HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

So just what is a modern day coach?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2003, 11:04 PM
  #26
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoudmouthHemskyfan#1
True enough, and I can see the point, just don't let experiences like this throw you off making the strong statements you do, the board needs them.
It's fun making strong statements. I expect back lash at times too.

But it's truly begining to lose it's luster. Too many "Mr. half-page post dissecting hockey gods" these days.

Telling me about lab rats. Gimme a break.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 03:16 AM
  #27
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretzky2kurri
What a surprise. The dawgbone "school of high hockey knowledge' is on the scene to make everything right and take me to school again.

How phucking predictable is that?

It's like nobody can come on here with an opinion without going through the mandatory "Dawgbone school of upper hockey knowledge" and a LONG WINDED DISECTION of their post. I'm pretty sure it wears on alot of posters. Especially when most of what you are serving up is a bunch of recycled hot air. Tiresome. And it's rarely that we are partly wrong.........we're just always COMPLETELY wrong.

Tell me something.......are you related to Craig MacTavish or something? Because the guy can NEVER do anything wrong in your eyes. It's like he's your god or something. What, did he give you an autographed hockey stick or something?

I'm calling you out to dig up ONE post were you said something REMOTELY negative about MacT. It's like he's bloody perfect or something. Just ONE comment. Nobody is perfect Dawgbone. That's right................not even you.

You seem like a pretty smart guy Dawgbone. But your blind love (that's right) for coach MacT is so blatantly obvious that I'm almost embarrassed for you.

I can accept that you disagree. But do you ALWAYS feel a need to treat other posters like they have only been watching hockey for only a month?

Again, tiresome and very predictable.
I was leaving it alone (as I had already said my peice on the coaching), until you challenged me in your post.

Don't get all righteous on me, because judging by your comment in your post, it sounded to me like you wanted a response (specificly from me), so I gave one.

I was under the impression that you wanted a response, so I gave one. But I guess you just wanted to set me up so you could go off on me.

Nice.


Last edited by dawgbone: 12-03-2003 at 03:20 AM.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 04:16 AM
  #28
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
This is a pretty good thread. Good points on both side.

I think the main problem with the Oilers is simply that they are not winning. It's the same here in on Ottawa radio and further proves that the game of hockey is ONLY about winning and losing. I'm not gonna pretend that I can disect a team's issues or problems like G2K or Dawgbone 'cuz I can't. But ***** man, If the Oilers play bad and somehow win, the mistakes they made may come out but it's no big deal- "Bah, they won. Yes!" If the Oilers play well and lose (like against Colorado, 41 shots and SJ , 36 shots), the fans go crazy. Again, it's all about winning and losing. The fact that we are blaming coaches, goalies, 6th defensemen, 4th line forwards, etc is, IMO, a product of the team losing. Doesn't matter if they deserved to win last Friday and Sunday, they lost.

Now, I'm gonna sit nicely perched on the fence with this one. There's an old saying that coaches don't win or lose games, players do. In the Oilers' case, I think it's been a mixture. I think the players have done some right things but they haven't scored. I also think the players have made bonehead plays, bad giveways among other things. The horrible PP can be a mixture of both bad coaching and bad player decisions. I never understood what the coaches are trying to make the players do on the PP. It just looks extremely unorganized. And don't want to hear anything about "Well they practice the PP every day". Well, if your PK unit is just as bad, how good of a practice can the powerplay unit get.

I think every one should be accountable, the players and the coaches.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 06:37 AM
  #29
rabi_sultan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to rabi_sultan Send a message via AIM to rabi_sultan Send a message via MSN to rabi_sultan Send a message via Yahoo to rabi_sultan
all i want to say is that it can be taught dawgbone, when you train someone to do one thing over and over again and then put him on the line after good coaching then they will not make as many mistakes, half the great players were only good its their development coaches that made them great together with the drive to suceed.

i agree in with Dr Nostrin in that breaks can win and lose you the game and tend to even themselves out over the season so really we can't use that as an argument to the REAL problems in this team.

i also agree with comrie in that there are too many coaches correct, Moores was doing a bad job last year with special teams but at least they didnt suck like they are now. And if it is indeed Simpson in charge of special teams then salostyle won't he make the team worse when he becomes a assistant coach ? the saying i think goes too many chiefs and no indians. Reason I say this is that there seemed to be a dispute in the leadership camp over captaincy last year if thats been resolved or not is also questionable over if the team is divided or not in the dressing room and on the coache's bench.

despite too many coaches, MacT's teams have always been excellent 5on5 and that's great encouragement and this is a major plus side for MacT, however the pp, pk and line shuffling is not and i agree with salostyle on that.

