|
Post by jimmy on May 2, 2019 8:35:50 GMT -4
I was thinking about open NHL coaching jobs ... Buffalo, Ottawa, and Edmonton are all currently open ... three of the biggest messes in the league. If you were an NHL coaching candidate and you had to choose between those three jobs, which would you choose and why?
Edmonton: Pros obviously are McDavid being a generational talent. Many cons, including lack of depth, bad cap situation limiting ability to improve, and meddling from above. GM job is currently vacant, so who knows what you would be getting on that front.
Buffalo: Pros would be Dahlin and Eichel as a base to work around. Cons would be relative lack of depth, instability in that the team tends to change coaches every year or two. Botterill seems like a competent GM.
Ottawa: Biggest con would be Melnyk lurking in the background. They are young, so expectations would be low, probably the deepest prospect pool of the three teams, but lacking top end stars like the other two. Cap space is not an issue, but willingness to spend it definitely would be.
Personally, I think I would pick Ottawa ... lot of good young players coming in the next couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 2, 2019 8:50:13 GMT -4
I'd pick Buffalo.
Edmonton's biggest issue is not only changing the culture but finding players who want to play there. Outside of the McDavid factor the franchise is a black hole in the least desirable market to live in. And if it all blows up again in the next 2-3 years....the fallout might be something you want to be far away from.
Ottawa's issue is Melnyk. The fans have lost any and all confidence in him. And the rebuild is very early in the process and despite the system having some key parts...it's another market that just throwing money at people might not work so you may need to drastically overpay for slight improvement as the kids head closer to unrestricted free agency.
Buffalo has a #1 C, #1 D, an owner willing to spend and a market that isn't quite as bad off as the others. There's still a losing culture to shake but you won't have intense national media pressure to fix it like in the other 2 markets. And I think it's an easier team to fix with the right smaller changes vs needing a huge overhaul like the other 2 seem to.
For me it's almost 100% about the management and ownership situations. And the McDavid factor in Edmonton is offset by Buffalo having a franchise defenceman along with a #1 C.
|
|
|
Post by yesisaiditfirst on May 2, 2019 12:22:48 GMT -4
I think I would have the longest leash coaching Buffalo.
Edmonton is a mess and when they panic again you are gone first before they isolate the real problem.
I like the players and prospects of Ottawa but there are so many external factors. Ownership, arena situation, total rebuild and likely not settles for a while.
|
|
|
Post by bois on May 2, 2019 12:25:12 GMT -4
if you're unemployed you go to whomever offers you the job
the question is a silly one because you're not going to be a coach sitting on the sidelines with a choice between the 3... if for some reason you are you're likely being paid by someone else and can afford to wait for a better opportunity to come along
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 2, 2019 13:23:05 GMT -4
if you're unemployed you go to whomever offers you the job the question is a silly one because you're not going to be a coach sitting on the sidelines with a choice between the 3... if for some reason you are you're likely being paid by someone else and can afford to wait for a better opportunity to come along Joel Quenneville would have had his choice among the 3 if he wanted any of those jobs. So it's not THAT silly. But also isn't very common as not just anyone would have that choice.
|
|
|
Post by bois on May 2, 2019 15:03:34 GMT -4
if you're unemployed you go to whomever offers you the job the question is a silly one because you're not going to be a coach sitting on the sidelines with a choice between the 3... if for some reason you are you're likely being paid by someone else and can afford to wait for a better opportunity to come along Joel Quenneville would have had his choice among the 3 if he wanted any of those jobs. So it's not THAT silly. But also isn't very common as not just anyone would have that choice. and that proves my whole point.... if you had the choice you'd be a guy with a reputation and a paycheck and the ability to wait for a much better choice... ala Quenneville
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on May 2, 2019 16:28:32 GMT -4
Joel Quenneville would have had his choice among the 3 if he wanted any of those jobs. So it's not THAT silly. But also isn't very common as not just anyone would have that choice. and that proves my whole point.... if you had the choice you'd be a guy with a reputation and a paycheck and the ability to wait for a much better choice... ala Quenneville I realize that it is very unlikely anyone would actually have their choice of the jobs ... it was just a theoretical question to generate discussion based on an observation that the three biggest tire fire organizations of recent years all happen to have head coaching vacancies at the same time. Worded differently - which one is most likely to be turned around sooner?
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on May 3, 2019 6:11:57 GMT -4
I was thinking about open NHL coaching jobs ... Buffalo, Ottawa, and Edmonton are all currently open ... three of the biggest messes in the league. If you were an NHL coaching candidate and you had to choose between those three jobs, which would you choose and why? Edmonton: Pros obviously are McDavid being a generational talent. Many cons, including lack of depth, bad cap situation limiting ability to improve, and meddling from above. GM job is currently vacant, so who knows what you would be getting on that front. Buffalo: Pros would be Dahlin and Eichel as a base to work around. Cons would be relative lack of depth, instability in that the team tends to change coaches every year or two. Botterill seems like a competent GM. Ottawa: Biggest con would be Melnyk lurking in the background. They are young, so expectations would be low, probably the deepest prospect pool of the three teams, but lacking top end stars like the other two. Cap space is not an issue, but willingness to spend it definitely would be. Personally, I think I would pick Ottawa ... lot of good young players coming in the next couple of years. Buffalo has better young players and they are already in the NHL, plus you don't have to deal with Melnyk.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 6, 2019 15:09:42 GMT -4
Man social media is chaos.
