broadcast, one thing that was mentioned was that Tocchet said that he wants one style of play - fast, and he doesn't want to start "dumbing down" the system so that they lose the concept of playing fast. Well, that's kind of an odd thing to say, because a system can be dumbed down and you may slow down a little bit at first. But as comfort comes with the system, the speed of the game and the decisions made becomes faster. I get what his line of thinking is - don't slow down and play fast. But if we continue down the path of not getting good enough results, we are forced to now say, "keep playing fast, but be more defensively responsible," which in and of itself, may be sending two mixed messages. We spend time working the defensive aspect, and we start to look a little better defensively, but we don't have quite the same offensive push b/c we decided to tighten things up in our own zone. Now, we have to manage a fine line of what actually works on the speed and aggressive stance of up-tempo while being aware of how we can keep things locked down on defense, which is tough to do with a team that is a) young and b) lacks some leadership at the top. Becomes tough to stay structured when there are polarities like that in how we want our offensive and defensive styles to mesh up to.

 

[RABBIT]

I agree with quite a bit of what you are saying, but the bolded has me befuddled. You are talking about injuries making us less talented to execute the system. Right now, injuries have little to do with the actual execution. Injuries only give us a weaker lineup to start with, but if the weaker players are at least executing some, we'd see longer and more sustainable offensive and defensive prowess.

Honestly, this is kind of what should happen when the focus becomes up-tempo offense and defense. We will continually string games like this together where we have a close loss and things appear to be coming together. Then we play a team that is slightly more comfortable operating in their system and we start to chase the game.

Listening to the Rangers broadcast, one thing that was mentioned was that Tocchet said that he wants one style of play - fast, and he doesn't want to start "dumbing down" the system so that they lose the concept of playing fast. Well, that's kind of an odd thing to say, because a system can be dumbed down and you may slow down a little bit at first. But as comfort comes with the system, the speed of the game and the decisions made becomes faster. I get what his line of thinking is - don't slow down and play fast. But if we continue down the path of not getting good enough results, we are forced to now say, "keep playing fast, but be more defensively responsible," which in and of itself, may be sending two mixed messages. We spend time working the defensive aspect, and we start to look a little better defensively, but we don't have quite the same offensive push b/c we decided to tighten things up in our own zone. Now, we have to manage a fine line of what actually works on the speed and aggressive stance of up-tempo while being aware of how we can keep things locked down on defense, which is tough to do with a team that is a) young and b) lacks some leadership at the top. Becomes tough to stay structured when there are polarities like that in how we want our offensive and defensive styles to mesh up to.

I was more chalking it up to him not being able to play with the lineup he wanted, not blaming the season struggles on injuries alone. Our defense isn't injured, and we see a lot of our mistakes come from the back end.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

So what coach should the coyotes look to that can get more with less and right the ship for this year? I know who I would consider.

If Tip was still here we wouldn't be 0-10, and I couldn't care less about Keller's minutes.

My suggestion to you and to anyone else who thinks it'd be great to have Tippett back is, "Get your head out of the year 2012." There is absolutely nothing that happened in the intervening five years since the WCF run that leads me to believe Tippett would have done better with this roster, or would do better if by some miracle of contractual wrangling we got him back as the head coach.

The team needed a culture change, but from what I can tell the change that it got is a throwback to the Gretzky coaching years, just minus the Friends of Gretzky nepotism.

 

[cobra427]

My suggestion to you and to anyone else who thinks it'd be great to have Tippett back is, "Get your head out of the year 2012." There is absolutely nothing that happened in the intervening five years since the WCF run that leads me to believe Tippett would have done better with this roster, or would do better if by some miracle of contractual wrangling we got him back as the head coach.

The team needed a culture change, but from what I can tell the change that it got is a throwback to the Gretzky coaching years, just minus the Friends of Gretzky nepotism.

I'm sure glad we changed the culture aren't you? I'm sure glad we got rid of Smith/Tip/Doan/Verby, we sure needed those changes Better coaching, younger players, better leadership, playing fast, what more could we ask for then an 0-9-1 record?

 

[The Feckless Puck]

I'm sure glad we changed the culture aren't you? I'm sure glad we got rid of Smith/Tip/Doan/Verby, we sure needed those changes Better coaching, younger players, better leadership, playing fast, what more could we ask for then an 0-9-1 record?

