Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyT
Retro brought up the change from Sutter to Playfair on the morning show today I think that's comparable. Sutter was a drill Sargent, as was Hartley, and then you bring in a guy who isn't suppose to do that, problem is with a young team they now have to motivate themselves on a daily basis and there's a definite learning period for that. Add in new contact expectations for your stars and a bad start and now you have a young team trying to find motivation themselves who are a fragile glass ball tumbling down a rocky cliff that feel like every mistake they make ends up with a red light going on.
I don't think Gully is that bad of coach, he definitely has his issues, but he's been setup to fail this season. I think playoffs are already essentially out of the picture this season, now management has to decide if they stick out with and hope that the team starts to perform under Gully and next season is better, or do they fire him and hope whoever comes in the interim can reinstill an indentity in this team. If you do fire him, then the question becomes A) can you hire another players coach, or have your core learned nothing and we need to go back to basics? B) Who is out there coaching wise that could be with your team for the foreseeable future?
Not a fun time to be in hockey ops, but you've made decisions that got you to the point you're at now and now your being paid to fix it.
|
I think the Playfair comparison is a great one. My lasting image of Playfair will always be biting his finger nails on the bench when the game got tight (and that time he lost his marbles and ripped off his jackets in the AHL). PLayfair was brought in as a defensive specialist to take over a winning team from Sutter and struggled with being a leader. Similarly, GG has the technical knowledge and looks like he is a great "teacher" (this was a core requirement in Playfair's search), however he is not a great leader/motivator and therefore continues to fail as a coach.This is most evident in the culture of the team.
I am not in the bring back Hartley camp, but for the last two years, the identity of the team was clear. You could ask any fan, any media personel or any player and they would tell you that the culture of this team was hard work with an "always earned, never given" mantra. As fans we disagreed with that it meant to "earn", but the culture was clear. This year you have a bunch of snowflakes drifting in the wind without a unifying vision, purpose or culture, because GG simply didn't have one to start the season. Instead we have the following:
1. We want to be a team that wants to be tough to play against, and yet we try to keep the puck off the boards because we cant win those battles against tough teams.
2. We want to be a fast team, but we focus on puck possession instead of a quick transition.
3. We want to be a team that moves as a 5 man unit and yet we line up at the opposition blue line waiting for one guy with speed to enter the zone.
Yes there is more the leadership on this team could be doing, but this is a team that is very coachable because they put their head down and lead by example. There is no one in that room that strikes me as a pump up the addrenaline kind of guy. The closest may be Elliot, but he has enough in his own house to worry about rather than going after the rest of the team.
Something to think about...
-Jonathan Toews is not Jonathan Toews without Joel Quenville behind him.
-Anze Kopitar and Drew Doughty are not the leaders they are without Darryl Sutter.
At the end of the day, even the most experienced leaders are in their early 30s, this is why we have coaches.