Department of Obvious Statements: Plugger Coaches Don't Automatically Hate Skill
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 9:38 AM MDT
Email
Print
One of the more egregious arguments tossed out by the uninformed fringe of Oilers' fandom is that Craig MacTavish is simply unable to coach skill because he was a checking line player. The argument reasons that because MacTavish was a checker, he will have little/no insights to pass on to players like Gagner and Hemsky about how to produce offensively. A typical example can be found in the comments section at Oilers Nation, and I'm quoting it in part below:
"Mact hates Shremp and his skill because Mact had no such skill and seems to have a tough time adjusting to skill players when he can’t turn them into his clone, Marty Reasoner."
"Look at the coaching staff he has now surrounded himself with. It is a veritable compendium, a list if you will, of offensive stiffs, stoops and pluggers. How are any of these Oiler coaches going to effectively coach Hemsky, Gagner et al when they don’t know their offensive asses from page 2?"
Without further referencing MacTavish, I'm going to show the sophistry inherent in such reasoning.
This season, for example, the Ottawa Senators were the league's highest scoring team. They were coached by John Paddock (NHL career: 82GP, 8-14-22) and Bryan Murray (ex-gym teacher). The second ranked team was Montreal, coached by scoring defensive legend Guy Carbonneau (18 NHL seasons, average pts/yr: 37). the third ranked was Detroit, coached by former BHL defenseman Mike Babcock.
But, the argument goes, these teams were veteran teams- the coaches didn't need to teach the players, they were already taught. Untrue in the case of Montreal, but can we think of any offensive, dynasty teams that were coached by pluggers? I dare say we can.
Edmonton Oilers (Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Anderson, et al.): Glen Sather
New York Islanders (Bossy, Trottier, Tonelli, Gillies, et al.): Al Arbour
Here's a better question: can anyone think of a successful, high-scoring team that was coached by an offensive star? I'm sure there's at least one out there, even if I can't think of it.
Regardless, I think it is beyond argument that a coach who lacked high-level offensive talent as a player can still successfully teach a group of talented players, and foster an environment that stresses offensive creativity.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Skill players learn more from other skilled guys and by practicing against better players - not from a coeach. Grinders who have long careers, are generally really smart players who can adapt their game. Jacques Lemaire is another good example.
Its on Rob Schremp to become an Oiler not MacT to make Rob Schremp and Oiler. That argument is such a crock.
by Sean on Jun 18, 2008 10:21 AM MDT reply actions
by jdrevenge on Jun 18, 2008 11:09 AM MDT reply actions
1) Larry Robinson and to a slightly lesser degree Jacques Lemaire and Randy Carlyle.
2) It's just regardless.
by Marchantfan on Jun 18, 2008 11:10 AM MDT reply actions
by Marchantfan on Jun 18, 2008 11:12 AM MDT reply actions
1) Larry Robinson and to a slightly lesser degree Jacques Lemaire and Randy Carlyle.
2) It's just regardless.
1) I'd eliminated Robinson from my mind because I assumed that the Devils of 2000 weren't a high-scoring bunch. Incorrectly, as it turns out. As for Lemaire and Carlyle, Lemaire coaches generally low-scoring teams, and Carlyle's Ducks have been good, but not great offensively (i.e. 9th in GF the year they won the cup) which is why I didn't include them (remember that the comparison is looking only for high-scoring teams).
2) Thanks, fixed now.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 11:16 AM MDT reply actions
More to the point, hasn't it been shown by now that pure-skill players tend not to hack it as coaches in the first place?
by Doogie2K on Jun 18, 2008 11:59 AM MDT reply actions
Bob Stauffer?
You can go on & on about how stupid this mem is:
- Ken Hitchcock
- How many big time offensive guys have coached cup-winning teams. Is it Zero? Damn close.
by Mr DeBakey on Jun 18, 2008 12:52 PM MDT reply actions
by Sean on Jun 18, 2008 1:48 PM MDT reply actions
Bob Stauffer?
I don't listen to Stauffer often enough to have an intelligent opinion on him; mostly I meant a couple of sketchy commenters over at OilersNation and HFBoards.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 2:05 PM MDT reply actions
If you can get the puck deep and play good positional hockey in all 3 zones then you're golden in MacTavish's book.
That's not to say other coaches don't desire they same thing but I think it's clear that MacTavish will sacrifice a little skill for reliability.
Marty Reasoner was not the best option on the first line when Horcoff went down, I will say that much.
