View Single Post
06-13-2004, 11:06 AM
Believe In Henke
Bluenote13's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,869
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kodiak
Why is everyone acting like we're choosing a coach for the next ten years? There is no reason to think that the organization would lose McGill if we were to hire Q. Coaches tend to last 3 years or so, and there's nothing wrong with McGill continuing in Hartford during that period. People seem to be forgetting that for all the success McGill has had, he only has 2 years of pro experience. That's pretty light in terms of experience gaining and "seasoning." A lot of young head coaches have been around as AHL coaches and NHL assistant coaches for a long time. Take Tortorella for example. People consider him a fine young coach, but he's spent 9 years as an assistant coach and 2 years coaching in the AHL. I would think that someone getting a shot at an NHL head coaching position after 2 years of AHL experience and no NHL experience whatsoever would be a pretty risky move to make.
Thats a bad scenario, one in which i'd see Mcgill being hired away before we even get to that '3 years or so'.

Well then, this exactly the reason we should hire Mcgill. Even if he is only here a few seasons, he's the kind of coach who will make the young guys turn into solid NHL'ers. He may not be able to get them to a Cup, but he'll put them on the right path.

Bluenote13 is offline