Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Leadership isn't easy.
Darryl goes to coach LA, which is also a 'project' team who needs someone to put them over the hump. He wins 2 cups.
He comes to coach Calgary, another 'project' team who needs someone to push them.
2 best players get traded, GM gets fired, he gets fired halfway into his tenure.
At the same time LA, with some of the same players that were part of Darryl's group are still there, and have managed to go from winning the Stanley Cup with Darryl, kinda sucking which led to Darryl get fired, to small rebuild, to making playoffs again with younger team but some core pieces still being there.
Question is, how much of a difference does a strong leadership group among the players mean, and how much is attributed to that group being able to help dictate the direction of the team.
Like with not practising the PP. There is no way a strong leadership group to whom the coaching staff actually listens would allow that to pass for even a day. But in this case it went on for weeks?
A lot of what happened here makes no sense.
Change of leadership can make a huge difference, as people get stale and are not willing to work with one another, however at the same time I feel that strong leadership can make the same group of people who hate each other learn to work with each other and be successful. Especially when you have a group of people (NHL players) who for the most part have worked hard most of their careers to be successful.
|
There are a few things you can point to I think in differences between LA and Calgary:
1) Location - obviously - being in LA during the winter is better than Calgary
2) Star player nationality - Gaudreau and Tkachuk were both American and may have preferred going back to the US. Became more of an issue during covid.
3) Winning - does everyone leave if they beat Edmonton and have a convincing series against Colorado in the WCF or win a cup?