MacTavish coaches from the Bears playbook rather than the Colts playbook. He likes to kill the clock and make the game short as possible. As low event as possible. Of course he doesn't have world class QB and 2 HOF recievers either..
by Traktor on Jun 18, 2008 2:08 PM MDT reply actions
If you can get the puck deep and play good positional hockey in all 3 zones then you're golden in MacTavish's book.
That's not to say other coaches don't desire they same thing but I think it's clear that MacTavish will sacrifice a little skill for reliability.
Completely agree with that assessment. MacT definitely defaults to defensive mode, although in some cases he'll sacrifice it if a player has a particular talent not replicated elsewhere on the roster (i.e. Comrie, Bergeron).
I just don't think that MacTavish can be judged as being no good with skilled players simply because he wasn't a big-time scorer at the NHL level.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 2:13 PM MDT reply actions
I agree 100%
You can't judge a book by it's cover. Certainly after 7 years is more than enough time to read between the binding though.
It's a by-product of the "result oriented business" that MacTavish commonly refers to.
MacTavish has had some huge successes in developing players (Horcoff, Pisani, Stortini) but from the skill variety Hemsky is the only kid that turned out to be a legit skilled first line player.
Of course MacTavish isn't the one who is drafting the players either but when he does things like play Peterson on the PP or give Reasoner extended 1st line minutes it becomes easy for the looks like a dog, smells like a dog crowd to call a spade a spade.
by Traktor on Jun 18, 2008 2:50 PM MDT reply actions
Horcoff?
And I think the really remarkable thing about Hemsky is that he's gone from a guy who was described thusly by Hockey's Future immediately after the 2001 draft:
He arguably one of this draft’s most electrifying players with the puck and one of the only reasons he was not taken higher is his unwillingness to play in traffic so to speak. Not particularly muscular by any means but that seemed to be of little concern to the Oilers brass since they were looking for pure skill over brawn. Because of the teams current depth of young gritty forwards in the system it was apparently felt that this selection was necessary.
His talent was never in question. His courage, ability to play in traffic, consistency and strength were. I think that MacTavish and his staff did a great job of taking a player whose scouting report sounds like Pavel Brendl and turning him into a complete hockey player.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 3:08 PM MDT reply actions
by jdrevenge on Jun 18, 2008 4:03 PM MDT reply actions
I really dont know- I had always classed him as one of those players who just couldnt make himself care enough to have a career. His talent certainly wasnt the problem.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 18, 2008 4:18 PM MDT reply actions
Reasoner played 915:03 5v5.
The 10 forwards he played with in order:
BRODZIAK 328:20
PISANI 261:36
STOLL 221:23
SANDERSON 153:27
HEMSKY 137:56
GAGNER 119:05
COGLIANO 105:25
PENNER 90:27
THORESEN 69:33
POULIOT 62:38
Obviously MacT agrees about Reasoner and the first line.
by Mr DeBakey on Jun 18, 2008 4:34 PM MDT reply actions
by jdrevenge on Jun 18, 2008 5:07 PM MDT reply actions
But I definitely agree: We should've seen a Stortini first line pivot try out.
by quain on Jun 18, 2008 5:27 PM MDT reply actions
Art Ross springs to mind. Toe Blake. There might be others, but no one in the last 40 years.
by Doogie2K on Jun 18, 2008 7:40 PM MDT reply actions
by Oilman on Jun 19, 2008 8:36 AM MDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Copper & Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Oilers Schedule
Last 5 Games
@
Vancouver
|
Sat 04/07 | L 0 - 3 |
|
Anaheim
|
Thu 04/05 | OT - L 2 - 3 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Mon 04/02 | L 0 - 2 |
|
@
Anaheim
|
Sun 04/01 | W 2 - 1 |
|
Los Angeles
|
Fri 03/30 | L 1 - 4 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- NBC News apologizes for Kings-sized Los Angeles/Sacramento logo screw-up (VIDEO)
- Wednesday’s Three Stars: Devils win; Kreider ties record; Brodeur’s sick save
- Watch John Tortorella’s Game 2 press conference, as he’ll ‘keep it in the room’ (VIDEO)
- Devils Coach Pete DeBoer’s adjustments make difference in Game 2 win vs. Rangers
- Marty Brodeur’s ‘own goal’ in Game 2 vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Rangers coach John Tortorella benches Gaborik for much of third after blunder on tying goal
- Rangers coach John Tortorella benches Gaborik for much of third after blunder on tying goal
- Rangers lose, Gaborik in doghouse
- Devils-Rangers Sum
- Devils D Adam Larsson out of New Jersey lineup for Game 2, replaced by Peter Harrold