HOZ its fine teaching students BUT this is true but what happens if the student is the unteachable type, or the one that is just too dumb to learn? they do exist you can't deny it since one coach can never teach everyone they will always have a faulty student.

so really i would say that the coaching job has the important aspects, teach skill, motivate players, teach strategy, create harmony/unity in the team, have hockey knowledge. for me i agree with salostyle in his one comment that sums up for me MacT :

Quote:
Originally Posted by salostyle
MacT knows the game but struggles to get the finer points across to some of his payers...the important ones.
As for the personal attacks/rants/etc to be honest its fun to read and makes me laugh a little with the comments but lets quit the slander please this isn't how this board got its repuation.


Last edited by rabi_sultan: 12-03-2003 at 03:01 PM.
rabi_sultan is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 09:35 AM
  #30
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Did you know that you can train a labrat to instinctively know how to maneuvre through a maze from start to finish at the fastest route, but the second you put it under any mental pressure (i.e. put a cat in with it), it's performance radically changes, either for better or worse?

You can hammer it into someones head how to do something, or you could have them at their absolute best, but it doesn't mean that when the time comes to perform, they won't mess up, or they won't make bad decisions.
i don't have time to kill a digital forest so i'll stick to this comment because i think some good discussion can come of it...

if a scientist can train a rat to find the cheese in the same maze every time why on earth can't macT teach hockey players to dump the puck hard of the glass when killing penalties or when pressured in their own zone?

seriously, is dumping the puck high off the boards too difficult for the likes of brewer and horcoff? how is that any more complicated than navigating a repetitive maze? get - the - puck - shoot - it - hard - and - high - off - the - glass. not rocket science.

your point seems to be that an intelligent person (scientist) can teach some of the stupidest animals on earth to efficiently complete repetitive tasks. if that is the case, macT must be awfully slow upstairs if he can't teach other humans to do an equally (relative to the intellectual capacity of the actor) simple, repetitive task.

if the oiler players would simply shoot the puck hard off the glass then the PK% would go up dramatically, the GAA would drop, and the wins would pile up.

you can argue that it's still up to the players to "do what they're told"... fair enough - but if i'm coach and the players don't do something as simple as dump the puck where the other team can't get it THEN THOSE PLAYERS SIT ON THE FREAKIN BENCH. case closed.

so either macT isn't telling them what to do or he isn't enforcing his own rules. either way, he is at least equally at fault with the players and G2K is more right than wrong in his commentary.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 09:51 AM
  #31
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretzky2kurri
It's fun making strong statements. I expect back lash at times too.

But it's truly begining to lose it's luster. Too many "Mr. half-page post dissecting hockey gods" these days.

Telling me about lab rats. Gimme a break.
But I have way more respect for you telling us what "you" think rather than listening to someone regurgitate information from the papers and media. It is way harder to open yourself up for criticism by making the first statement than sitting back and waiting to criticize.

Walsher is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 09:52 AM
  #32
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,901
vCash: 500
Simply put. A good modern day coach can utilize each individual player's strengths. They will evaluate each player's strengths and weaknesses, and be able to assign them to a position that uses their strengths to the full extent.

I don't know if any of you watch USC football, but Pete Carroll has turned a Pac-10 cellar team into a national championship contender in just two short years. The reason is that he knows what his player's strengths are and molds his system according to those strengths. He is also known to take players out of their natural positions and put them in places that can utilize their strengths to the full extent.