Yes, I'm glad we changed the culture. I'm not happy with how it changed, but it needed to be changed. I'm glad we got rid of Smith and Tippett. Doan, I wasn't thrilled about, but more because of how it was done than why. I'd have liked to have had Vrbata back, sure.

But you're fooling yourself if you think this team would be above .500 had Chayka elected to keep Tippett around and leave the roster static.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Look I was one of the first to call for Tocchet’s head, but I never wanted to bring Tippet back. We need an offensive minded coach with Keller, but one who has a system which also minds the defensive side of the game. No more pond hockey.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Look I was one of the first to call for Tocchet’s head, but I never wanted to bring Tippet back. We need an offensive minded coach with Keller, but one who has a system which also minds the defensive side of the game. No more pond hockey.

Tocchet is getting a lot of heat, but I wonder how much John MacLean and Scott Allen should be getting as well - not to mention Jon Elkin. Not to deify Sean Burke, but we saw a fairly precipitous decline in our goalie fortunes when Elkin came on board (even though he was a Mike Smith nepotism hire). A poor assistant coaching staff can legitimately affect a team's on-ice performance as much as, if not more than, a mediocre head coach. Look what happened when Jim Playfair got around to switching out Ulf Samuelsson's defensive schemes with his own... right around 2013, in fact.

 

[Mosby]

Why is Jon Elkin still here even? Mike Smith left, his personal goalie coach should have went with him.

 

[rt]

My suggestion to you and to anyone else who thinks it'd be great to have Tippett back is, "Get your head out of the year 2012." There is absolutely nothing that happened in the intervening five years since the WCF run that leads me to believe Tippett would have done better with this roster, or would do better if by some miracle of contractual wrangling we got him back as the head coach.

The team needed a culture change, but from what I can tell the change that it got is a throwback to the Gretzky coaching years, just minus the Friends of Gretzky nepotism.

Agree with the DT part but I would not be evoking the Gretzky era here. Tocchet was by all definitions an extremely qualified candidate with a proven and impressive track record. This was purely a merit based hire. Those can end badly too. Allen was an AC in the NHL as recently as last season. He was also given a lot of credit for running a great PK on a bad team. Id call him merit based too. MacLean is a head scratcher. That single questionable hire doesn't make this Wayne-O The Clown ptII. Not by a long shot.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Tocchet was by all definitions an extremely qualified candidate with a proven and impressive track record. This was purely a merit based hire.

I disagree. From all the stuff I read and heard from Chayka, Tocchet's presentation coupled with the fact that he was an AC with the Penguins for two consecutive Cup wins was what sealed the deal.

As a head coach, this was Tocchet's start with Tampa Bay - lost the first game, won the second, and then lost the next nine games and 12 out of 13 in total. That doesn't scream "merit" to me. He's been successful by association rather than merit, IMO.

The reason I bring up Gretzky is because Wayne's MO was to have a free-flowing offensive game with little structure (or, if you believe Derek Morris, NO structure). From what I've seen on the ice thus far, that's exactly what Tocchet is preaching. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

As for Allen getting a lot of credit for the PK, another guy who got a ton of credit for his assistant coaching was Newell Brown... and we all know how that ended up.

 

[SniperHF]

As for Allen getting a lot of credit for the PK, another guy who got a ton of credit for his assistant coaching was Newell Brown... and we all know how that ended up.

I didn't really have a problem with Brown toward the end despite the drop in PP performance. Obviously we had some personnel turnover from the high flying days of having Yandle and OEL to man the point. The PP was never the same after that.

I do think his scheme got a bit stale, teams were starting to go back to their way of playing super aggressive against us on the PP which they could never really handle. But hardly the worst offender around here.


After watching all those goals last night though, I have to say I'm starting to disagree with the "no structure" idea to what Tocc is running. That doesn't mean what he's doing is good necessarily, but I think there's a pretty clear pattern in there. On the breakout the first thing that happens tends to be the high forward darts off as fast as he possibly can once possession is gained. I should note that this has actually caused problems on occasion because the recovery of the puck could be only temporary, especially with how our D is playing. It also causes things like Domi to get two breakaways in a game he doesn't convert on....Which was something I was complaining about a week ago or so, the team isn't finishing a lot of their best chances.

