HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Has Adam Oates Been Fired Yet????

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-18-2014, 01:47 PM
  #426
g00n
Moderator
ಠ_ಠ
 
g00n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henderson19 View Post
Casual observer, admittedly, but I also think Oates has grossly mismanaged the goaltending situation. The first real troubling moment came during the road game in Calgary, when Holtby got absolutely shelled early, gave three (could have been six), and got pulled.

Ever since, it's been 'blame the goalie.' If not in word, then certainly in deed -- too many quick hooks. Some coaches build sound defensive systems and other coaches place higher expectations on goalies to cover up mistakes, system flaws, etc. Oates falls in the latter camp, but to an extreme degree, imo. He's proving to be a confidence killer.

Others here will have better perspectives, but this is what I've seen...
I would generally agree with that. He commented after last night's loss that he felt sorry for Grubauer because the team left him hanging, but if not in word then in deed it does seem like his "system" relies heavily on the goaltender making saves and then the rest of the team scooping up the rebound for a transition the other way. Which is to say, no defense.

g00n is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 02:52 PM
  #427
Langway
Flow➜Grow
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,556
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by g00n View Post
Exactly. Oates is making excuses for why he doesn't motivate. It doesn't have to be the same thing every day, and even if it is that's your JOB. Find ways to motivate your staff.
I'm not sure he can even spell motivate. According to other comments, he coaches like he would have wanted to be coached. Considering how he was as a player that's kind of like letting the lunatics run the asylum.

Based on Boudreau's quotes about Murray being a far more in your face GM than McPhee, it should be little wonder that there's no pressure from the top-down to perform. It's up to the players. Without even a baseline standard of play to strive for that presumes motivation it's no wonder that anything goes is their apparent organizational standard.

Langway is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:11 PM
  #428
g00n
Moderator
ಠ_ಠ
 
g00n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langway View Post
I'm not sure he can even spell motivate. According to other comments, he coaches like he would have wanted to be coached. Considering how he was as a player that's kind of like letting the lunatics run the asylum.

Based on Boudreau's quotes about Murray being a far more in your face GM than McPhee, it should be little wonder that there's no pressure from the top-down to perform. It's up to the players. Without even a baseline standard of play to strive for that presumes motivation it's no wonder that anything goes is their apparent organizational standard.
When he was playing I recall hearing "he's so smart and knows so much about the game, he'll probably end up coaching after his playing days are over". Probably from Locker and teammates. But he never struck me as a rousing leader so much as a quirky player (see: his stick blade) who was just extremely cerebral and maybe even a bit of a maverick (butted heads with some people, iirc).

So I think you're right about him possibly coaching as he'd want to be coached. I think Gretzky a similar problem in that he couldn't seem to understand why his players were unable to just go out and perform like 5 Great Ones on the ice! DH wanted to turn everyone into a grinder like him. Etc.

What a mess.

g00n is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:16 PM
  #429
Liberati0n*
Full Hammock
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,146
vCash: 500
Maybe it's how he wanted to be coached, but you (g00n) were right a page ago when you said he rationalizes not including motivation in his approach because he just can't do it. He doesn't have the charisma (or whatever) to pull off that or being directly hard on the players, so he justifies not doing so by claiming he doesn't believe it's effective, and instead of being direct he's just really passive aggressive.

Liberati0n* is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:34 PM
  #430
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 21,384
vCash: 500
Do we have any Oates supporters left?

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:37 PM
  #431
artilector
Registered User
 
artilector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Honestly, I think the motivational stuff is the least of Oates' problems. No amount of motivation is gonna turn Erskine & Carrick & Green & Orlov into reliable defensemen right now. Or get Laich & Brouwer to contribute on offense.

As far as systems, it's maybe not great but not bad either -- against Pens & SJ the Caps played very well, so maybe it's not offensively exciting or aggressive on defense, but IMO Oates' hockey can be effective.

For me, by far the biggest issue with Oates is OCD personnel choices, both in choosing who plays and where. Erskine & Carrick over Schmidt & Urbom, Laich & Brouwer over Erat and anybody else. It really exacerbates the even more fundamental problem of poor team construction by McPhee.

If these issues were resolved, I think arguments about motivation would barely get any traction. Like, do we seriously think that the proverbial Iron Mike could get THIS defense to be reliable??

edit: and no, I'm not an Oates supporter, although I don't want to see him axed before McPhee. And if a new GM wanted to give Oates a chance and maybe put more pressure on him to correct personnel idiocy, I'd be willing to see how it plays out..

artilector is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:47 PM
  #432
Brian23
Registered User
 
Brian23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by artilector View Post
Honestly, I think the motivational stuff is the least of Oates' problems. No amount of motivation is gonna turn Erskine & Carrick & Green & Orlov into reliable defensemen right now. Or get Laich & Brouwer to contribute on offense.

