Just some info on Tippett that I personally find interesting.
Yes, Coyote hockey has to be the most boring type of hockey around. They became the new Minnesota Wild, and the NJ Devils before that. However, keep this in mind:
Coyotes didn't have much offensive talent. A very structured team-oriented approach to defence was basically the only way for that lousy team to ever have a chance every game.
One thing that I remember reading (and that I can't find right now, unfortunately) during the search after Hartley was fired was an article on Tippett and how his fame for being a boring, overly defensive oriented coach is undeserved. Apparently in his previous stops, he had his teams playing a more up-tempo style. I wish I could find the article, as it is just coming from memory a couple of seasons back, but thought I would share that.
Now, here is another article that I found while looking for the above article, and I find it rather interesting, especially considering that this team is composed of 6 (more or less) puck-moving defencemen.
http://archive.azcentral.com/sports/...rfect-fit.html
Interesting tidbit on managing player TOI.
Quote:
Every 10 games, Coyotes coach Dave Tippett posts a report card on the wall. Players circle like hawks, eager to learn their score, where they stand.
These are not ordinary statistics. These are player-efficiency ratings, the evolution of a system born in Tippett's brain more than 15 years ago, a quantifiable look at how every member of the Coyotes spends his ice time.
"What we've done is put a value on everything that happens in a game, from goal scoring to assists to fights to shots and shots blocked," Tippett said. "And then we break that down per minute played."
And that's why players are so interested. You can't expect more ice time if you don't have the numbers to back it up.
|
Quote:
"I'll give you an example," he said. "We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did a 10-game analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can't move the puck.
"Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn't defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he's making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he's only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."
|
It is an interesting take, and one that I think most of us share. I don't think that Kris Russell would be getting a lot of minutes under Tippett. I do think that most - if not all - of the existing defencemen would fit what Tippett expects.
Anyway, I was 100% against Tippett, but doing a bit of research leads me to believe that he might actually be a very good replacement, and if Gulutzan does indeed get the axe and Tippett takes over, I would at least keep a very open mind about him. If for nothing else, he quickly turned both the Stars and the Coyotes around, and the Kings had a 25 point improvement the season that he was brought on as an assistant coach.
Sutter is still my first choice, but Tippett doesn't sound so bad to me either. I don't think for a second that Ruff would even get interviewed - his system was much like Hartley's, and Treliving didn't agree with it.
This talk is all moot anyway seeing as the Flames still have a coach, but thought I would share what I know about Tippett. I don't think he would come in here and turn this team into Coyotes 2.0, but rather just make this team better at both ends of the ice.