Teemu's Book (Boudreau comments)

[Godzlaf]

I don't think we saw a lack of effort. I think we saw a team that was overwhelmed.

That aside, there's maybe nothing, no, I'll say almost certainly nothing Boudreau could have done at that point to correct it. But consider that there may have been things he could have done earlier to prevent the team from ever getting to that point. As Snark said, coaches have to manage the team, they can't just use the fan's "professional athletes should be ready" proverb. If there's a problem, they need to correct it. We never got a ******* reliable power play. We never solved the falling behind early problem. We had a weird goalie controversy that IMO was exacerbated by the use and treatment of the goaltenders. We had a large part of our veteran leadership group that was apparently highly critical of the coach in the room. Many of those issues are issues that have followed this coach around.

Boudreau is still a fairly new NHL coach and he's certainly had no lack of learning opportunities. His ability to generate excitement and regular season success is a very precious commodity to a team. There are reasons to believe in this coach as a potential all-time great, some day. But the jury's still out and I have concerns, and those concerns are only growing.

Can you elaborate on the bolded? Aside from Hiller and Selanne.

They dominated games in that same series... why would you all the sudden be overwhelmed? Game 7 or not, the team had shown they could hang with the Kings... it's not like the Kings hit another gear... Anaheim just didn't show up. I agree with him being responsible for the PP struggles, but the goalie thing... he was screwed either way. He benches Hiller, gets ripped. If he keeps starting Hiller and Hiller sucks, Bodreau gets ripped worse. Hiller caused that controversy by being consistently inconsistent.

 

[bumperkisser]

Selanne said Beauch and koivu didn't like the way BB was handling things and that the constant line juggling was very annoying

 

[Godzlaf]

Koivu really wasn't playing too well by that time last year... Beauch was on injury recovery... and it is hearsay if Teemu said it... I'll take that with a grain of salt.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Can you elaborate on the bolded? Aside from Hiller and Selanne.

Koivu and Beauchemin also supposedly complained.

They dominated games in that same series... why would you all the sudden be overwhelmed? Game 7 or not, the team had shown they could hang with the Kings... it's not like the Kings hit another gear... Anaheim just didn't show up.

That's a good question. Here's another one, using your words: they'd shown up in every game that series, why not in Game 7?

I agree with him being responsible for the PP struggles, but the goalie thing... he was screwed either way. He benches Hiller, gets ripped. If he keeps starting Hiller and Hiller sucks, Bodreau gets ripped worse. Hiller caused that controversy by being consistently inconsistent.

No. That's an argument for the decision being difficult. That doesn't excuse mishandling the goaltenders.

Koivu really wasn't playing too well by that time last year... Beauch was on injury recovery...

So?

...and it is hearsay if Teemu said it... I'll take that with a grain of salt.

Sounds like your mind is pretty well made up, like most folks on both sides. By the way, that isn't hearsay.

 

[strongbad]

Boudreau sounds like a weasel. If you weren't going to use Selanne the way you promised prior to the season, and at the end of the 2013 season, then you should have let him go to another team. I think though Selanne is also himself frustrated that he considered the Kings and they ended up winning the SC that very same year. Ironically, I don't think they may have won it with Selanne, as that may have hindered the Gaborik deal from happening.

 

[Godzlaf]

Koivu and Beauchemin also supposedly complained.



That's a good question. Here's another one, using your words: they'd shown up in every game that series, why not in Game 7?



No. That's an argument for the decision being difficult. That doesn't excuse mishandling the goaltenders.



So?



Sounds like your mind is pretty well made up, like most folks on both sides. By the way, that isn't hearsay.

The Kings didn't show up for a few games in the series as well. Game one was an awful hockey game that was saved by a circus performance by their goaltender. Yet no one talks about Sutter being an awful coach. The Koivu and Beauchemin point I am making is that neither were playing like their former selves and didn't deserve the minutes they are complaining about. You can't just armchair GM like in NHL 15 and think the coach is to blame for everything. Knee jerk reactions (ya know, like after one game), are ignorant.

How is Selanne saying that the other two said something not hearsay? That is the very definition of the word.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

The Kings didn't show up for a few games in the series as well. Game one was an awful hockey game that was saved by a circus performance by their goaltender. Yet no one talks about Sutter being an awful coach.

