Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Unless I completely misunderstood your original argument, then this is the only point I'm trying to make.
You can't say that Bill Peters is a bad coach because Eric Staal struggled under his tenure (that is how I understand your argument). There are examples of other players excelling in the same structure. One player under performs. A similar player exceeds expectations. Which of these facts is indicative of a coach's quality?
The answer is neither. Did Bill Peters get the most out of his top players? Yes for some, no for others.
GranteedEV's comprehensive analysis of style in relation to players and coaching systems is more relevant to assessing a coach's quality, at least with respect to the team he coached. It's speculative when applied to another team's players, but it has more merit.
|
See, I think, using a Gulutzan as an example that
- the roster was good enough to make the playoffs
- many, many individuals underperformed
- a few (top line and Tkachuk) did well
- the ones that performed well are the elite talent or fortunate enough to be the winger playing with 2 elite players
- almost everyone else on the whole team underperformed
- no it didn’t balance out
- badly coached team lost too many games
I am asking with Peters if this may be a concern.
Anecdotally he has many of the same general criticisms as Gulutzan
I think that there is concern in a franchise player becoming temporarily mediocre
I’m not saying the guy is a bad coach. But there are a few big red flags. And I don’t think you can simply look past them. You absolutely have to look deeper, but I have not seen them as summarily dismissible