Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
Bob Hartley is not Scotty Bowman. It's one thing to be hated and win wherever you go and something different to be hated and only win at only one of your NHL stops and that on a stacked team that probably would have won the cup with any competent head coach.
|
I would not be so easily dismissive of any coach that wins the cup.
Sure, the Avs were stacked. How many other coaches fail to win with stacked teams? How many disappointments happen? Tonnes.
Also, because they were a stacked team, how do you manage that? How do you manage those personalities? How do you come up with line combos, assign responsibilities, design a system that helps that team win, and manage the personalities of guys who want the ice time and puck touches? How do you go in there and tell a Sakic or a Forsberg that your game stinks right now, and you need to be better?
People gloss over the whole 'stacked team', but don't consider that it is probably really difficult coaching a team that is so stacked. During the playoffs, you also have to account for injuries and deciding who you should limit, how to counter what the opposing team is doing, decide on what lines to break up and try to shake up a team before it is too late, etc.
In my opinion, there are two ways that I look at coaching and see who is a good coach, and who is a poor coach. First - championship wins. Secondly, how often that coach got a crap team turned around.
Hartley won the cup with the Avs. Check.
Hartley got the crappy Atlanta team turned around, and got Calgary turned around (during a rebuild no less).
That's fairly impressive. You might argue Atlanta, but every season under Hartley was an improvement, and after he was fired early in his last season, that team did worse.
You can disagree on his methods, you might be right that he has a short shelf life, but you can't dismiss the fact that he won a cup, and generally everywhere he goes he makes a team play better than what the expectations are. That's a good coach to me.
Look at the Calgary Flames. Where does he rank all time? Yep, Calgary has been a team with a long track record of hiring terrible coaches, but they have some very good ones also.
If I am going to order my list, it would probably be something like:
'Badger' Bob Johnson -> Darryl Sutter -> Bob Hartley -> Terry Crisp -> Dave King
I would have put Crisp much higher on the list since he won a cup (especially here!), but look at his record in Tampa - it was atrocious. I would argue that if there was a coach who got 'lucky' in winning a championship, it was him with Calgary, but I am sure he still made the right decisions to see the Flames through to the end that season. His other seasons in Calgary? I can't say the Flames were better than the expectations, and I can't say that they were running like a well-oiled machine either. They were a top team that seemed disjointed to me from what I remember, but it came together for them in '89.
Badger had those teams running really well - above expectations - and later went on to win a couple of cups in Pittsburgh (should have won a couple in Calgary).
Sutter came in and got the Flames turned around and playing way above expectations, and they were a well-oiled machine.
Hartley's tenure? He took a rebuilding squad with this roster:
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...000432015.html and he turned that into a playoff team.
That's damn good in my opinion. He has somewhat of a history of turning a poor roster into a competitive one. He has a history of taking a good team all the way. That to me is a proven coach. He has done both.
He is better IMO than a Bruce Boudreau who takes stacked teams and makes them into playoff disappointments. Who has never taken a crap team and made them strong. There are a lot of over-hyped coaches who haven't won anything, and haven't ever went to a poor team and made them better.
This is why I sometimes shake my head at people saying Hartley was a bad coach, and who was just simply 'lucky' in winning a cup. Lots and lots of other coaches don't do it. Lots and lots of other coaches don't get bad teams to play well either.
Short shelf-life or not, it is difficult to deny that Hartley gets results when he coaches. If I am a GM and I feel that I am in the hot seat, I may take a look at Hartley and feel he is my best shot to remain employed by taking my under-performing squad further.