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 09:59 AM
  #33
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
i don't have time to kill a digital forest so i'll stick to this comment because i think some good discussion can come of it...

if a scientist can train a rat to find the cheese in the same maze every time why on earth can't macT teach hockey players to dump the puck hard of the glass when killing penalties or when pressured in their own zone?

seriously, is dumping the puck high off the boards too difficult for the likes of brewer and horcoff? how is that any more complicated than navigating a repetitive maze? get - the - puck - shoot - it - hard - and - high - off - the - glass. not rocket science.

your point seems to be that an intelligent person (scientist) can teach some of the stupidest animals on earth to efficiently complete repetitive tasks. if that is the case, macT must be awfully slow upstairs if he can't teach other humans to do an equally (relative to the intellectual capacity of the actor) simple, repetitive task.

if the oiler players would simply shoot the puck hard off the glass then the PK% would go up dramatically, the GAA would drop, and the wins would pile up.

you can argue that it's still up to the players to "do what they're told"... fair enough - but if i'm coach and the players don't do something as simple as dump the puck where the other team can't get it THEN THOSE PLAYERS SIT ON THE FREAKIN BENCH. case closed.

so either macT isn't telling them what to do or he isn't enforcing his own rules. either way, he is at least equally at fault with the players and G2K is more right than wrong in his commentary.
What on earth do you think MacT is teaching the defensive pairings on the PK - to fan on clearing attempts or to put it right on the defensmen sticks. No. Plus i hardly think it woul be a brainstorm to tell players like Smith, Cross, Staios, or Brewer that putting the puck high off the glass would make for much more successful PK results. They already know that - they aren't avoiding doing that because MacT's system is geared towards costly giveaways rather than solid dump outs. This is what DB has been saying. The fault in this scenario has to fall on the shoulders of the players. They are the ones making the ill advised flip shots rather than pounding the puck and they are the ones refusing to take the simple play in favor of reversing the puck back into a dangerous position. Watch tonight if the PK is bad. I can guarantee you the defense has plenty of opportunity to ring the puck around the glass but instead they reverse it behind their net hoping to free up space and time. The difference is the other teams have closed the gap way to fast leading to the bonehead turnovers. When you lack skill on the back end you keep it simple. That is what has made Cross, Smith, & Brewer successful in the past.

Walsher is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 10:07 AM
  #34
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walsher
What on earth do you think MacT is teaching the defensive pairings on the PK - to fan on clearing attempts or to put it right on the defensmen sticks. No. Plus i hardly think it woul be a brainstorm to tell players like Smith, Cross, Staios, or Brewer that putting the puck high off the glass would make for much more successful PK results. They already know that - they aren't avoiding doing that because MacT's system is geared towards costly giveaways rather than solid dump outs. This is what DB has been saying. The fault in this scenario has to fall on the shoulders of the players. They are the ones making the ill advised flip shots rather than pounding the puck and they are the ones refusing to take the simple play in favor of reversing the puck back into a dangerous position. Watch tonight if the PK is bad. I can guarantee you the defense has plenty of opportunity to ring the puck around the glass but instead they reverse it behind their net hoping to free up space and time. The difference is the other teams have closed the gap way to fast leading to the bonehead turnovers. When you lack skill on the back end you keep it simple. That is what has made Cross, Smith, & Brewer successful in the past.
re-read the part in my post that is bolded with CAPITAL LETTERS mr. smartass. i gather from your rhetoric that you are assuming the oiler players are unteachable. if that is the case, why bother with a coach at all?

teaching requires reward and punishment. the only people macT seems to punish are isbister, hemsky, bergeron, and semenov. how is THAT "good coaching"?

of course, i'm sure you'll only "half read" my post and respond with some more pedantic commentary along the lines of "if macT was coach of a veteran team he'd have a winning record". well, duh. the whole point to my argument (and i believe G2K's argument as well) as that the oilers need a coach who can TEACH the players what to do in certain situations - not a coach who simply EXPECTS them to do it right. there is a difference you know.

macT is a fine coach but he is a crappy teacher.