As far as systems, it's maybe not great but not bad either -- against Pens & SJ the Caps played very well, so maybe it's not offensively exciting or aggressive on defense, but IMO Oates' hockey can be effective.

For me, by far the biggest issue with Oates is OCD personnel choices, both in choosing who plays and where. Erskine & Carrick over Schmidt & Urbom, Laich & Brouwer over Erat and anybody else. It really exacerbates the even more fundamental problem of poor team construction by McPhee.

If these issues were resolved, I think arguments about motivation would barely get any traction. Like, do we seriously think that the proverbial Iron Mike could get THIS defense to be reliable??

edit: and no, I'm not an Oates supporter, although I don't want to see him axed before McPhee. And if a new GM wanted to give Oates a chance and maybe put more pressure on him to correct personnel idiocy, I'd be willing to see how it plays out..
I thought Orlov has been pretty damn good, all things considering...

Brian23 is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 03:56 PM
  #433
SimplySensational
Heard of Hough
 
SimplySensational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: VA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langway View Post
I'm not sure he can even spell motivate. According to other comments, he coaches like he would have wanted to be coached. Considering how he was as a player that's kind of like letting the lunatics run the asylum.

Based on Boudreau's quotes about Murray being a far more in your face GM than McPhee, it should be little wonder that there's no pressure from the top-down to perform. It's up to the players. Without even a baseline standard of play to strive for that presumes motivation it's no wonder that anything goes is their apparent organizational standard.
Uhhh... BB whined afterwards that GMGM was always telling him what to do.

SimplySensational is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 04:08 PM
  #434
aerovette99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 34
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplySensational View Post
Uhhh... BB whined afterwards that GMGM was always telling him what to do.
I remember NOTHING of the sort. Please supply a link to this statement

aerovette99 is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 05:34 PM
  #435
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,056
vCash: 500
I think most of us here have bashed McPhee including me for pressuring boudreau into giving up his game for a defense first style. that is pretty well documented. Boudreau really lost his edge when he gave up on what he believed in.

As for Oates. I don't see how a coach can get by without motivating his players. I guess Landry did it in football, but he insulted his players for not having any brains. Oates assumes his players are professionals and smart enough to handle the job.


Last edited by txpd: 01-18-2014 at 05:45 PM.
txpd is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 05:57 PM
  #436
Hivemind
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 17,435
vCash: 500
Posted this in another thread, should probably have gone here:


As for Oates, I think he's got a lot of potential as a coach. But he's still new at it, and he's going to take his lumps. He and his staff (namely CalleJo and Kolzig) are over thinking things and outsmarting themselves. If every team consisted of Adam Oates and Nicklas Lidstrom clones, their game plan might work. But the players aren't smart enough to play the way they want, and the opponent isn't going to play the way they expect.
Think of it like professional poker players. A lot of them excel at beating players at their, or similar, levels. But when a worse player starts making moves that are "wrong" from a theory perspective, it may be hard for the professional to understand and read them. Against other smart, skilled, offensive teams, what Oates and his staff wants to do makes sense. But when a team plays a simpler game, Oates' system doesn't work as well.
Look at how Kolzig is getting the goalies to play deeper, and how the PK is instructed not to attempt to clear people out of in front of the net. The coaching staff is trying to take away high percentage options for the opponent, like back-door plays and good east-west puck movement. A "smart" team should be looking for these high percentage plays more than anything else, so it makes sense to attempt to take them away. But the reality is most teams take the simple chances given to them, and Oates' system is not built to stop those.

Hivemind is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 06:40 PM
  #437
Capsman
Registered User
 
Capsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
I think most of us here have bashed McPhee including me for pressuring boudreau into giving up his game for a defense first style. that is pretty well documented. Boudreau really lost his edge when he gave up on what he believed in.

As for Oates. I don't see how a coach can get by without motivating his players. I guess Landry did it in football, but he insulted his players for not having any brains. Oates assumes his players are professionals and smart enough to handle the job.
See I've never agreed with the belief that BB was forced to change styles and with that our offense went down the tubes. We were actually off to a productive start that season when the offense went dry. Why would GM then say "Bruce change it up"? The offense went dry on its own and we were forced to change. Started with OV going dry and people laughing it off as a mini cold streak he goes through every year. Except it went on and on and on. The league caught up. There was no other choice.

