Yes, the coach deserves credit,....for how well they've played with these major injuries. But, let's give some credit to the players. They are the ones playing the game. They deserve just as much credit as Maclean does.
Luke Richardson, our Bingo system & Coaching staff.
I heard it mentioned a few times on HNIC as well as Sportsnet that they're teaching the same system down in Bingo as Paulrus is coaching up here. I had my doubts before, but now I feel like Luke is doing a tremendous job staying on our organization and taking over Binghampton (Who were leading the league at one point before all the callups). Compared to previous years, our call-ups have actually an impact and I'm sure knowing the same system has a profound impact on the actual ability of our depth.
Also hats off to our other coaching staff (Dave Cameron & Mark Reeds). I feel like we are finally seeing the fruits of the coaching rehaul a year or two back. We finally have assistant coaches who seem to communicate just as much as our head coach. Having the two Memorial cup finalist head coaches must be a huge plus for our young players.
I can finally say I have absolute confidence in both our full coaching staff, our GM, and our affiliate organization, which is a statement not many franchises can make right now.
Edit: Ooops, seems like discussion of coaching staff popped up in the Paulrus Appreciation Thread. Didn't see it beforehand
Lebrun says in his article that SixthSens linked to:
Originally Posted by Lebrun
The skinny: What’s going to hurt Quenneville, Julien and Vigneault in the voting is that expectations were high for those teams. The voters (NHL Broadcasters Association) on this award traditionally reward coaches whose clubs overachieved or surprised or surpassed expectations.
It makes you wonder then if the Jack Adams is really rewarding the best coach or the pluckiest roster with the hottest goalie. And are the NHL broadcasters really best positioned for making this judgement?
I dont want to slam our coaching staff, they sure seem top notch, it's just that im not sure how to measure it properly.
Perhaps one thing we can take from all of this is the importance of giving a GM 4 years before making evaluations. Looking back at some of the premature accusations against Murray and the desire to fire him back in years 1 and 2 for not knowing how to GM or pick a coach, or for judging him based on the teams record at the time, seems almost as inaccurate and shoot-yourself-in-the-foot worthy as picking a coach based on which teams most overachieved that one year.