prove me wrong.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 10:16 AM
  #35
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
re-read the part in my post that is bolded with CAPITAL LETTERS mr. smartass. i gather from your rhetoric that you are assuming the oiler players are unteachable. if that is the case, why bother with a coach at all?

teaching requires reward and punishment. the only people macT seems to punish are isbister, hemsky, bergeron, and semenov. how is THAT "good coaching"?

of course, i'm sure you'll only "half read" my post and respond with some more pedantic commentary along the lines of "if macT was coach of a veteran team he'd have a winning record". well, duh. the whole point to my argument (and i believe G2K's argument as well) as that the oilers need a coach who can TEACH the players what to do in certain situations - not a coach who simply EXPECTS them to do it right. there is a difference you know.

macT is a fine coach but he is a crappy teacher.

prove me wrong.
An who do you propose fill the minutes of the top 4 defensemen on PK? Bergeron, Ferguson, Bobby Allen, Doug Lynch? I read your post - but if you intend on benching your top 4 defensemen then your PK will only plummit deeper into the cellar. This is a problem the players have to fix. Everyone of the defensemen have been making these plays. Bergeron was runner up for rookie of the month yet his defensive zone lapses are as visible as any others. Ferguson is effective as a #6 man but his footspeed affects his ability to kill penalties. He has a reduced ability to close gaps on the puck holder and getting behind the net to get the puck with any pressure. Beside how is it possible for you to argue MacT is a bad teacher? Are you at practices watching his work? Billy Moores is well known as one of the best teachers of the game in this community, he is a member of the coaching staff is he too now incompetent? I guarantee he is not. I am not going to preach inexperience because frankly stating the obvious gets annoying to everyone - I think the Oilers have adequate experience in the positions that are making the mistakes. That being top 4 defensmen and the talented forwards. To me the inexperiencedare playing the best so I try to avoid that argument. Torres, Stoll, Salmo, Conks have been the most consistent performers when they have had ice. Smyth, Cross, Brewer, Smith, Laraque, etc are the vets who have been extremely innefective. To me this problem runs much deeper than a coach's inneffective "teaching" the experienced players are playing with lack of understanding of how important these games are becoming.

Walsher is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 10:37 AM
  #36
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
i don't have time to kill a digital forest so i'll stick to this comment because i think some good discussion can come of it...

if a scientist can train a rat to find the cheese in the same maze every time why on earth can't macT teach hockey players to dump the puck hard of the glass when killing penalties or when pressured in their own zone?

seriously, is dumping the puck high off the boards too difficult for the likes of brewer and horcoff? how is that any more complicated than navigating a repetitive maze? get - the - puck - shoot - it - hard - and - high - off - the - glass. not rocket science.

your point seems to be that an intelligent person (scientist) can teach some of the stupidest animals on earth to efficiently complete repetitive tasks. if that is the case, macT must be awfully slow upstairs if he can't teach other humans to do an equally (relative to the intellectual capacity of the actor) simple, repetitive task.

if the oiler players would simply shoot the puck hard off the glass then the PK% would go up dramatically, the GAA would drop, and the wins would pile up.

you can argue that it's still up to the players to "do what they're told"... fair enough - but if i'm coach and the players don't do something as simple as dump the puck where the other team can't get it THEN THOSE PLAYERS SIT ON THE FREAKIN BENCH. case closed.

so either macT isn't telling them what to do or he isn't enforcing his own rules. either way, he is at least equally at fault with the players and G2K is more right than wrong in his commentary.
Unfortunately, the Oilers don't have the personael to have those players sit on the bench.

Look at the culprits... I will go out on a limb and say Steve Staois is on the PK for well over half the goals, and has made several very stupid plays while killing the penalty, and seems to get burned on almost all of them. Mac-T can't really sit him, because there aren't any other options. As little as Bergeron and Ferguson can play on the PK, the better off the Oilers are. As for the forwards, the Oilers don't have many players who you would think of as top penalty killers, and it is the usually reliable guys that have really killed this team on the PK. I would also love to see how many PP goals the Oilers have given up as a result of lost draws in their own end. The Oilers do not have a single player at or above 50% on short-handed draws, and that is a very telling stat.