I think the Kings showed up just fine. And even if they didn't, who cares? How does that reflect on Boudreau's coaching ability? Sutter's your comparison point, the guy who just won his second cup in three years?

The Koivu and Beauchemin point I am making is that neither were playing like their former selves and didn't deserve the minutes they are complaining about. You can't just armchair GM like in NHL 15 and think the coach is to blame for everything. Knee jerk reactions (ya know, like after one game), are ignorant.

Again, so what? As I said before, coaches can't just be fans and say "professionals should be ready." Nor can they ignore trouble in the room just because they disagree with the person causing trouble. They have to manage their players. This is about how Boudreau deals with disagreements between himself and his veterans. Whether you think those guys had a legitimate beef or not is completely immaterial.

How is Selanne saying that the other two said something not hearsay? That is the very definition of the word.

Hearsay is an out of court statement offered in court to prove the truth of the matter contained in the statement. This has nothing to do with a court, nor is there a statement being made. Just an assertion that those players were also unhappy. The information about Koivu and Beauchemin doesn't even meet the layperson's incorrect usage of hearsay, because as far as I can find it wasn't Selanne (or at least, wasn't just Selanne) that said these things about the other two, it was the book's author who claimed that they were present and onboard at the post-game-7 Last Supper of Tantrums.

 

[Godzlaf]

I think the Kings showed up just fine. And even if they didn't, who cares? How does that reflect on Boudreau's coaching ability? Sutter's your comparison point, the guy who just won his second cup in three years?



Again, so what? As I said before, coaches can't just be fans and say "professionals should be ready." Nor can they ignore trouble in the room just because they disagree with the person causing trouble. They have to manage their players. This is about how Boudreau deals with disagreements between himself and his veterans. Whether you think those guys had a legitimate beef or not is completely immaterial.



Hearsay is an out of court statement offered in court to prove the truth of the matter contained in the statement. This has nothing to do with a court, nor is there a statement being made. Just an assertion that those players were also unhappy. The information about Koivu and Beauchemin doesn't even meet the layperson's incorrect usage of hearsay, because as far as I can find it wasn't Selanne (or at least, wasn't just Selanne) that said these things about the other two, it was the book's author who claimed that they were present and onboard at the post-game-7 Last Supper of Tantrums.

Wow. Just wow. There are a ton of online dictionaries available at your disposal for you to so vehemently drill a false statement into the ground... can't really say much more on that matter.

You can't just look at "Sutter won the cup twice" and have that be your end all. The world isn't black and white. A LOT more goes into winning and losing than coaching. Sutter is a very mediocre coach who benefits from having the best goaltender in the world on his team. The Ducks in 2007, a monkey could have coached that team to a cup. All a coach really does, at the end of the day, is implement a system that either works or doesn't work for his given roster and make adjustments to his opposition. I'm waiting for you to give some hard evidence to how Bodreau has failed in that regard. All I hear from you is "goaltending controversy" and hearsay out of Teemu or his author.

Ask someone who grew up playing hockey (there are more than you think in this state) how many times they lost a game and thought it was the coach's fault... SPOILER ALERT: you aren't going to like the answer.

 

[Duck Off]

Well the question is if the vets not showing up in key games is related to feeling disrespected. Hiller indicates that his play might have been affected. But Hiller is kind of known to be a little whiny. Teemu's book also suggested some discontent from Koivu and Beauchemin, though.

Being a pro coach sometimes seems to be as much of an ego manager than just a lineup and strategy manager. It is possible that Boudreau's manner (maybe even more than his actual decisions) contributes to his playoff record.

This is a terrific point. This is also why many great college coaches can't transition to the pros. Hopefully BB uses this for future dealings with players.

 

[Duck Off]

]Boudreau sounds like a weasel. If you weren't going to use Selanne the way you promised prior to the season, and at the end of the 2013 season, then you should have let him go to another team[/B]. I think though Selanne is also himself frustrated that he considered the Kings and they ended up winning the SC that very same year. Ironically, I don't think they may have won it with Selanne, as that may have hindered the Gaborik deal from happening.

Selanne was given opportunities and just didn't have the game anymore. No one should have to add "oh by the way, if you suck, you're not going to stay in that position". That's clearly inferred.