A week ago every "NHL insider" said Holland was out of the running in Edmonton.
Then rumblings the weekend of him going there and suddenly it's "as has long been rumored..."
But then the pitchforks come out in questioning if Holland did a proper interview process, what what his plan for moving forward, etc trying to basically discredit him as a washed up GM taking a retirement contract.
From the same people ready to praise him as much as they could if he went to Seattle (which actually was a rumor...)
At least lets give the guy some time to see if he can turn it around properly before we start shitting on them for hiring him, him for taking the money, etc, etc, etc.
Holland in Edmonton could be excellent for both. Could really blow up as well if he has trouble turning it around. But give the guy the time to see some of it through first.
|
|
|
Post by moosefan1994 on May 6, 2019 15:25:48 GMT -4
Man social media is chaos. A week ago every "NHL insider" said Holland was out of the running in Edmonton. Then rumblings the weekend of him going there and suddenly it's "as has long been rumored..." But then the pitchforks come out in questioning if Holland did a proper interview process, what what his plan for moving forward, etc trying to basically discredit him as a washed up GM taking a retirement contract. From the same people ready to praise him as much as they could if he went to Seattle (which actually was a rumor...) At least lets give the guy some time to see if he can turn it around properly before we start shitting on them for hiring him, him for taking the money, etc, etc, etc. Holland in Edmonton could be excellent for both. Could really blow up as well if he has trouble turning it around. But give the guy the time to see some of it through first. Work colleague asked me a week ago why Canadian teams are so relatively bad or unsuccessful, last Canadian team to win Cup was in 1993. I said mismanagement, like all Canadian teams have had it at some point recently but IMO the biggest reason why is toxic fanbases - most Canadian fanbases have become so nasty because of social media it is ridiculous and players sign in the States for the most part I believe because of it.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on May 6, 2019 15:35:29 GMT -4
Man social media is chaos. A week ago every "NHL insider" said Holland was out of the running in Edmonton. Then rumblings the weekend of him going there and suddenly it's "as has long been rumored..." But then the pitchforks come out in questioning if Holland did a proper interview process, what what his plan for moving forward, etc trying to basically discredit him as a washed up GM taking a retirement contract. From the same people ready to praise him as much as they could if he went to Seattle (which actually was a rumor...) At least lets give the guy some time to see if he can turn it around properly before we start shitting on them for hiring him, him for taking the money, etc, etc, etc. Holland in Edmonton could be excellent for both. Could really blow up as well if he has trouble turning it around. But give the guy the time to see some of it through first. Work colleague asked me a week ago why Canadian teams are so relatively bad or unsuccessful, last Canadian team to win Cup was in 1993. I said mismanagement, like all Canadian teams have had it at some point recently but IMO the biggest reason why is toxic fanbases - most Canadian fanbases have become so nasty because of social media it is ridiculous and players sign in the States for the most part I believe because of it. It all stems from the toxic media culture from people who think because a local sports team has sucked for say 8 years then you have free reign to call out everything they do, everyone who plays there, etc which creates a toxic fan base the minute things really go south. In Toronto you have people like Simmons, Rosie "how am I employed as a media contibuter?" DiManno with her absolute joke of a stance on almost everything...Eric Francis in Calgary is a joke...dont even need to list the Montreal media for how they treat the team... Even now a Toronto finally starts to right its ship a bit and it's "salary cap crunch" and "Cup windows has closed" and "how do they sign Marner!?!?". The fact they have a pretty good young core that is very comparable to say a Colorado still playing in the playoffs is not at all relevant. It's shit on them until they win and then they only win "because they were supposed to after 50 years". People wonder why the Toronto fan base lost their shit when Tavares came home. Yet almost everyone is still shocked he didn't take the easier and less pressure filled options he had in the US. And on top of it all the toxic culture is now all over the womens side of the sport with the laughable entitlement of "we deserve to be paid more" despite all signs saying nobody really gives a shit about the womens game and it can't stand on its own revenue wise and has zero signs of ever doing so. And we don't even need to talk about youth hockey and why many parents are avoiding it at all costs for other more affordable and less pressure and concussion filled sports like soccer.
|
|
|
Post by Citris on May 6, 2019 17:31:29 GMT -4
And on top of it all the toxic culture is now all over the womens side of the sport with the laughable entitlement of "we deserve to be paid more" despite all signs saying nobody really gives a shit about the womens game and it can't stand on its own revenue wise and has zero signs of ever doing so. Must say I'm a little shocked at this take from you. Especially since this had.. like... not much to do with the conversation at all. The womans game isn't profitable for many reasons, but a lot of those issues are fixable with time, and it's an area the game can grow and become more profitable. The push to expand the Woman's game isn't by any means altruistic. Sportsnet has been pushing this and there's no way the execs behind these decisions have anything other than the bottom line in mind. If the girls don't get paid, that means they need other jobs, which means they can't dedicate as much time into the sport as men do, which leads to the quality of the product being worse, which leads to less demand, which leads to the girls not getting paid, which leads to them needing other jobs... you get the idea. Break the cycle, give them a decent TV slot, and maybe it can become a profitable model. Obviously experts think this is the case, or else they wouldn't be dedicating time to trying to build a successful womans league. Myself, I personally would like to see a female pro league because I just think that would be pretty neat, but if you're going to go at it from a "rah rah capatalism grr" standpoint, like I said, it would be naive to believe that the push for the growth of womans hockey isn't driven by dollars. So I don't think that holds up either. ----------------------- To mention something on the topic of Holland and Canadian teams- I completely agree that Canadian teams have vocal, and often toxic fanbases that sometimes push the owners to make rash decisions that hurt franchises long term. But in Edmonton's case, I think their problem lies in living in the past, they have an old boys club mentality, they're not forward thinking and they keep bringing back former players who obviously aren't equipped for the jobs they're given to try to dig them out of trouble.... and now have brought in 2 GMs who both overvalue veterans and can't manage a cap to save their lives. They fired Cherelli and brought in a guy who is going to have most of the same problems Cherelli did. Now, I'm not saying Holland can't grow and learn, I hope he has from his days in Detroit, but... My guy tells me that's not happening anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by MikeC on May 6, 2019 18:12:58 GMT -4
Break the cycle, give them a decent TV slot, and maybe it can become a profitable model. Obviously experts think this is the case, or else they wouldn't be dedicating time to trying to build a successful womans league. I don't think it's that cut and dry, otherwise the NHL wouldn't have their stance of "we won't do our own league as long as there is an existing women's league". I generally agree with most of what you're saying though. If a women's league has a chance, it's going to take some investment of money and time, and the NHL is probably the best group to do it.
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on May 6, 2019 20:11:35 GMT -4
Break the cycle, give them a decent TV slot, and maybe it can become a profitable model. Obviously experts think this is the case, or else they wouldn't be dedicating time to trying to build a successful womans league. I don't think it's that cut and dry, otherwise the NHL wouldn't have their stance of "we won't do our own league as long as there is an existing women's league". I generally agree with most of what you're saying though. If a women's league has a chance, it's going to take some investment of money and time, and the NHL is probably the best group to do it. I’m not sure that it’s really the NHL’s responsibility to do it though, I can see why they’d be the logical group but I don’t think they should be expected to do it. I think a women’s league has a chance, the WNBA has become successful and I think there can be a market for it but I’m not convinced it will ever get to the level of the WNBA. I don’t think the players would be able to earn a salary that would allow them to not work outside of hockey, especially with the attendance figures they’ve had in the women’s leagues. At least initially, it may happen over time but you’re looking at probably a 15-20 year grind before you can get to a level to pay the players what they expect to be paid. I respect the current players stance and desire to change things but I think if there was a market to make it possible, it would have already happened to some degree. It’ll be a slow burn and for the next generations it should be better but I don’t think this generation will reap any real benefits. The players can’t make a sustainable living but I’m not sure who would be willing to make that possible for them without significant increases in revenue and fan interest. I know as it currently stands, they likely wouldn’t ever get my interest or much of my money and it’s not because it’s women’s hockey, it’s because I watch sports to be entertained and the women’s game, outside of the Olympics or other best on best events, doesn’t provide me with enough entertainment to justify me spending my money on a product that (I’m going to use this carefully) isn’t particularly skilled. It’s a real double edged sword because I don’t want to spend my money as it currently stands but they likely cant improve if I’m not willing to invest.
|
|
|
Post by bois on May 7, 2019 8:40:52 GMT -4
I fully support the women for their stance on this and I think it makes perfect sense for the NHL to jump in getting one north american pro league for women up and running..... if people decide the game is not entertaining enough or not worth their money then so be it... it will die or someone will once again recreate the niche market league they already had and life goes on
as for Holland..... i actually think it's a pretty good hire here..... time will tell what he is able to achieve but on the surface it at least isn't another rehash of the old boys club in Edmonton again.... obviously this is a very important hire because if things don't improve greatly in the next 2 years max... mcDavid will be wanting out and that would be disastrous
toxic fanbases are everywhere..... maybe we have worse ones for hockey but American fanbases are just as bad for other sports.... i think they probably are pretty bad for hockey too we just don't necessarily see them here as we get fed our own teams drivel instead.... and the reality is you have major sports networks dedicated to competing with one another so they hire every figurehead who has any connection to the sport to disect every rumour and create rumours of their own to fill time on the networks
|
|