Capsman is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:06 PM
  #438
OVs Gold Chain
Registered User
 
OVs Gold Chain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,051
vCash: 557
I love how the media is beginning to pile on Oates, you keep seeing the mention of 4 game losing streaks and former coaches.

News flash: Babcock wouldn't be doing any better with this defensive core. You are not going to win a Stanley Cup, or even come close to contending for one, with Erskine and Carrick on a pairing seeing major ice/PK time. And to top that off, the Caps are icing 2 purely offensive defensemen in Green and Orlov... you better be scoring 4-5 goals a game or you're eventually going to lose a lot of games.

I understand there needs to be a willing seller in order for the Caps to be buyers, but we need to sacrifice some offensive skill for at least one true "stay-at-home" defenseman. We need one from a coaching standpoint and really just our team's overall confidence. A player who can settle the team down at times and shut-down opposing top lines. If Oates gets ****-canned because our GM doesn't have the connections/has burned too many bridges to bring in help, we'll be on pace to waste the entire careers of guys like Ovechkin and Backstrom.

OVs Gold Chain is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:06 PM
  #439
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 21,384
vCash: 500
Babcock would absolutely be doing better with this personnel and the staff he'd have hired.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:14 PM
  #440
artilector
Registered User
 
artilector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian23 View Post
I thought Orlov has been pretty damn good, all things considering...
I'm a big fan of Orlov, and I think already the good outweighs the bad. I hope the Caps retain him at least over anybody except Carlzner.. but as a young D man, it's gonna take him some time to make better reads -- and as an offensively-minded guy, he's always gonna take some risks and make some mistakes.

All that is fine, but right now the Caps have only 1 defensively consistent D pairing, which is clearly not enough. Caps could live with Orlov and/or Green making occasional mistakes, but you add Erskine+Carrick, and it becomes too much to overcome..

artilector is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:15 PM
  #441
artilector
Registered User
 
artilector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Babcock would absolutely be doing better with this personnel and the staff he'd have hired.
Mainly he'd be doing better because most likely we wouldn't have Erskine&Carrick playing right now

artilector is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:19 PM
  #442
artilector
Registered User
 
artilector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerovette99 View Post
I remember NOTHING of the sort. Please supply a link to this statement
My impression was that BB and McPhee had discussions about what to do after offensive hockey playoff failures, McPhee indeed may have suggested a more defensive scheme and BB went along with it (or may in fact have thought himself it was the right thing to do). But afterwards I think he said he wished he stuck to his guns, which would seem to mean that he always had the final say in how the team played.

Given McPhee's apparent lack of vision, I doubt he had the confidence to order BB to play a particular style. Opinions, ideas, suggestions -- sure.

artilector is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 07:19 PM
  #443
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 21,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by artilector View Post
Mainly he'd be doing better because most likely we wouldn't have Erskine&Carrick playing right now
Certainly part of it. He also wouldn't have a Caps reunion on his staff.

And the comparison at this point is laughable anyway. Babcock is Ovechkin to Oates' Brian Willsie.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 08:13 PM
  #444
RandyHolt
Aiko Oshie All Day
 
RandyHolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Poland
Posts: 26,501
vCash: 2714
I have long felt a good dpair needs a stay at homer, an anchor, someone to depend on.

Orlov and Green lacks that. Erskine is doing his best to be that but is used a lot under Oates pushing his limits, especially last year of course. And, in Oates's system, the D in general are not passing the eye test. They more all look like Rich Pilon's.

Talking myself out of my own point, I am not sure any D pairs will work when the goalies are all head cases wondering if they are the starter backup or trade bait. Knowing their career may take a big hit with one bad goal.


Last edited by RandyHolt: 01-18-2014 at 08:32 PM.
RandyHolt is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 08:25 PM
  #445
artilector
Registered User
 
artilector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyHolt View Post
I have long felt a good dpair needs a stay at homer, an anchor, someone to depend on.

Orlov and Green lacks that. Erskine is doing his best to be that but is used a lot under Oates especially last year of course. Of course, in Oates's system, the D in general are not passing the eye test. They more all look like Rich Pilon's.

Talking myself out of my own point, I am not sure any D pairs will work when the goalies are all head cases wondering if they are the starter backup or trade bait. Knowing their career may take a big hit with one bad goal.
I don't know, Orlov & Green are making me wonder about that. I'm not sure that playing together they give up more chances than the sum of what happens when playing each with a separate "responsible" partner.