He wasn't on the PP because he couldn't handle a damn pass. He still found the spots in the defense but couldn't hit the one timer anymore. He just got old. Nothing wrong with it, but like Souj said, it's his fault he didn't have it anymore, not BB's. His entitlement is lame. I agree he deserves to have things communicated to him better, but his playing time BS is just asinine.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Selanne was given opportunities and just didn't have the game anymore. No one should have to add "oh by the way, if you suck, you're not going to stay in that position". That's clearly inferred.

He wasn't on the PP because he couldn't handle a damn pass. He still found the spots in the defense but couldn't hit the one timer anymore. He just got old. Nothing wrong with it, but like Souj said, it's his fault he didn't have it anymore, not BB's. His entitlement is lame. I agree he deserves to have things communicated to him better, but his playing time BS is just asinine.

He's a weasel if he made promises he didn't keep. I personally doubt that happened - I think Teemu heard what he wanted to hear. Boudreau and Murray were pretty open last summer about what the conditions were, the Teemu would be given the same shot everyone else would get, and not be sacrificed to a youth movement. Based on what I saw, he had his chance.

 

[Paul4587]

Ask someone who grew up playing hockey (there are more than you think in this state) how many times they lost a game and thought it was the coach's fault... SPOILER ALERT: you aren't going to like the answer.

Don't play that card. I grew up playing hockey and have had plenty of coaches that influenced outcomes of games. Whether it's directly or indirectly, coaches have more influence than you're making out.

 

[bumperkisser]

Wow. Just wow. There are a ton of online dictionaries available at your disposal for you to so vehemently drill a false statement into the ground... can't really say much more on that matter.

You can't just look at "Sutter won the cup twice" and have that be your end all. The world isn't black and white. A LOT more goes into winning and losing than coaching. Sutter is a very mediocre coach who benefits from having the best goaltender in the world on his team. The Ducks in 2007, a monkey could have coached that team to a cup. All a coach really does, at the end of the day, is implement a system that either works or doesn't work for his given roster and make adjustments to his opposition. I'm waiting for you to give some hard evidence to how Bodreau has failed in that regard. All I hear from you is "goaltending controversy" and hearsay out of Teemu or his author.

Ask someone who grew up playing hockey (there are more than you think in this state) how many times they lost a game and thought it was the coach's fault... SPOILER ALERT: you aren't going to like the answer.

lol wut. if that were true why do we even need coaches?

coaches absolutely have a huge impact on whether your team performs well or not. why do some teams play so well after a coach gets fired?

they aren't the sole reason by any means for a win or a loss but they play a large part in it.

 

[Sojourn]

Boudreau sounds like a weasel. If you weren't going to use Selanne the way you promised prior to the season, and at the end of the 2013 season, then you should have let him go to another team. I think though Selanne is also himself frustrated that he considered the Kings and they ended up winning the SC that very same year. Ironically, I don't think they may have won it with Selanne, as that may have hindered the Gaborik deal from happening.

Boudreau sounds like a weasel for not putting Selanne ahead of the rest of the team? Fascinating.

 

[Sojourn]

Wow. Just wow. There are a ton of online dictionaries available at your disposal for you to so vehemently drill a false statement into the ground... can't really say much more on that matter.

You can't just look at "Sutter won the cup twice" and have that be your end all. The world isn't black and white. A LOT more goes into winning and losing than coaching. Sutter is a very mediocre coach who benefits from having the best goaltender in the world on his team. The Ducks in 2007, a monkey could have coached that team to a cup. All a coach really does, at the end of the day, is implement a system that either works or doesn't work for his given roster and make adjustments to his opposition. I'm waiting for you to give some hard evidence to how Bodreau has failed in that regard. All I hear from you is "goaltending controversy" and hearsay out of Teemu or his author.

Ask someone who grew up playing hockey (there are more than you think in this state) how many times they lost a game and thought it was the coach's fault... SPOILER ALERT: you aren't going to like the answer.

I'm not sure you thought that argument through. I grew up playing hockey, and there were plenty of times I felt the coach got in the way of the win. There were two people who could almost single-handedly make it incredibly difficult to win the game: The goalie, and the coach.

The rest of the players need to be accountable as well, and there is a difference between an excuse and a valid reason, but to dismiss the coach as having little to no impact? That's simply not true.

