This core has a long history of inconsistent efforts and not starting games on time. There are major issues with the leadership group and the core of this team.
That being said Ward is exacerbating these issues. This is a team that looks like they are confused and unsure about what they are supposed to be doing out on the ice. It appears as if they are playing different systems on different days, most games they just fall back and play protect the net and then dump the puck into the neutral and offensive zones, other games they play a more aggressive puck pursuit style of play.
Last season Ward's best attribute seemed to be his communication, this season, looking in from the outside that seems to have gone away.
The lineup choices are beyond odd, scratching Bennett and not telling him why, scratching Nesterov in the middle of three game winning streak, scratching Leivo just as his game is starting to turn a corner. Burying your top line (Tkachuk/Lindholm) in defensive zone starts all season. Dressing guys like Rinaldo and Robinson and playing them under 5 mins.
This has other issues than the coach that is for certain, but the biggest issue right now is Ward. I didn't like the way he coached last season and in the return to play and I like the way he is coaching now even less. He maybe the worst coach I have seen coach this team in recent memory.
If this team does make the playoffs it will be squarely on the back of Markstrom.
Lol. It didn’t work. Give me the benefit of the doubt
How do you know Mangiapane didn’t just have a brain cramp? Lindholm challenged the point, the puck goes over to Boeser who has a free lane into the circle. It’s 5 on 5 but the instinct to collapse with an empty net might easily be on a player, not a coach. After all, they were pretty aggressive 6 on 5.
I’ve come to realize what I expect will be a very unpopular opinion.
I believe many posters look at Ward as being their real life boss. They take out their multiple frustrations out on him , with very little idea of what he actually does and what his job envelopes.
What a bad take.
This thread has many posts showing exactly what people don't like about his tactics with examples, statistics, graphs and all sorts of objective items.
Instead of responding to those with specific things to support his coaching, you've dreamt up some weird scenarios of work life emulation is going on??
If you like Ward, that's absolutely fine. How about listing the specific tactics and strategies of his you like as a response to others.
No need to dream up a weird emotional scenario.
For the record, I don't have a boss and think Ward is under qualified for the job. Must be some other frustrations in my life I'm taking out on him
Last edited by Winsor_Pilates; 02-16-2021 at 03:23 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Winsor_Pilates For This Useful Post:
My biggest issue was less about having Lindholm on the wing, but more about having Monahan taking an important defensive zone faceoff. Monahan is 47% on faceoffs this year, and is terrible defensively. Lindholm should have been taking that faceoff, even if it was on his offside.
How do you know Mangiapane didn’t just have a brain cramp? Lindholm challenged the point, the puck goes over to Boeser who has a free lane into the circle. It’s 5 on 5 but the instinct to collapse with an empty net might easily be on a player, not a coach. After all, they were pretty aggressive 6 on 5.
It more had to do with the coach throwing together a new line rather than using one of his normal lines.
At any rate, I don’t plan to expend the energy to rationalize how the unfamiliar and new line combination that got scored on was somehow actually a good coaching decision.
Tre certainly deserves his share of criticism for the coaching hires but we act like the Vigneaults and Laviolettes and Gallants were all begging and lining up to coach here...I'm pretty sure the players would have given their vote of confidence to keep things rolling under Wardo and have this "family" stick together for at least another season/playoff run.
It more had to do with the coach throwing together a new line rather than using one of his normal lines.
At any rate, I don’t plan to expend the energy to rationalize how the unfamiliar and new line combination that got scored on was somehow actually a good coaching decision.
I’m not saying it was a good coaching decision. I’m saying Mangiapane screwed up. And his screwup was not necessarily from doing something he was coached to do. Which is what IO was responding to.
Tre certainly deserves his share of criticism for the coaching hires but we act like the Vigneaults and Laviolettes and Gallants were all begging and lining up to coach here...I'm pretty sure the players would have given their vote of confidence to keep things rolling under Wardo and have this "family" stick together for at least another season/playoff run.
I think it's the opposite. Anytime the organization was hiring a coach, and people brought up big names, several people have chimed in to say that those coaches may not be willing to come here. I don't think anyone has said Calgary is a top coaching destination. That being said there are only 32 NHL coaching jobs and good coaches are currently unemployed so they would really have to hate Canada to not consider the job. Also, it's been widely reported that Treliving didn't even contact any other candidates when he hired Peters.
I think it's the opposite. Anytime the organization was hiring a coach, and people brought up big names, several people have chimed in to say that those coaches may not be willing to come here. I don't think anyone has said Calgary is a top coaching destination. That being said there are only 32 NHL coaching jobs and good coaches are currently unemployed so they would really have to hate Canada to not consider the job. Also, it's been widely reported that Treliving didn't even contact any other candidates when he hired Peters.
The Peters deal was not Treliving’s best work because of the reason you stated. Of course, lots of posters here think Peters was a good coach, though obviously he couldn’t remain.
After the Peters fiasco and because Ward had some success, and because of the weird season, a coaching hire was a little more difficult IMO. There wasn’t even a guarantee of a season and that may have caused some available coaches some issues.
I do think think the Seattle opportunity may be on the minds of some like Gallant, who has obvious experience. It’s a pretty easy landing spot compared to Calgary.
I think it's the opposite. Anytime the organization was hiring a coach, and people brought up big names, several people have chimed in to say that those coaches may not be willing to come here. I don't think anyone has said Calgary is a top coaching destination. That being said there are only 32 NHL coaching jobs and good coaches are currently unemployed so they would really have to hate Canada to not consider the job. Also, it's been widely reported that Treliving didn't even contact any other candidates when he hired Peters.
