HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

Maurice 3.0: Is it time for a coaching change or...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2013, 08:03 AM
  #1
bluedevil58*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,496
vCash: 500
Maurice 3.0: Is it time for a coaching change or...

Does the team just not have any confidence when Peters is in net and plays too timid? On the other hand we have the horses to be really good and it's the coaches job to motivate these players. What is happening? Is the era of Maurice 3.0 upon us? Discuss!

bluedevil58* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 08:20 AM
  #2
Oogie Boogie
Registered User
 
Oogie Boogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Boone, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 17,441
vCash: 500
If we ever bring back Maurice I'm done with this team for good.

Oogie Boogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 08:22 AM
  #3
Hayley from paramore
Registered User
 
Hayley from paramore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,162
vCash: 500
Changing the coach isn't going to do anything, just like changing the coach didn't do anything last time despite people still wanting to pretend like the 2011 edition of Carolina Hurricanes Annual Second Half Hot Streak Sponsored By Eric Staal was due to a coaching change rather than a naturally occurring phenomena. The team can't score goals because outside of Semin and Skinner the "top forwards" are glorified garbage goal scorers (or completely useless in the case of Ruutu) and they are complemented by grinders and defensive defensemen. There is next to zero creativity or passing ability from at least a dozen regulars. Too many forwards who don't fit together, waaaay too many 4th liners, and too many bad defensemen who can't make simple plays.

Hayley from paramore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 08:29 AM
  #4
Elsker
Registered User
 
Elsker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaxing Joni Jokel View Post
Changing the coach isn't going to do anything, just like changing the coach didn't do anything last time despite people still wanting to pretend like the 2011 edition of Carolina Hurricanes Annual Second Half Hot Streak Sponsored By Eric Staal was due to a coaching change rather than a naturally occurring phenomena. The team can't score goals because outside of Semin and Skinner the "top forwards" are glorified garbage goal scorers (or completely useless in the case of Ruutu) and they are complemented by grinders and defensive defensemen. There is next to zero creativity or passing ability from at least a dozen regulars. Too many forwards who don't fit together, waaaay too many 4th liners, and too many bad defensemen who can't make simple plays.
It's...it's like you know us.

Elsker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 09:29 AM
  #5
rocky7
DAT 13
 
rocky7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: God's country
Posts: 3,479
vCash: 1400
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
Does the team just not have any confidence when Peters is in net and plays too timid? On the other hand we have the horses to be really good and it's the coaches job to motivate these players. What is happening? Is the era of Maurice 3.0 upon us? Discuss!
IMO:

- Peters and team confidence in him is a non-issue.
- they have some very fine horses though there are plenty of scapegoats available.
- JR didn't assemble an All-Star team by any means, but one far better than this.
- players are motivated, executing and working hard (there are some qualifiers here).
- I don't advocate Muller being fired yet (very soon though if he and the other suits don't accept responsibility, identify the problems and fix them, and fast = sign of good coach). I don't expect this will happen however.
- overall, it isn't as simple as hiring a new coach but I believe it will likely go down.
- there is dysfunction at every level within this organization that must be addressed in order to be a successful franchise.
- fire noone now but expect change and improvement starting today.
- hell of a complicated mess but this is pro sports. deal with it. if not, continue to lose. the buck stops at the owners. attendance has been dropping. much chatter. something will happen.
- will much/anything change? ????? depends. in time it will.

rocky7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 09:57 AM
  #6
GoCanes2013
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raleigh
Posts: 1,056
vCash: 500
Keep in mind the Montreal fan base was pretty upset we 'stole' Muller to be our coach - he was generally believed to be a solid coach candidate by more than just us - no one ever knows how these new coach choices pan out - heck even vet coach choices don't pan out. But it does "feel" like perhaps this team isn't responding to Muller for whatever reason. I'd give him no more than 10 more games before something breaks. I agree this year isn't on JR. It's either Muller or the players, and the way they players are going so far, none of them are going anywhere via trade.

GoCanes2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:11 AM
  #7
Lazyking
Never Forget
 
Lazyking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
If there was a way to get rid of both Staals, I'd do that before I'd fire Muller.. Since that's not the case, I'd fire JR and Muller because he's a JR hire.

