View Single Post
Old
03-25-2013, 06:05 PM
  #43
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palefire View Post
I don't intend to pick on you, since lots of people have been citing the above claim, but without any context I think this falls way short of being persuasive empirical evidence. Here's what I would want to know before leaning too much on that claim.

(1) Sample size: how many coaches have coached into their 7th season with a team, without having won a cup in seasons 1-6? How many total seasons beyond their 6th have been coached by coaches in that situation?

(2) Comparison group: For each coach who coached a team 7+ years without winning a cup, how did their immediate successors do? How many seasons did they last as coach and how many total cups were won? Do any of those situations look at all comparable to the Canucks' situation?

Can anyone compile this info, or have it already at hand?
Using the more than 5 year time frame most people refer to, here are the more recent coaches (30 years or so) that I was able to find with a quick search who didn't win a cup with their team:

Lemaire (MIN)
Quinn (TOR)
Martin (OTT)
B. Murray (WSH)
Quenneville (STL)
Crawford (VAN)
Ruff (BUF)
Maurice (CAR)
Tippett (DAL)
MacTavish (EDM)
A. Murray (LAK)


And then two active coaches:

Trotz (NSH)
Vigneault (VAN)


Carolina is really the only team on that list to win the cup after changing coaches. LA did as well, but that was 6 years later with a completely different team and after they'd already gone through Crawford and T. Murray in the interim.

opendoor is offline