 

[AngelDuck]

Yeah, I've been on plenty of hockey teams that I felt we could have been much better with a better coach.

No one's arguing it's all Boudreau's fault, but there is plenty of blame to go around. We haven't shown up to elimination games in the playoffs 3 times straight (Game 7 vs. Detroit, game 6 vs. Dallas-won the game but we were terrible until 4 minutes left, and game 7 vs Kings).

Factoring those games in with what Washington fans said about him when we first got is concerning I think.

 

[Godzlaf]

I'm not sure you thought that argument through. I grew up playing hockey, and there were plenty of times I felt the coach got in the way of the win. There were two people who could almost single-handedly make it incredibly difficult to win the game: The goalie, and the coach.

The rest of the players need to be accountable as well, and there is a difference between an excuse and a valid reason, but to dismiss the coach as having little to no impact? That's simply not true.

I am not saying they have little to no impact... I am saying it is more on the players than the coach. I have disagreed with things coaches have done as far as playing a certain line too much or too little, but any time we were all just out of it and playing like crap, similar to Anaheim in these games... how could I blame the coach for that? Not clearing the crease, getting burned by a forward on the outside and letting him drive the net and score, being reactive instead of proactive... those things are on the players. They are also the things I saw in both the games we are discussing.

 

[Godzlaf]

lol wut. if that were true why do we even need coaches?

coaches absolutely have a huge impact on whether your team performs well or not. why do some teams play so well after a coach gets fired?

they aren't the sole reason by any means for a win or a loss but they play a large part in it.

That's more or less the point I am trying to make... they can be partly responsible for things going right or wrong... but are never the end all, be all factor in winning or losing. Some people act like they are, and that the notion is gospel or something.

 

[bumperkisser]

That's more or less the point I am trying to make... they can be partly responsible for things going right or wrong... but are never the end all, be all factor in winning or losing. Some people act like they are, and that the notion is gospel or something.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that its 100% bb fault but he deserves a good chunk of the blame especially with how constantly it keeps happening over and over in important games

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I don't think anyone here is arguing that its 100% bb fault but he deserves a good chunk of the blame especially with how constantly it keeps happening over and over in important games

Of course's no one's arguing that. Some people need that narrative in order to feel they have something useful to contribute, though.

For better or worse, we're a much younger team this season. It'll be interesting to try and figure out how that affects Boudreau's relationship with the team.

 

[digginit]

He's a weasel if he made promises he didn't keep. I personally doubt that happened - I think Teemu heard what he wanted to hear. Boudreau and Murray were pretty open last summer about what the conditions were, the Teemu would be given the same shot everyone else would get, and not be sacrificed to a youth movement. Based on what I saw, he had his chance.

Here's a quote directly from Boudreau where he makes a promise he didn't keep:

Boudreau said he made no promises. “I said, ‘You’re going to start out as the No. 2 right winger, and I’m going to start you out on the first power-play unit, and we’re going to go for a little while and we’re going to see how that goes,’ ”
https://sports.yahoo.com/news/anaheim-ducks-respond-to-teemu-selanne-s-criticism-of-coach-bruce-boudreau-212857754-nhl.html

Even though he starts out saying he didn't promise Selanne anything, he contradicts himself in the next breath by saying he was going to start him out on the first power-play unit. What, it's not a promise because you didn't use the word promise? That's just bs.

Not only did he not start him out on the first pp unit, he embarrassed the **** out of him in WPG in the third game of the season up there. Selanne happened to be on the ice with 15 and 10 and he drew a penalty. You know what Boudreau did? He pulled him off the ice for Bonino and left the other 4 guys out there (maybe three of them, but it was more than just Getz and Perry). Teemu didn't get a chance until he came out with Perreault and the 2nd unit on that pp.

Selanne wasn't on the first pp unit the first two games to begin the season right before that game, either. I don't think he was ever given a chance on the top unit. When Bonino went down and was out for that four game stretch right before the olympic break, Boudreau didn't even give him the chance then. He put Palmieri out there at first I think, and then Maroon or Perreault or Penner. Selanne never got a chance on that first pp unit.

Because Boudreau himself admits he told Selanne he was going to be on the top unit, but never gave I'm that chance, I'm going to take Selanne's word on the promise thing because BB basically perjured himself. And then on top of it embarrassing him in Winnipeg, it tips the scales against the coach because it shows how out of touch he was with how he handled the situation right from the get-go of the season.

