Coach Q's actual playoff ability
View Single Post
05-19-2013, 11:44 PM
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Wicker Park
Originally Posted by
Some other threads seem to support Q as all knowing and how to tweak a team, i.e. Stalberg benching.
Admittedly, I thought it was stupid so I did a little research.
We know playoffs is when the intensity picks up for players and coaches. Q's career regular season records are .612, playoff record is .518. A significant dropoff rather than raising of performance, so it would seem.
I looked back over the last 20 Cup winners and checked their coach's performance for perspective relative to Q. A couple of coaches have playoff records better than regular season for their careers (Robinson, Demers, Hartley).
Most have a slight dropoff from regular season to playoff performance. The only coach with a dropoff similar to Q is Dan Bylsma, not quite Scotty Bowman part deaux.
The following recent coaches have better playoff records relative to regular season than Coach Q: Laviollette, Babcock, Crawford, Sutter, Julien, Lemaire, Keenan, Bowman, Hitchcock, Tortorella, Carlyle and Pat Burns.
Let's just temper the Coach Q knows what he is doing just a bit, eh?
Your research is interesting but the red flag was that you were only included data that supported your premise but left the rest to “trust me.”
I’m not going to look at retired HOF guys, they aren’t meaningful to the conversation. So I just looked at Babcock, and it turns out his playoff WIN% in the playoffs as coach of the Wings dropped by much more than Q’s had under the Hawks. It’s not even close if we’re parsing small sample sizes:
Q: RS 63%, PO 58%; -0.05
B: RS 68%, PO 56%; -0.12
And this doesn’t take into account that DET had better seeds in most of those years, so easier opponents net-net.
I have no problem with saying Babcock is a better coach- he may be the best in the NHL - but you can’t base it on shoddy data.
Last edited by LarmerSavardSecord: 05-19-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by LarmerSavardSecord