I don't believe that Muller really is the number one issue. They're running his system...however, Pucks are not going into the net and you can't just keep a coach around because the team is just failing to convert. If you could change the core, maybe.

Lazyking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:13 AM
  #8
What the Faulk
Auggie
 
What the Faulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 40,933
vCash: 500
Muller isn't going anywhere.

What the Faulk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:15 AM
  #9
Lazyking
Never Forget
 
Lazyking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by What the Faulk View Post
Muller isn't going anywhere.
He'll be gone by Jan. if we avg. 2 goals a game or less still.

Lazyking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:15 AM
  #10
WalkerBabe
Registered User
 
WalkerBabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 718
vCash: 500
I just wondered aloud to my husband this morning if Muller was ready for primetime? Yes, I did like Paul Maurice a lot ... I thought he had a lot of bad luck with injured players ... but I know change can be good, and when a team isn't winning, coaches go. So I have given Muller a chance, though I really question how he treated Jussi Jokinen who is now red hot for Pittsburgh. I'm starting to doubt him now.

WalkerBabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:17 AM
  #11
What the Faulk
Auggie
 
What the Faulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 40,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazyking View Post
He'll be gone by Jan. if we avg. 2 goals a game or less still.
Very doubtful on both accounts.

What the Faulk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:25 AM
  #12
Novacane
Registered User
 
Novacane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 22,761
vCash: 500
Nope. I'd rather blow up the team (Yes. That means trading Staal) before changing coaches again. That's not to say I want to trade Eric, just that there are some other places to go before going after the coach. Again. It's been too soon since Muller took over and the team has looked just as much like **** as they did with Maurice. Changing coaches won't do a damned thing. It only defers the blame to the coach and the same careless hockey will be played 1-2 years down the line.

Novacane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 10:33 AM
  #13
Elsker
Registered User
 
Elsker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by What the Faulk View Post
Muller isn't going anywhere.
I agree. His fundamental hockey kool-aid is org endorsed, top to bottom, so there's no conflict in vision.

If it gets so bad that they have to go into drill sargent mode to put the spurs to the Staals, there's enough candidates already on board in the coaching ranks and brain trust to find that voice without hiring Kenan or someone of that ilk.

A good sports psychologist is needed now moreso than a coaching change. Plenty of amateur talent within the org for that talk, as well, if they won't go pro.

Otherwise, two broke goalies, Ruutu firing on one cylinder, Gleason messed up, Pitkanen gone, Skinner out, played three division leaders in a row with all of the above...

There are plenty of candidates for reasons to fail besides a wtf coaching change.

Elsker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:03 AM
  #14
Blueline Bomber
From the Blueline
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 29,523
vCash: 500
Changing coaches (again) wont do anything. The issue is the players (or more specifically, the core players) have to accept no responsibility for their poor play and they know it.

It's a Catch-22. The team isn't good enough to scratch Staals without basically calling the games they miss insta-losses, and if the team is successful, it's likely because of the Staals and thus, there'd be no reason to scratch them.

Have a player's poor play have consequences (scratch them for games, call them out in the media, etc) and you'll see this team turn around real quick

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:13 AM
  #15
Highway29
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Country: Finland
Posts: 286
vCash: 500
How about trading Staals, Ruutu, Semin for Spezza, Ryan and 1st?
And Harrison, Gleason etc. for one 2nd line forward at some point..

I know. Just a crazy proposal but been wondering too much how to get rid of Staals.

Then:
Tlusty - Spezza - Ryan
Skinner - Lindholm - Terry/Boychuk
Gerbe - Rask - Dvorak
Sutter - Malhotra - Dwyer

Highway29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:14 AM
  #16
bleedgreen
Registered User
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 12,473
vCash: 500
Jr isn't a knee jerk guy when it comes to something like a coaching change. Think of how bad things were for mo to get fired. Not to mention we can't afford to pay two coaches at once, which for a team like us matters. If we fired muller the replacement wouldn't be the best choice, it would be the cheapest.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:16 AM
  #17
Sens1Canes2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonister View Post
How about trading Staals, Ruutu, Semin for Spezza, Ryan and 1st?
And Harrison, Gleason etc. for one 2nd line forward at some point..