On the pp, you have forwards who have constantly done this on the power play:

Winds up at the Oilers blueline, attempts to carry the puck into the zone, gets stood up by 2 or 3 players, and does a soft dump in while everyone is standing around, simply letting the other team picking up the puck, and easily firing it out.

Part of my whole problem, is I am seeing a lot of this (in a stripped down way).

Make players accountable, but don't change the lines for 10 games to allow the players to gel...

I guess I just don't understand...

dawgbone is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 01:30 PM
  #37
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I was leaving it alone (as I had already said my peice on the coaching), until you challenged me in your post.

Don't get all righteous on me, because judging by your comment in your post, it sounded to me like you wanted a response (specificly from me), so I gave one.

I was under the impression that you wanted a response, so I gave one. But I guess you just wanted to set me up so you could go off on me.

Nice.
Actually DB I didn't want a response from you, I just expected one. And that's cool. It was in no way a set up.

I feel I went a bit far (I'll work on it)

I just need to realise that not every poster is going to respond in the same style.

When I disagree with the majority of a post I usually just grab a couple of the more glaring points from the post and make a response to them.

I don't break the ENTIRE post down into 15(?) sections and scrutinize every word like a CSI investigator pawing over vital evidence. I mean seriously, go back to the snips you took out and look at the length of your responses in comparison to the selected clippings. That was one of my longer posts and your combined replys freaking dwarfed it. Gee......I guess I was REALLY wrong. I was waiting for you to say that I used the wrong finger when I hit the "enter" button for crying out loud.

Anyway, like I said earlier, I feel I went a bit far. And after waiting a while (cooling off) and going back and re-reading your "turbo-reply", I realised there really is no reason to get excited about anything you have to say.

I didn't really need to try and make you look like a dolt-boy. Your reply was self-dolting "style of response" all on it's own.

Happy hunting Grissom.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 01:37 PM
  #38
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretzky2kurri
Actually DB I didn't want a response from you, I just expected one. And that's cool. It was in no way a set up.

I feel I went a bit far (I'll work on it)

I just need to realise that not every poster is going to respond in the same style.

When I disagree with the majority of a post I usually just grab a couple of the more glaring points from the post and make a response to them.

I don't break the ENTIRE post down into 15(?) sections and scrutinize every word like a CSI investigator pawing over vital evidence. I mean seriously, go back to the snips you took out and look at the length of your responses in comparison to the selected clippings. That was one of my longer posts and your combined replys freaking dwarfed it. Gee......I guess I was REALLY wrong. I was waiting for you to say that I used the wrong finger when I hit the "enter" button for crying out loud.

Anyway, like I said earlier, I feel I went a bit far. And after waiting a while (cooling off) and going back and re-reading your "turbo-reply", I realised there really is no reason to get excited about anything you have to say.

I didn't really need to try and make you look like a dolt-boy. Your reply was self-dolting "style of response" all on it's own.

Happy hunting Grissom.
lol... well, like I said, I thought you wanted a response like that from me... I like challenges, especially ones where they go "you can never convince me..."

As for me only responding and trying to prove everyone wrong... I usually don't post something along the lines of "I agree with everything you said"... to me that is a waste of bandwidth and serves no real purpose other than to help assist the server crash.

The only time I post to something I agree with is when I want to add something. That is the way I am and always will be... I am not going to change that because some people don't like it.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 01:48 PM
  #39
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
lol... well, like I said, I thought you wanted a response like that from me... I like challenges, especially ones where they go "you can never convince me..."

As for me only responding and trying to prove everyone wrong... I usually don't post something along the lines of "I agree with everything you said"... to me that is a waste of bandwidth and serves no real purpose other than to help assist the server crash.

The only time I post to something I agree with is when I want to add something. That is the way I am and always will be... I am not going to change that because some people don't like it.
I usually only post when I disagree also. Hippie love-fests are boring. I just do it different than you. Alot of people do.

