I get that normally a team that hates all its coaches would be a warning flag, but in their defence, it's not like we're hiring Scotty Bowman clones here. We're talking about one coach that had to work in Europe because he couldn't get an NHL job, and another one who just has no business being a head coach anywhere.
And now we have another coach without any kind of established credibility.
My question is this: Why put all the effort into building a talented team, just to skimp out on the guy in charge of deploying and managing that team?
Like, I don't get it. Do we (GM/Owners) don't believe that you also need a great ("good" at the very least) coach to be a great team? Are we of the mindset that it's 90% players and 10% coach? You can have the best player in the history of the game on your team, but if your coach decides to sit him and have a defenceman take his place in the shootout in the biggest game of the season... what good is that?
/end rant
|