I'm not giving Selanne a pass for running his mouth here. He crossed the line with what he's done. But he isn't the only one on the other side of that line. So was Boudreau.

And even though I give BB great credit for keeping his mouth shut and not reacting to Selanne's slur's, at least Teemu has apologized for it. Not only has Boudreau not apologized, he hasn't even acknowledged his part in the issue to begin with. If he's that much of a blockhead to not even realize he did fail to keep a promise to Selanne, then someone (like his boss, who's stood by him) needs to point it out.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Here's a quote directly from Boudreau where he makes a promise he didn't keep:



Even though he starts out saying he didn't promise Selanne anything, he contradicts himself in the next breath by saying he was going to start him out on the first power-play unit. What, it's not a promise because you didn't use the word promise? That's just bs.

Not only did he not start him out on the first pp unit, he embarrassed the **** out of him in WPG in the third game of the season up there. Selanne happened to be on the ice with 15 and 10 and he drew a penalty. You know what Boudreau did? He pulled him off the ice for Bonino and left the other 4 guys out there (maybe three of them, but it was more than just Getz and Perry). Teemu didn't get a chance until he came out with Perreault and the 2nd unit on that pp.

Selanne wasn't on the first pp unit the first two games to begin the season right before that game, either. I don't think he was ever given a chance on the top unit. When Bonino went down and was out for that four game stretch right before the olympic break, Boudreau didn't even give him the chance then. He put Palmieri out there at first I think, and then Maroon or Perreault or Penner. Selanne never got a chance on that first pp unit.

Because Boudreau himself admits he told Selanne he was going to be on the top unit, but never gave I'm that chance, I'm going to take Selanne's word on the promise thing because BB basically perjured himself. And then on top of it embarrassing him in Winnipeg, it tips the scales against the coach because it shows how out of touch he was with how he handled the situation right from the get-go of the season.

I'm not giving Selanne a pass for running his mouth here. He crossed the line with what he's done. But he isn't the only one on the other side of that line. So was Boudreau.

And even though I give BB great credit for keeping his mouth shut and not reacting to Selanne's slur's, at least Teemu has apologized for it. Not only has Boudreau not apologized, he hasn't even acknowledged his part in the issue to begin with. If he's that much of a blockhead to not even realize he did fail to keep a promise to Selanne, then someone (like his boss, who's stood by him) needs to point it out.

I'm really not on either side of the dispute between Boudreau and Selanne. But I don't think you can use these quotes and ice time from one particular game to prove your point. Boudreau and Murray both talked about how Selanne would get his shot. That's a promise, but it's not a promise to give him everything he wanted, nor is it a promise to keep him in that spot all year no matter what. Obviously they disagree as to whether he got a fair shot. Based on how he looked, I'd say he did.

 

[Godzlaf]

Hockey is not a coach-centric sport the way football, baseball, and basketball are. Those sports have frequent stoppages and lulls. The coach calls a play, the guys attempt to execute. The only element of a hockey game that comes close to that degree of play execution are PPs. 90% of a hockey game is fluid and spontaneous... and therefore, IMO on the players. Not saying that they don't have set plays while at even strength, but it's a lot different than the scrutiny of a football or basketball play. Baseball is more like a chess match, but a lot of how a player approaches an at bat is determined by the manager. Some of you are saying "over and over and over" again, like it's been going on for 20 years, and it's been 2-3 elimination games. I don't think axing him is the answer until we see him lose the locker room a la Carlyle.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

......And even though I give BB great credit for keeping his mouth shut and not reacting to Selanne's slur's, at least Teemu has apologized for it. Not only has Boudreau not apologized, he hasn't even acknowledged his part in the issue to begin with. If he's that much of a blockhead to not even realize he did fail to keep a promise to Selanne, then someone (like his boss, who's stood by him) needs to point it out.

Regardless of your opinion of the WPG game, starting a fire and then apologizing for it is not classier than the fireman who keeps his mouth shut about the fact it was an arson fire. Anything BB says now would just be fueling the fire and making things worse.

I'm not defending BB for everything he did or didn't do, but right now he is playing this 100% correct.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Let's take the legal semantics discussion to PM or the OT thread please