I won't change (too much) either. In the past I've taken you WAY to seriously. And that doesn't make me look very good. So certain people have been telling me.

I actually DO make mistakes. That's life.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 02:41 PM
  #40
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,901
vCash: 500
just to jump in here...I don't know if anyone else noticed this but I think Lawndemon, Dawgbone, and G2K have very similar posting styles. Your straight shooting, speak whatever's on your mind approach adds some color to the Oilers board, instead of having every poster here agree on what everyone else says...It sometimes feels like you're all the same person and i often have to check your screen names to see who's saying what...its eerie.
there's never a dull moment here with you guys around, thats for sure. :p

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 03:14 PM
  #41
Lowetide
Registered User
 
Lowetide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,281
vCash: 500
I want to choose my words carefully here because it's not an easy issue.

MacTavish does some things that drive everyone nuts, there's no doubt. His constant line juggling, putting Cross on the PP, belittling the refs then wondering why they screw him blue in the third period, it's enough to drive me to (more) beer.

I dont think he's a good teacher, either. He doesn't really seem to have had a huge impact on any particular prospect. I remember when he broke down Poti's game the first camp and Poti has been broken since.

And yet, I'm not prepared to say he's a bad coach. I can agree he's ill suited to a young bunch like this, and that a more veteran squad would have more success with MacT as leader.

We can't overlook the fact, though, that he's gotten 90 point seasons out of the Oilers since he's been coaching, and made the playoffs more often than not, despite a constantly changing roster and (this season) no center who can win a faceoff.

There are certainly better coaches out there, and there are most certainly worse coaches too.

I know this is fence sitting, but I sincerely believe that the Oilers are where they should be, and a new coach won't change what they are to any great extent. Until they can insert some veterans to show the way, then the Oilers are a 7th-10th place team with a reputation of being entertaining.

Lowetide is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 03:51 PM
  #42
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowetide
I want to choose my words carefully here because it's not an easy issue.

MacTavish does some things that drive everyone nuts, there's no doubt. His constant line juggling, putting Cross on the PP, belittling the refs then wondering why they screw him blue in the third period, it's enough to drive me to (more) beer.

I dont think he's a good teacher, either. He doesn't really seem to have had a huge impact on any particular prospect. I remember when he broke down Poti's game the first camp and Poti has been broken since.

And yet, I'm not prepared to say he's a bad coach. I can agree he's ill suited to a young bunch like this, and that a more veteran squad would have more success with MacT as leader.

We can't overlook the fact, though, that he's gotten 90 point seasons out of the Oilers since he's been coaching, and made the playoffs more often than not, despite a constantly changing roster and (this season) no center who can win a faceoff.

There are certainly better coaches out there, and there are most certainly worse coaches too.

I know this is fence sitting, but I sincerely believe that the Oilers are where they should be, and a new coach won't change what they are to any great extent. Until they can insert some veterans to show the way, then the Oilers are a 7th-10th place team with a reputation of being entertaining.
You forgot, "fun to play against".......lol.

I really wish we coulda ended up with someone like Babcock or that guy in Tampa (John Tortillashell?).

I'm not saying coaches like them are the ticket to the cup, but I want someone who's played a bit, but coached/taught a LONG time. Not played a LONG time and coached/taught a bit.

Julien played a bit and has been coaching a while now. I was a little upset when he ended up in Montreal. I guess because I had hoped he would eventually be MacTs ticket out of here. Probably the wrong reasons to want him in here......because I'm not very familiar what type of coach he is. He isn't really turning that Hab club around yet.

DB followed last years Dawgs pretty good. He likely has a better idea what kind of coach Julien really would have been. Jim of course would have some insight too.

There are rare instances where ex-NHL vets become immediate successes. I would rather put my money on a career coach. And he doesn't have to have been an Oiler at one time either.....lol.

Coaching for a club like we have here is very vital. Good coaching is about the only thing we can afford. It's about the only thing we can go top dollar on, because their salary ceiling is quite low compared to even fringe plumbers in this league.