I know. Just a crazy proposal but been wondering too much how to get rid of Staals.

Then:
Tlusty - Spezza - Ryan
Skinner - Lindholm - Terry/Boychuk
Gerbe - Rask - Dvorak
Sutter - Malhotra - Dwyer
This is why I come here. To read stuff like this.

Sens1Canes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:32 AM
  #18
Dfence033
Registered User
 
Dfence033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 911
vCash: 500
As an outsider, your team's problems go far, far beyond Muller as a coach. How many coaches do you need to roll through, having the same problems year-after-year, before you start questioning if it's not the coaches?

1) Peters has actually played decently. I know you guys like to rag on him and his bad stats, but you should remember, the guy is a journeyman AHL goal-tender at this point, and the 3rd guy deep on your depth chart. If the players are playing worse in front of him because of that, it's on the skaters, not the goalie. The Rangers have Cam Talbot (26-year old, first NHL-game, previous AHL goalie, 3rd-string) playing and playing well. It's not because he is some hidden gem that's been looking to break out for years; it's because the players on the Rangers (who looked **** poor to start the year) are giving him all the help he can get. Like Peters (who has also done well in this respect), Talbot is being asked to make the 1 or 2 challenging saves, and try to limit the rest. Peters kept you in the Tampa game, even with the bad bounce (Quick had one too, doesn't make him a bad goalie). Your forwards scored exactly 0 goals. They looked like they didn't care. No backchecking, watching the goalie get peppered with quality chance after chance (Stamkos had at least 6 of them). You scored zero goals. I know, I know... Skinner is out...

2) Injuries. They aren't an excuse. Skinner, Ward, Devo, and Pitkanen being out sucks, yes. The Rangers are/were missing Nash, Callahan, Hagelin, Lundqvist, and Moore. That's at best a comparable list, and most would argue significantly worse. The Rangers are/were still winning games without those players. The difference is two-fold: a) Depth. Due to the Staals, Semin, Skinner, and Ward making up 60% of your cap, you have none. Everyone knew it coming into this season, and it wasn't addressed (unless you consider wasting Lindholm on the 4th line as addressing depth). b) Players stepping up. You still have both Eric and Jordan Staal. Gleason, Sekera, Ruutu, Boychuk for the 14th time, Faulk, Murphy (although these two seem to have actually been on par or slightly better, so they are excused). There are still players on this team that were counted on that aren't doing anything of value.

3) Staals. They both have looked mostly putrid. Are the too comfortable now that they have their contracts and their brother to play a shoddy version of "keep away" with on the ice? Jordan's defense has fallen off a cliff. He looks nothing like a Selke finalist. His offense is nowhere to be found. Eric, how many years do you keep making the "slow start" excuse? If it's 10 years in a row, someone should tell him how to get his head out of his rectum faster than game 41. That's one of my biggest issues I see. Eric Staal is the captain and can't be bothered to do much else then float and collect points that mostly mean nothing. He doesn't back-check. He takes half a year off every season. He is paid to be a franchise player, and he has shown he is capable of playing to that level on more than one occasion. It's been 3 coaches. All have had the same problems. Once they get fired, Staal finally gets off his "slow start" kick and goes PPG+. I'm largely of the belief that Staal doesn't want to work, and his slow starts are intentional disregard of the coaches that try to MAKE him work. Mo did. Lavy did. I know Muller is (even if it's not via media tirades like you seem to want from him; that's not his style). "Staaleigh" was a nice idea, but it hasn't paid off. Neither looks interested in working and playing their games as opposed to pond-hockey like when they grew up together. Muller isn't the problem. Neither was Laviolette. Or Maurice. JR and Eric Staal are the most glaring culprits. Scratching Eric and Jordan won't do anything but get Muller fired; it shows JR was wrong about them, and he won't stand for it. He will go find another coach to sing the praises of how he will turn the team around and fire them two years later when the same results occur.

Dfence033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:33 AM
  #19
HisIceness
Sad Canes fan
 
HisIceness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Charlotte
Country: United States
Posts: 15,041
vCash: 1638
Yeah, I'll pass on Maurice being coach again.