Then the D or center attempt to make a stretch pass, almost universally at least from the circles to the red line. Lately they've been going D to D for a first pass a little more. That first forward out, if he catches the pass (they bobble them a lot) will attempt to carry the puck in. If there is too much traffic the forward will pass east-west up high to the next forward in. This is often Domi to Keller or Keller to Domi. Now the problems are caused when teams are trapping against us the first forward in is often up against 3 players right in his face. That causes the passes to get bungled. And since you have two forwards (sometimes three) blasting into the zone at maximum attack to appropriate a rally term, when it blows it up goes real bad real fast.

My complete novice opinion is that they need to mix it up more. Use the boards to go up ice once in a while, yes even dump it past the trap just a smidge more often. Especially for the lower lines. The Coyotes are too predictable but don't have the personnel to make that irrelevant. Kind of reminds me of the Suns in the 7 seconds or less days if you took out the two time MVP. It wouldn't work.


The case that they lack structure on the defensive side though is reasonably strong . Or maybe they just get caught up ice too much I dunno.

My super early this is way to early did I mention it's early conclusion is we lack the personnel on lines 2 and 3 to run this system as rigid as they have been offensively. Dvorak has been handling the puck like hot potato, Rieder's finishing problems are even worse than usual right now, and the rest of the guys just can't keep up. Maybe Perlini can but we haven't seen much of him yet.

I also think there's a good chance teams are identifying what the Coyotes are trying to do and the Coyotes don't have enough tools in the toolbox to do something different and confuse defenses. If I had a guess as to what's causing all the odd man rushes I'd say that's it.

I still don't really think that the system is what's making Schenn, Demers, OEL, and Goligoski pass to the other team though. Or KConn getting beat on the edge all the time. To an extent it could be a puck support issue but I mostly see the biggest disasters as 1 on 1 plays for the most part.

 

[SR]

Here’s my take - may be long but this is where I see things.

Chyka brought in proven talent at this level (Demers, Stepan, Raanta, Hjarlmarsson. To a lesser extent Nick Cousins (primary 4th line role) to sharpen this teams core and to build with. By all accounts, Chyka has done a damn good job assembling this team. I don’t care where HF ranks him as far as GMs go, but he’s done well in my opinion.

Now, you’ve got:
Domi
Duclair
Reider
Ekman-Larsson
Perlini
Martinook

All who’ve never played another system, ever, besides Dave Tippets, in the NHL. They’ve never known anything but that system. Adding in the other acquisitions who all played in different systems and trying to force these guys to learn this Tochett system I can’t imagine is easy. It’s like that common core math, you were taught one way and one way only for years and develop the understanding like the back of your hand only to do it a different way now. The end result is getting the equation right and the end result is winning after 60 (65) minutes of playing.

The talent is there gents. These guys have all had success and have won and most notably have been the reasons their former teams had success. It’s not like we pulled from a grab bag and inserted them into the line up, these guys can flat out play hockey (Stepan, Hjarlmarsson most notably) but something’s not clicking.

Tochett I believe expects this team to be a Pittsburgh 2.0 and rightfully so, that’s a lot of what Tochett knows and has seen the success implementing it. But, you have to have the right players for that system. We do not have a Malkin or Crosby or a core that has played that system the last 3 years (or however Long Sullivan has been there) this is all very new for this group. I want to blame the system, I want to blame the coaching staff and I also want to blame the players, but reality is, I guess, is time.

Our goaltending has been shit, defensive coverage has been shit (some due to d man joining rushes) but the accountability needs to be there on the team as a whole. We’ve all seen demers, goligoski, Schenn, OEL etc all royally f*** up and cost the team, but it has to be a team approach from now.

The talent is certainly there, no denying that. But somethings gotta give and I believe it’s learning to structure the system tocchet is preaching and if it can’t be done, bring in someone that isn’t as complicated.

 

[PhoPhan]

I think Sniper is right on about the transition game, and though I agree that it’s a little too predictable for a team without enough speed and skill to keep other teams honest, that part has been moderately effective so far.

My frustrations about the lack of structure are more about the play in either zone once possession has been established (and transition back to D, to a lesser extent). That’s when the bad turnovers and biggest individual defensive lapses seem to happening. I think puck support is a big part of it. The forwards are releasing for the breakout a little too early, leaving the defensemen on their own islands too often. On offense, I’m seeing forwards get too deep to be helpful on the backcheck, and there have been some bad pinches from defensemen without forwards cycling back to cover for them.