I'm hoping Lowe considers this. I'm not around the coach and GM every day of course. But I have a hunch Lowe has some partially blind loyalty for his ex-Oiler glory day buddy, Craig. This hunch disturbs me.

If this team has a faltering PP and PK by the end of the season (they won't make the post-season as a result) then Lowe needs to take "old yeller" behind the wood shed.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 04:07 PM
  #43
hmminvisiblecola1279
I just hope we can
 
hmminvisiblecola1279's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: win a game
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,595
vCash: 1072
lol man oh man i missed a fun time. certainly won't go on a long winded discussion but i agree with g2k, the oilers need a coach that will teach these guys. enough said all sides have spoken so what i add is squat. time to listen to the game on the radio. expect the lines to be shuffled right off the bat.

hmminvisiblecola1279 is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 04:11 PM
  #44
Behind Enemy Lines
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 3,790
vCash: 500
I'll join Lowtide in the fence sitting. I for one do not believe this is a black-and-white issue. I place accountability on both the coach and this team's personnel. MacTavish has made some questionable coaching decisions including use/non-use of time-outs at critical times, excessive loyalty to some players, and perhaps working the blender. However MacT has also found chemistry with Torres, York, Hemsky. Bergeron and Stoll are blossoming. Craig Simpson was hired to work with the Power Play and while I like Simpson's cerebral approach he and the assistants do not deserve a free pass from accountabilities. Some suggestions made here to promote Simpson to head coach seem crazy when he has not yet achieved success in his core duties.

The Oiler personnel must also be accountable for these team results. This defense is paper thin and an area of concern (I felt) going into this season. Simple, responsible decision making is critical and this team, coaching or not, is prone to making back decisions. It is also evident that several players such as Isbister and Laraque require 'tough love' to motivate rather than self-motivation. Eric Brewer and Ryan Smyth have not contributed the veteran consistency expected of them. Finally, Injuries - no excuse - have contributed to shaky and erratic play.

Coaching a young, inexperience team imo is like walking a tightrope. It is a delicate balance between nurturing and teaching to instill confidence while also at times delivering tough love when mistakes begin repeating themselves and lessons are not learned.

Through this difficult patch I have viewed some positive. The Oates signing will help in many facets. Salo will return healthy - physically and hopefully mentally. We've seen youth rise to the opportunity with Salmo, Stoll, Conklin. This team has rallied several times in games to come back.
And we are still in the race.

Behind Enemy Lines is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 04:28 PM
  #45
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Man.. read this thread late and I don't think I have the nerve to post here. I'm happy just reading. Besides, I think most of my points on MacT have been well discussed by the posters on this thread. In the meantime, I'll just read along until something catches my eye.

momentai is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 05:27 PM
  #46
HOZ
Registered User
 
HOZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gretzky2kurri
HOZ

Has Lemaire become a bad coach now? Since his team is losing, that means he has lost the respect of his players and they are just not listening...right?

I just knew you would resort to being ridiculous HOZ. What other alternative would you have.....right?

I can't even name another player on that team besides Gaborik. Oh yeah....Willie Mitchell.

I have a hunch that Lemaire is doing his job sufficiently.

How about that guy in Tampa? John Tortellashell? Any beleivers on that team?
Hardly ridiculous. Lemaire's team has gone to he quarter finals. Now they are playing poorly. According to you this means, if it was MAcTavish, the players have stopped listening and lost their respect for their coach.

And since you like Keenan so much. How about Florida. How did he do there? Answer: Got fired.

As for a system. Hows watching that Minnesota sytem? Betcha you could hear the paint dry!

Just about forgot...just an add-on
Off the top of my head...
Dupuis
Dowd
Kuba
Zyuzin
Shultz
and...ehem...Daigle

A very decent core of players....ok, not Daigle


Last edited by HOZ: 12-03-2003 at 05:31 PM.
HOZ is offline  
Old
12-03-2003, 05:47 PM
  #47
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
Man.. read this thread late and I don't think I have the nerve to post here.
LOL.....I'm climbing back into my fox hole. The Oilers are facing a loss tonight.

Mortars will be flying.

gretzky2kurri 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 09:10 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.