HisIceness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 11:57 AM
  #20
Identity404
Unknown Pleasures
 
Identity404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dfence033 View Post
b) Players stepping up. You still have both Eric and Jordan Staal. Gleason, Sekera, Ruutu, Boychuk for the 14th time, Faulk, Murphy (although these two seem to have actually been on par or slightly better, so they are excused). There are still players on this team that were counted on that aren't doing anything of value.

Identity404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 12:01 PM
  #21
Identity404
Unknown Pleasures
 
Identity404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
I think your three points sum up how I think most people on this board feel. Pretty good analysis from an outsider.

Identity404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 12:04 PM
  #22
Dfence033
Registered User
 
Dfence033's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Identity404 View Post
Is he not on the Hurricanes depth chart again this year? Or did you guys just get him back for the giggles of his epic run at most teams played for in two years? Most teams don't go back after players that they've tried to rid themselves of multiple times if they have no hopes of them contributing anything. Should I have used Bowman's 5th unsuccessful NHL stint instead? The point remains, you have a severe lack of depth. The retreads are just more fodder to the lack of competency by the GM.

Edit: And I don't mean that to come off as attacking. It's just another story that the Hurricanes seem to love; retreads. Both players and coaches get recycled through the Hurricanes more than any other team I can remember. That just appears to be awful management of the roster. Either they were good and you made a mistake letting them go in the first place, or they were awful so you let them go, but brought them back in hopes that they were anything more than awful.

Dfence033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 12:11 PM
  #23
What the Faulk
Auggie
 
What the Faulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 40,933
vCash: 500
Boychuk was among the first cuts and has been in Charlotte all year. Would say he's probably the 16th or 17th forward on the depth chart. He means next to nothing and why you brought him up at all doesn't make any sense.

What the Faulk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 12:12 PM
  #24
Mr Whipple
Charmin Soft
 
Mr Whipple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Greenville, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dfence033 View Post
Is he not on the Hurricanes depth chart again this year? Or did you guys just get him back for the giggles of his epic run at most teams played for in two years? Most teams don't go back after players that they've tried to rid themselves of multiple times if they have no hopes of them contributing anything. Should I have used Bowman's 5th unsuccessful NHL stint instead? The point remains, you have a severe lack of depth. The retreads are just more fodder to the lack of competency by the GM.

Edit: And I don't mean that to come off as attacking. It's just another story that the Hurricanes seem to love; retreads. Both players and coaches get recycled through the Hurricanes more than any other team I can remember. That just appears to be awful management of the roster. Either they were good and you made a mistake letting them go in the first place, or they were awful so you let them go, but brought them back in hopes that they were anything more than awful.
Oh, you're preaching to the choir about the Canes and retreads. Once you join the Canes family you get lifetime membership to the country club. Plus it extends to all of your family members.

Boychuck is stuck down in Charlotte this year, though. Where he belongs. Though your point still stands that we did go and re-sign him so we could stash him as one of our collectibles.

Mr Whipple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2013, 12:16 PM
  #25
Identity404
Unknown Pleasures
 
Identity404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dfence033 View Post
Is he not on the Hurricanes depth chart again this year? Or did you guys just get him back for the giggles of his epic run at most teams played for in two years? Most teams don't go back after players that they've tried to rid themselves of multiple times if they have no hopes of them contributing anything. Should I have used Bowman's 5th unsuccessful NHL stint instead? The point remains, you have a severe lack of depth. The retreads are just more fodder to the lack of competency by the GM.

Edit: And I don't mean that to come off as attacking. It's just another story that the Hurricanes seem to love; retreads. Both players and coaches get recycled through the Hurricanes more than any other team I can remember. That just appears to be awful management of the roster. Either they were good and you made a mistake letting them go in the first place, or they were awful so you let them go, but brought them back in hopes that they were anything more than awful.
Boychuck was mainly reacquired for Charlotte. He is a pretty solid AHLer and I would imagine very low on the call up list. We never wanted to rid ourselves of him in the first place, just wanted to put him in Charlotte and he was claimed.

I wasn't trying to disagree with you about our lack of depth. Just wanted to point out that Boychuck isn't being used for depth. Including him in a list of players not stepping up was out of place and ridiculous.


Last edited by Identity404: 11-03-2013 at 12:26 PM.
Identity404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:52 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.