View Single Post
Old
10-04-2012, 01:07 PM
  #9
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadLuke View Post
Good one. No Jacque Lemaire no cup for the Devils that year ?

But that is a big statement that the coaching advantage was the biggest factor in that cup win, when you play againt's Scotty Bowman.

I could search for it, but some study (no sure how good they were) showed that school teacher and team coach have very little to no effect in success, versus student and player talents.
To some extent. Let Canadian national team (Olympic) play without coach and they still win almost everything on pure talent advantage. Any Scott Bowman or Lemaire wouldn't make them much more better, in fact they could even hurt particular players by their system. Does it work with bunch of 2nd or 3rd tier players? Hell, no! Good coach make them much more better than no coach. Recent example is Slovak national team. Terrible results with weak coaches like Glen Hanlon and immediate success with Vujtek and his system. And everyone would swear that Vujtek has weaker players on the paper compared to past.

EDIT: Recent Devils trilogy came into my mind too. Same team, worse in first half of the season (MacLean), best in second half (Lemaire) and SC finalist next year (DeBoer). There is a good reason to say MacLean is bad coach. Harder question is..are Lemaire and DeBoer such great coaches or any average coach would lead them to the same (or similar) results.

EDIT2: Canada - Czech semifinal in Nagano. Good example of outcoaching.


Last edited by begbeee: 10-04-2012 at 01:15 PM.
begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote