CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,601
- 24,668
Lars never got to media day, so I don’t think they did.what else is he supposed to say? they all said the same thing about lars last year.
Lars never got to media day, so I don’t think they did.what else is he supposed to say? they all said the same thing about lars last year.
That's the definition of "damn with faint praise."This isn’t exactly a vote of confidence. Lol
How many coaches are they paying ? Larsen ended this year .. Can’t imagine they paid Babcock much , and that’s not on the books ..I doubt it with how many coaches they're paying. Probably too early to call but I'll go with No because I think the next GM knows they won't be contending next year.
If you look at the structure the team plays with it's night and day compared to last year. I appreciate that part of what Vincent has done.
I really really really wanted Roy last year. Vincent seemed like a what now after Babs, so I say let the new GM bring in whoever he wants.
Let's not forget that Vincent literally had DAYS to prepare himself and the team in the way he wanted to. I think he deserves at least another shot to implement the system and style that he wants with a full off-season to gameplan and prepare.In a way comparing him to Larsen, he's the opposite in both good and bad. Larsen's team never had any structure, but their first season they got by with skill and heart and 3rd period comebacks. His second season there was nothing he could do with that roster, but OTOH he also seemed to fall flat on his face in trying to implement any structure. In my mind his new "defensive scheme" has become a legend and a myth, much talked about but never seen But Larsen's tenure is tough to judge because of off ice factors, hard to say how much of it was on him, both in the good and the bad.
Vincent to me seems a fundamentally more solid coach but I think he has plenty of room to grow in the other things that go into being a head coach. That is also a bit tough (read impossible) to judge from the outside, but my impression is he doesn't have the right balance yet. I'm not even sure what exactly I mean by balance, just comes off to me like he's a bit rigid in his ways and not always good at getting the best out of the players. But it could also be that will change once he's happy about the fundamentals and comes to trust the players more, or just grows with the job.
I guess that to me is the question in retaining him. I think both the team and the coach need to grow to become succesful, is he a coach that can happen with? Can't say I have the answer.
there's a strong argument that pascal vincent is an exception to the "we need continuity" argument given that he wasn't actually the guy who they wanted to hire and was simply thrust into the role out of necessity.Changing coach every year is what dysfunctional teams do, and from what I've seen, it rarely seems to fix anything. Let's not turn into Sabres. A new gm can do a lot to fix some of the roster management issues (Jiricek thing).
there's a strong argument that pascal vincent is an exception to the "we need continuity" argument given that he wasn't actually the guy who they wanted to hire and was simply thrust into the role out of necessity.
if they'd had this kind of season under like, gerard gallant or peter laviolette, i'd agree. but i don't the jackets (or any other org) has ever truly viewed pascal as NHL head coaching material.
remember, he interviewed for the HC job after torts left, didn't get it, and took the assistant gig here. then he interviewed for HC jobs after larsen's first year, didn't get any of those, and came back.
then he interviewed for the CBJ HC job again, didn't get it, interviewed some more for other openings, didn't get those, then came back for an assistant job, then got elevated out of necessity.