HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Minnesota Wild (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   6/16 Discussion - Grading Todd Richards' Performance (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=787283)

GopherState 06-16-2010 03:10 PM

6/16 Discussion - Grading Todd Richards' Performance
 
As there was already a thread on grading GMCF's performance, it is time to turn the attention over to the other new guy, Todd Richards.

grN1g 06-16-2010 03:17 PM

Since there is no C-, i gave him a D. I didnt like the way he did practices and resting periods for players, and his overall coaching was a bit average at best. Still it was his first year and the team is still tryin to be built for him so i dont mind to wait a few years to see what he can really do with the right players.

Surly Furious 06-16-2010 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grN1g (Post 26317695)
I didnt like the way he did practices and resting periods for players, and his overall coaching was a bit average at best. Still it was his first year and the team is still tryin to be built for him so i dont mind to wait a few years to see what he can really do with the right players.

I tend to agree with this. I was baffled how the Wild wilted after the Olympics, and got a free pass from Richards instead of working harder.

When they were playing well before the Olympics however, that was some of the most entertaining Wild hockey I've ever seen, and they had some amazing comebacks.

So overall, given his inexperience, I'd say C+ with potential for improvement

bozak911 06-16-2010 04:09 PM

I'm not a fan...

...but I also don't have a vote.

*laughs*

GopherState 06-16-2010 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bozak911 (Post 26318533)
I'm not a fan...

...but I also don't have a vote.

*laughs*

I almost created a F- option but remembered that you couldn't vote yet.

thestonedkoala 06-16-2010 04:45 PM

Incomplete. I want to see what he does next year.

He's kind of stuck with the dead weight that Riser left behind and wasn't given a lot to work with.

North Metro Peewees 06-16-2010 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bookman (Post 26318354)
I tend to agree with this. I was baffled how the Wild wilted after the Olympics, and got a free pass from Richards instead of working harder.
When they were playing well before the Olympics however, that was some of the most entertaining Wild hockey I've ever seen, and they had some amazing comebacks.

So overall, given his inexperience, I'd say C+ with potential for improvement

To me that was driven mostly by the condensed schedule. There were too many times the Wild played 4 games in 5 nights down the stretch which limited the chances to push them in practices.

bozak911 06-16-2010 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GopherState (Post 26318575)
I almost created a F- option but remembered that you couldn't vote yet.

:handclap:

Thanks!

Jarick 06-16-2010 05:02 PM

Wasn't a big fan of a lot of what he did. Defensive play got worse, special teams got worse, scoring chances against went way up, scoring didn't improve. He did get the guys to go hard against the better teams which Lemaire couldn't do though.

Not sure about his coaching style...I didn't like how he never had the guys practice down the stretch, but reading the Lats interview he sounds like the players really like him and he takes time to talk with them.

We'll see how he does next year. Wild need to show improve or I bet he's only given 25 games the following year.

CT* 06-16-2010 05:37 PM

One thing I didn't like is he seemed way too calm in a lot of situations, sometimes I think the players need to have a Tortorella-esque coach every now and then to maybe speak up to them or something, he just seemed way too okay with the fact certain players were doing things wrong.

rynryn 06-16-2010 06:01 PM

it didn't bother me that he was relatively emotionless where I'd be screaming on the bench...just a different personality. "C" because our special teams took a huuuuuuuge drop and there were some really questionable changes and matchups, BUT I did see glimmers of what they're trying to do overall and I likes it. Next year I won't be as kind.

State of Hockey 06-16-2010 06:01 PM

D-. Ugly job in his first year. Lax "practices", defensive struggles, no added offense, road woes, ugly start. No way he gets even an average grade.

rynryn 06-16-2010 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by State of Hockey (Post 26320265)
D-. Ugly job in his first year. Lax "practices", defensive struggles, no added offense, road woes, ugly start. No way he gets even an average grade.

no added offense... I dunno. look at our roster. Not a whole lot you can do with that.

the rest :nod:

TaLoN 06-16-2010 07:10 PM

Indifferent about his performance thus far. I expected a big slide no matter who took over after Lemaire, and that's exactly what happened.

melinko 06-16-2010 07:53 PM

I think he did as well as I expected heading into the season, this year should give us a good look into what he will be like as a coach. He should have learned alot about being a head coach in the NHL last year and adjust how he does things.