 

[rt]

I disagree. From all the stuff I read and heard from Chayka, Tocchet's presentation coupled with the fact that he was an AC with the Penguins for two consecutive Cup wins was what sealed the deal.

As a head coach, this was Tocchet's start with Tampa Bay - lost the first game, won the second, and then lost the next nine games and 12 out of 13 in total. That doesn't scream "merit" to me. He's been successful by association rather than merit, IMO.

The reason I bring up Gretzky is because Wayne's MO was to have a free-flowing offensive game with little structure (or, if you believe Derek Morris, NO structure). From what I've seen on the ice thus far, that's exactly what Tocchet is preaching. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

As for Allen getting a lot of credit for the PK, another guy who got a ton of credit for his assistant coaching was Newell Brown... and we all know how that ended up.

You can't really disagree with the classification of Tocchet as a highly qualified candidate for his job. Extremely successful assistant coaches often get head coaching jobs. It works that way a lot of the time. He was clearly highly qualified, just as Nelson was. Highly successful minor league coaches are also often given head coachcing jobs. It also works that way. Tocchet and Nelson were equally qualified and neither was less qualified than any other publicly known candidate.

My personal preference was for Nelson with Tocchet just maybe a tiny smidge behind. Keefe was probably solidly my third choice. Everyone else was miles behind in my mind.

Brown was great at first. That's his reputation. He's good early for PPs and wears out. Allen has a resume as good as most candidates for NHL assistant jobs. He's not an irregular hire.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

You can't really disagree with the classification of Tocchet as a highly qualified candidate for his job.

Well, I just did. Anyway, we'll see what the rest of the season brings.

 

[cobra427]

Yes, I'm glad we changed the culture. I'm not happy with how it changed, but it needed to be changed. I'm glad we got rid of Smith and Tippett. Doan, I wasn't thrilled about, but more because of how it was done than why. I'd have liked to have had Vrbata back, sure.

But you're fooling yourself if you think this team would be above .500 had Chayka elected to keep Tippett around and leave the roster static.

This team, with the current talent level, would have a better record with Tip as the coach. How could they not? The culture has changed, you are correct there, its way worse. We didn't have a poor record the last few years because of a poor culture. It was because of poor talent, which isn't the case now.

 

[cobra427]

You can't really disagree with the classification of Tocchet as a highly qualified candidate for his job. Extremely successful assistant coaches often get head coaching jobs. It works that way a lot of the time. He was clearly highly qualified, just as Nelson was. Highly successful minor league coaches are also often given head coachcing jobs. It also works that way. Tocchet and Nelson were equally qualified and neither was less qualified than any other publicly known candidate.

My personal preference was for Nelson with Tocchet just maybe a tiny smidge behind. Keefe was probably solidly my third choice. Everyone else was miles behind in my mind.

Brown was great at first. That's his reputation. He's good early for PPs and wears out. Allen has a resume as good as most candidates for NHL assistant jobs. He's not an irregular hire.

Tocc was a qualified choice. Former player, successful assistant, won the last 2 cups. But he isn't proven as a head coach like Hitch/trotz, etc..there is a huge difference. Just like Raanta isn't proven as a starter and until he proves it we don't know.

 

[Llewzaher]

You can't really disagree with the classification of Tocchet as a highly qualified candidate for his job. Extremely successful assistant coaches often get head coaching jobs. It works that way a lot of the time. He was clearly highly qualified, just as Nelson was. Highly successful minor league coaches are also often given head coachcing jobs. It also works that way. Tocchet and Nelson were equally qualified and neither was less qualified than any other publicly known candidate.

My personal preference was for Nelson with Tocchet just maybe a tiny smidge behind. Keefe was probably solidly my third choice. Everyone else was miles behind in my mind.

Brown was great at first. That's his reputation. He's good early for PPs and wears out. Allen has a resume as good as most candidates for NHL assistant jobs. He's not an irregular hire.

I was hoping for Nelson as well... But I don't mind the Tocchet hiring...

The only problem I had was Chayka saying Tocchet was "miles ahead of anyone else" This may have burned the bridges we may need in a few months. Hoping not , though .. hoping can turn the ship around..
Maybe Roenick's comments will light a fire under everyone

 

[SniperHF]

The only problem I had was Chayka saying Tocchet was "miles ahead of anyone else"

I've mostly been assuming that was media tire pumping and not all that serious.