Who are the NHL's most accomplished and experienced coaches?
by Robert L on Jul 20, 2009 7:18 PM EDT
9 comments
I'm in need of a little reader/commenter feedback on a post in progress.... I am currently working on a piece that seeks to rank all 30 NHL coaches by experience. The goal of the piece is to either prove, or refute, the notion that experienced coaches make for better hirings. Of course we all understand that in many scenarios, hiring a bench boss with a long and detail resume full of accolades, makes great sense. But...on the other hand, hiring a person with particular insights into coaching mechanisms concerning how they teach and lead men can also have great merit. I'm aware of the myths and truths having to do with how great NHL players do not necessarily make for great coachs. We will put that aside for now. There are also the ramifications and mitigating factors as to why an oldtimer such as Pat Quinn has done everything under the sun except win a Stanley Cup, when along comes greenhorn like Jean Perron in 1986, or this season with Dan Bylsma, who win it first kick at the can. Yes, Roy and Crosby were certainly part of the equation. Aside from those type of discussions, what I'm truly looking for, and where I need most help in going forward, is with a points ranking system based on past achievements by the 30 coaches. I've come up with my own, but it's not cement. Before moving forward, I'd like your imput, to see whether I'm close, or way off the mark. All your thoughts are welcome. Here's how it looks so far. Points system: Coaching career: Per Stanley Cup wins as a coach: 25 pts Per Stanley Cup final appearances: 15 pts Per 25 games won as an NHL coach - playoffs: 3 pts Per 100 games won as an NHL coach - regular season: 3 pts Per games coached at the NHL level: 1 pt Per championships won coaching at junior, AHL or U.S. Collegiate or University level: 5 points Playing Career: Reached NHL Level: 25 pts Reached AHL Level 15 pts Played minor but did not reach pro ranks: 5 pts Glorified house league: 0 pts Per 100 NHL games played: 2 pts Per 100 AHL/minors games played: 1 pt Per Stanley Cups won as a player: 10 Pts Thanks for your help.
0 recs |
9 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I would add...
Adams Trophies won and maybe a point scale for seasons with team improvements ie: standings/points/ +/-
by yathehabsrule on Jul 20, 2009 8:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought of the Adams Trophy thing, but that award is so dubious to me, and I haven’t agreed with a winner in ages.
by Robert L on Jul 20, 2009 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you have a point
Since ’73-74, only seven times did the Adams winner have the best overall record in the regular season.
Three won Cups the same year they won the Adams, and three others reached the finals in the same year.
by yathehabsrule on Jul 20, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s extremely difficult to qualify who is the best coach annually. If it is attached to a team record, then it could be said that the players are equally responsible.
Andy Murray of the Blues impressed me most last season. You could truly establish where he did make a difference. His team finished 14th overall after being dead last on All Star weekend.
Julien did great work with the Bruins, bringing them from 8th to 1st place in the east in one season. He did a great job in a year where many of his younger players matured. The players and the coach had a positive effect on one another. Julien didn’t steal the Adams.
There is little criteria for the award. It’s alot like…well, what’s your favorite flavor!
by Robert L on Jul 21, 2009 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
an aside
By including points for a coach’s past accomplishments as a player, you are not putting aside the issue of good players making bad coaches or vice versa or anything like that (btw, I’m a huge carbo fan) instead, you are pretending that there isn’t an issue at all.
I’m not emotionally involved or anything— just thought I’d point out the discrepancy. Seems a little loosey-goosey without something in the way of justification first.
by subdoxastic on Jul 21, 2009 2:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The idea of awarding those points for a coach’s playing days is to give that particular type of experience a certain weight. Where it ends up ranking those coaches won’t necessarily mean they are better, and it might not even rank them higher than a coach who’s won several titles in the minors.
Two points per 100 NHL games played as opposed to one pt per 100 minor games only differentiates and puts a little weight where the experience was accumulated. A coach playing 800 NHL games would merit 16 points. One playing 700 games in the minors would get 7. The former coach may have gone directly into NHL coaching, where it is harder to win, whereas the minor league guy may have had a head start on his coaching in the AHL. That’s the kind of discrepancy is what hoping to avoid.
Let me know if you think that makes enough sense.
by Robert L on Jul 21, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are discounting minor league coaching experience and placing too much weight on playing experience. Some of the best coaches in sports weren’t the best players. Look at Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson.
by Stanley Cup of Chowder on Jul 26, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the updated post, minor league coaching experience was factored in.
Just to clarify some, this was an excercise in debunking popular misconceptions about coaching experience. I was hoping the results would be somewhat out of whack, in order to make certain points.
by Robert L on Jul 26, 2009 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just noticed that there were guys with tons of experience at the AHL level that were ranked lower than coaches that played a bunch of years in the NHL but had very little experience behind the bench. Interesting concept though.
by Stanley Cup of Chowder on Jul 27, 2009 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Habs Eyes On The Prize
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