If you think about it, what happens when one defenseman loses position -- you need the other guy to cover fast.. so an important attribute for a partner of a risky D is to be mobile, and these guys certainly are. They also have been excellent as pressure valves for each other when needing to move puck out of the zone, since both can do it.

So.. I don't know, there are questions (like what'll happen against a team that will really cycle and crash the net in the playoffs), but I've really liked and have been surprised by their synergy. It might take a really good D acquisition to make it worthwhile to break them up..

artilector is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 08:31 PM
  #446
Hivemind
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 17,435
vCash: 500
I can get behind stylized d-pairs, if they have a real identity and are deployed properly. While the "balanced" method of pairing a stay-at-home guy with a PMD is tried and true, and often very effective, there are alternative ways of building functional pairings. But the two players have to have chemistry together, and they should be utilized to maximize their strengths and minimize their deficiencies.

I'm not sure Orlov and Green have reached that level of chemistry yet, and Oates sure as hell isn't utilizing them properly (outside of denying them PK minutes, which is dumb in itself when the alternative is Erskine/Carrick). They're a highly effective possession unit and can both put points on the board. There's a lot to like. But the seem to have one or two real bad miscommunications per game, in terms of picking up players from the neutral zone or when to pinch up ice. It's burned the Capitals on several occasions already.

Hivemind is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 08:39 PM
  #447
g00n
Moderator
ಠ_ಠ
 
g00n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by artilector View Post
My impression was that BB and McPhee had discussions about what to do after offensive hockey playoff failures, McPhee indeed may have suggested a more defensive scheme and BB went along with it (or may in fact have thought himself it was the right thing to do). But afterwards I think he said he wished he stuck to his guns, which would seem to mean that he always had the final say in how the team played.

Given McPhee's apparent lack of vision, I doubt he had the confidence to order BB to play a particular style. Opinions, ideas, suggestions -- sure.
I don't have the link handy but I think I read BB describing how, at the tail end of the 8 game losing streak that December, he and GMGM were on the phone discussing what to do. It was decided that since the offense had dried up then the only way to stop the bleeding was to give up fewer goals. Hence the more defensive approach.

It was not in response to playoff issues. In the playoffs the failure to score (particularly on the PP) was the problem. Remember there were some embarassing blowouts in that losing streak. That's what they were trying to stop.

g00n is offline  
Old
01-18-2014, 09:34 PM
  #448
Acallabeth
Get well soon Octopi
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kemerovo, Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 5,691
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Acallabeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
I can get behind stylized d-pairs, if they have a real identity and are deployed properly. While the "balanced" method of pairing a stay-at-home guy with a PMD is tried and true, and often very effective, there are alternative ways of building functional pairings. But the two players have to have chemistry together, and they should be utilized to maximize their strengths and minimize their deficiencies.
Not sure this is possible with Oates this year. I have zero faith in him making a roster decision that would require a pairing playing its own hockey (unlike his majestic system) to hide their deficiencies.
There's not a single line or player on the Caps who Oates milked the best from, outside that PP early in the season. 3 talented goalies' confidence took a big hit. We consistently play a pairing that doesn't belong in the NHL and jiggle top 4 hoping for a miracle to happen, and for players to develop chemistry instantly out of nowhere. Oates is consistently breaking lines that work and keeping lines that don't work. I agree that Orlov-Green could be for us like Lidstrom-Murphy in style, but I'm sure Oates will find a way to make them a trash pairing.

Acallabeth is offline  
Old
01-19-2014, 12:08 AM
  #449
Hivemind
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 17,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acallabeth View Post
Not sure this is possible with Oates this year. I have zero faith in him making a roster decision that would require a pairing playing its own hockey (unlike his majestic system) to hide their deficiencies.
There's not a single line or player on the Caps who Oates milked the best from, outside that PP early in the season. 3 talented goalies' confidence took a big hit. We consistently play a pairing that doesn't belong in the NHL and jiggle top 4 hoping for a miracle to happen, and for players to develop chemistry instantly out of nowhere. Oates is consistently breaking lines that work and keeping lines that don't work. I agree that Orlov-Green could be for us like Lidstrom-Murphy in style, but I'm sure Oates will find a way to make them a trash pairing.
I'd say Ovechkin is thriving under Oates. On pace for 60 goals.

Hivemind is offline  
Old
01-19-2014, 01:09 AM
  #450
KevinM
Registered User
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: D.C.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Do we have any Oates supporters left?
I'm not a supporter but I do find some sort of masochistic pleasure in trying to crack his enigma of a brain when he makes what are seemingly the most baffling decisions at times.

KevinM is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.