What I do like is how the players seem to like him (lats comments). I imagine when the players feel like their opinions are valued they will play harder for him, atleast it works that way in other jobs.

The comebacks were nice too feels like we had as many last year than we had the past 3-4 years under lemaire, games were all but over if we trailed by 2 in the 3rd.

State of Hockey 06-16-2010 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rynryn (Post 26320611)
no added offense... I dunno. look at our roster. Not a whole lot you can do with that.

You mean the same roster that Lemaire nearly took to the playoffs?

firstroundbust 06-16-2010 09:45 PM

Jeez I don't know...INC/C?

- I like the theory, but there was some bad execution of the system most of the time...although, that stretch in December was awfully fun to watch.
- How much of the season is a product of the personnel being ill fit for the system?
- Poor job of matchups at home.
- Waited too long to drop the hammer on the team when things went sour.

TaLoN 06-16-2010 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by State of Hockey (Post 26323221)
You mean the same roster that Lemaire nearly took to the playoffs?

Lemaire is one of the best coaches of all time for a reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeuceUNO (Post 26323295)
- How much of the season is a product of the personnel being ill fit for the system?

That is a HUGE part of it! The Wild were one of the slowest teams in the league last year... not a good thing when you are trying to be an aggressive team.

this providence 06-16-2010 09:57 PM

I guess I'm not as down on him as most.

The only thing I really didn't care for is something that has been beaten to death; match-ups. Richards would have some real head scratchers on a game by game basis. This is an area where he needs to improve.

Other than that, I'm fine with what I can realistically judge as a fan. In the end, this team finished right at where most of us expected them to finish.

rynryn 06-16-2010 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by State of Hockey (Post 26323221)
You mean the same roster that Lemaire nearly took to the playoffs?

yes, the roster that was assembled with Jacques Lemaire hockey in mind (one hopes). perhaps not a great fit for a different system...Havlat is no Gaborik. Gaby had 13 goals in 17 games playing in a repressive system. Havlat had 18 in 73 games playing in a wide open system.

I realize that they are two different types of players...but that's the point, see?

GopherState 06-16-2010 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by this providence (Post 26323442)
I guess I'm not as down on him as most.

The only thing I really didn't care for is something that has been beaten to death; match-ups. Richards would have some real head scratchers on a game by game basis. This is an area where he needs to improve.

Other than that, I'm fine with what I can realistically judge as a fan. In the end, this team finished right at where most of us expected them to finish.

That's my big thing with him as well. There were way too many times at home where the line matchups were nothing short of astonishing; especially for the team with the last change. I had a couple other issues with Richards' decisions towards the end of the year but it's hard to tell whether or not injuries precluded those decisions.

UMD05 06-17-2010 08:37 AM

I gave him a D mainly due to his baffling matchups and odd management of practices. I suspect he'll improve with a year under his belt & a better roster. I really dig his system when the players are able to execute it properly.

I wanted to give him an F because I can't stand it when he talks about the "compete factor," a player's "level of compete," etc. Did Richards take English as a second language?

BigT2002 06-17-2010 09:06 AM

I give him a D+:

-He was very uninteresting with his postgame conferences. Like he didn't care
-Didn't push the players until it was too late and most had already checked out from the season
-Never changed up the lines if something wasn't going right
-Basically ended Sykora's career by HSing him more than even attempting to play him
-Still stuck Sheppard with 4th line minutes and never allowed him to play with the big fish to see if he could do anything
- Relied too much on Backstrom to win the games
- Power play was absolutely terrible, worst in the league for SHG's allowed and I think our worst finish in the league for PP %
- Blackballed Schultz to 3rd line defensive positioning with Hnidy
- Put the two new prospects on a freaking line with Boogaard of all people until the last 2 games of the season
- Our 5-on-3 opportunities seemed very limp wristed


I could probably continue...

State of Hockey 06-17-2010 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rynryn (Post 26323597)
...Havlat is no Gaborik. Gaby had 13 goals in 17 games playing in a repressive system. Havlat had 18 in 73 games playing in a wide open system.

You brought up another down point with Richards. Havlat was junk. That early benching never worked either.

Jarick 06-17-2010 02:03 PM

Havlat was pretty good post-injury.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:49 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.