Fair enough...the 'not interviewing anyone else' thing always bothered me, but this last time around we don't really know what the delay was in announcing Ward do we? Hard to believe there wasn't at least some due diligence and consideration into bringing in another coach, but would the grass really be greener? Hard to say. I personally would have liked to see an experienced hard-ass to get this roster to reach its full potential but hell at this point I don't even know if that would have truly made a lasting difference.
The truth of the matter is that this organization refuses to pay for top-tier coaching.
There's an argument to be made for finally bringing in a top tier coach, however, this core group has churned through 3 previous coaches, all with fairly similar results of tuning out the message one year into the tenure.
Can this be attributed to lacklustre coaching or a lacklustre core? It's pretty easy to base yet another mediocre season coming down the pipe on Ward when we've all seen this same performance play out with 4 different voices now. For these reasons, I have a hard time pinning anything on the coach.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
Last edited by Hot_Flatus; 02-16-2021 at 02:27 PM.
Fair enough...the 'not interviewing anyone else' thing always bothered me, but this last time around we don't really know what the delay was in announcing Ward do we? Hard to believe there wasn't at least some due diligence and consideration into bringing in another coach, but would the grass really be greener? Hard to say. I personally would have liked to see an experienced hard-ass to get this roster to reach its full potential but hell at this point I don't even know if that would have truly made a lasting difference.
It’s funny that lots of people want a hard-ass coach (which is fine - I get it) but then they talk about getting Boudreau and Gallant. That’s not how either of them actually coached as I understand it. Both are super player friendly and I recall when Boudreau tried to be a disciplinarian once (I think for the Caps) it went badly because it just wasn’t him. Is it because people look at them and think they are hard-asses because they are balding beefy guys?
It’s funny that lots of people want a hard-ass coach (which is fine - I get it) but then they talk about getting Boudreau and Gallant. That’s not how either of them actually coached as I understand it. Both are super player friendly and I recall when Boudreau tried to be a disciplinarian once (I think for the Caps) it went badly because it just wasn’t him. Is it because people look at them and think they are hard-asses because they are balding beefy guys?
Hartley was as hard assed as it gets and ultimately it's what lead to his demise in Calgary. Now people are clamoring for a return to the madness?
When this many voices achieve the same result, it's not the voice that's the problem.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
It’s funny that lots of people want a hard-ass coach (which is fine - I get it) but then they talk about getting Boudreau and Gallant. That’s not how either of them actually coached as I understand it. Both are super player friendly and I recall when Boudreau tried to be a disciplinarian once (I think for the Caps) it went badly because it just wasn’t him. Is it because people look at them and think they are hard-asses because they are balding beefy guys?
lol yea probably... Gallant just looks like a mean son of a...
I think nowadays most players would relate/respond moreso to a 'players coach' anyways but also someone who can give a good kick in the arse when the team's core is too incompetent to do it themselves...
Hartley was as hard assed as it gets and ultimately it's what lead to his demise in Calgary. Now people are clamoring for a return to the madness?
When this many voices achieve the same result, it's not the voice that's the problem.
I think it is more nuanced than "hard ass" - Hartley was nasty, so was Babcock. There are "hard ass" coaches that manage to get along and have respectful relationships with players - Sutter, Tortorella, for example.
I think it is more nuanced than "hard ass" - Hartley was nasty, so was Babcock. There are "hard ass" coaches that manage to get along and have respectful relationships with players - Sutter, Tortorella, for example.
Yes...hard-ass ain't the same as a**hole playing mind games with players
...although I'll always like him for instigating that Canucks/Torts debacle lol
I think it is more nuanced than "hard ass" - Hartley was nasty, so was Babcock. There are "hard ass" coaches that manage to get along and have respectful relationships with players - Sutter, Tortorella, for example.
I think you’d be surprised at how many players disliked Sutter.
ETA: Then again, some very well-liked Flames reportedly hated Badger Bob, who I put at the top of Flames coaches.
I think you’d be surprised at how many players disliked Sutter.
ETA: Then again, some very well-liked Flames reportedly hated Badger Bob, who I put at the top of Flames coaches.
Having been an employee and a boss, there are always people that will have issues with people for whatever weird reasons. You cannot get away from that.
I am just saying you can have "tough" bosses without said boss being a sociopathic asshat.
Having been an employee and a boss, there are always people that will have issues with people for whatever weird reasons. You cannot get away from that.
I am just saying you can have "tough" bosses without said boss being a sociopathic asshat.
True, but Sutter was as much a button pusher as a lot of coaches people dislike. He said so himself. The Kings tried to lock him out of the DR. And Carcillo really ripped him as an abusive coach (not just yelling). Doughty kind of dissed him as well.
Yes...hard-ass ain't the same as a**hole playing mind games with players
...although I'll always like him for instigating that Canucks/Torts debacle lol
I'm of the opinion that many coaches of a certain vintage came up through a culture where hazing was accepted, where players were routinely humiliated and demeaned. Salaries were beyond regular wages but not the huge sums that really started with Lemieux. Those tactics just don't work.
Coaches need to be able to be able to extract performance by cultivating an environment that is demanding but not abusive.
Anyone watch Free Solo (National Geographic on Disney +)? Alex Honnold free climbed El Capitan and he talks about his mindset of performance vs comfort. He was raised in a performance mindset compared to others who want friends and happiness (coziness) for fulfillment. He says nobody achieved anything great by wanting to be cozy. Good movie!
That's the challenge for modern coaches: get players to embody a high performance mentality. These are already committed athletes but now be high performance athletes.
Ward and his staff are really good it seems. Just listen to Huska.
Last edited by Jeff Lebowski; 02-16-2021 at 08:40 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jeff Lebowski For This Useful Post:
