Who is the coach next season?

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Yes, I am saying that.

Neither Kane, nor Toews, have been as good as Zetterberg and Datsyuk were in 2008. That's a fact. They simply weren't. Kane had 88 points and was a joke defensively defensively. Toews was better at defense, but scored 68. Datsyuk and Zetterberg score 90+ points, were world class defensive players AND played on both the PP and penalty kill to boot.

If you think Toews and Kane in 2010 and 2012 were better (or as good) as Dats or Z in 2008 you're nuts. They weren't, by any objective measure.

Kopitar is an excellent player. World class. He's never score 90+, played on both special teams, and played world class defense. Neither did Carter. Or Brown. Or Richards. Or Gaborik.

No team, in the modern era has won the Cup with two players that good. Not Pittsburgh. Not Chicago. Not Los Angeles or Boston.

People forget just how good Dats and Z were in 2008 and 2009.

And I'm honestly not even trying to rag on Babs here. I don't think he needs players that good to win. And if he does, I hope he's not holding his breath, because you're not likely to find anybody that good in a while. I'm criticizing folks who think that Babs is looking for another Pav and Z for his next job. There aren't another Pav and Z. Anywhere.

Please, if you've got a single argument that suggests that any of Kopitar, Kane, Toews, Crosby, Malkin, or anybody else was as good as Dats and Z were in 2008, I'd love to hear it.

Edit: I'm focusing on the forwards because that was the original context of the debate, but the same applies for the defense. Doughty and Keith are amazing. They're not better than Lidstrom was in 2008. Not even close.

But again, my point is that I doubt finding "another Pav and Z" is Babs' primary motivation. Because he won't be able to, and he shouldn't need to. And if it is his primary motivation, then he's not that great.

If you need me to point out to you why in 2009 Crosby (who had 103 points in the regular season and 31 in the playoffs) and Malkin (113 points regular season, 36 points playoffs) were as good as Dats and Z were in 2008, there's really no point in continuing.

[kipwinger 8,492]

If you need me to point out to you why in 2009 Crosby (who had 103 points in the regular season and 31 in the playoffs) and Malkin (113 points regular season, 36 points playoffs) were as good as Dats and Z were in 2008, there's really no point in continuing.

Did they also play superstar defense and kill penalties? Then they weren't as good.

Edit: None of the players you mentioned have been the best offensive AND defensive players at the same time. None. Only Lidstrom, Dats and Z. Babs surely realizes this, and isn't hedging his bets on trying to find that type of situation again.

Edited May 1, 2015 by kipwinger

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Did they also play superstar defense and kill penalties? Then they weren't as good.

Edit: None of the players you mentioned have been the best offensive AND defensive players at the same time. None. Only Lidstrom, Dats and Z. Babs surely realizes this, and isn't hedging his bets on trying to find that type of situation again.

I'd love for you to take that argument somewhere other than a Wings board and see how it goes. No one is going to be the exact player as Datsyuk and Zetterberg, which is what seems to be only acceptable answer to you. The reality is that Chicago, LA, Boston were all great teams.

And it's kind of beside the point because Babcock got within one win of the Cup without anyone in the same universe as a Datsyuk or Zetterberg anyways. He took Anaheim to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals with the "star" player being Kariya with 81 points (which doesn't even crack the top 10 that year) and an assorted cast of Sykora, Oates, and Mike Leclerc.

[kipwinger 8,492]

I'd love for you to take that argument somewhere other than a Wings board and see how it goes. No one is going to be the exact player as Datsyuk and Zetterberg, which is what seems to be only acceptable answer to you. The reality is that Chicago, LA, Boston were all great teams.

And it's kind of beside the point because Babcock got within one win of the Cup without anyone in the same universe as a Datsyuk or Zetterberg anyways. He took Anaheim to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals with the "star" player being Kariya with 81 points (which doesn't even crack the top 10 that year) and an assorted cast of Sykora, Oates, and Mike Leclerc.

I know. Which is my point.

Someone else said...

"I'm 100% convinced he wants to leave because he doesn't see another Zetterburg or Datsyuk on this team or in the pipeline".

I don't think he needs "another Datsyuk or Zetterberg". He's a better coach than that. And if he does need guys like that, and he's making his decision based on that, then that's pretty weak.

He's said before he wants to be the most successful coach of his generation. I don't think a guy like that is afraid to take over a young team with potential, and turn them into winners. Rather than inherit an already developed group of stars.

Edited May 2, 2015 by kipwinger

[MrazekFanBoy 223]

What makes you think Babs is presumably packing up and leaving? And it's either him or Blashill. Blashill has earned it and put in his time to be next in line.

Fixed that for you. Our team will be the best conditioned team in the league and he'll teach these kids how to play with a nasty side.

i doubt granato and that other guy are both leaving

[MrazekFanBoy 223]

Don cherry

love don

[gowings00 545]

I know. Which is my point.

Someone else said...

"I'm 100% convinced he wants to leave because he doesn't see another Zetterburg or Datsyuk on this team or in the pipeline".

I don't think he needs "another Datsyuk or Zetterberg".

Dang....I thought I had cleared up my comments to you but I dont think we're on the same page. Sorry, but there are two of us that seem to be saying the same thing to you.

I don't know what else to say so I'll just drop it.

[twopups 19]

If Babcock is so effin great, why hasn't he won the Jack Adams.

Personally I gave up on him last year when Tats could not be sent to GR and Babcock wouldn't use him at all until he was forced to due to injuries. Said the young players had to EARN their ice time. Did Francine or Cleary earn their ice time? NO, Francine should have been traded 2 years ago when he was still worth something. Maybe they could have gotten a decent Defenseman in return. The Wings Defense sucks. Kronwall and Ericsson were a good 2nd line too bad they couldn't stay there.

Love to see him go to the Leafs.

[kickazz 5,459]

If Babcock is so effin great, why hasn't he won the Jack Adams.

The Jack Adams trophy is probably one of the most biased and subjective awards in the league. I wouldn't read too much into it. NHL is known to pick favorites for its awards. There's been times where I've wondered why the hell Datsyuk didn't win the Hart Trophy in 2009. Don't get me started.

Edited May 2, 2015 by kickazz

[marcaractac 3,960]

The Jack Adams trophy is probably one of the most biased and subjective awards in the league. I wouldn't read too much into it. NHL is known to pick favorites for its awards. There's been times where I've wondered why the hell Datsyuk didn't win the Hart Trophy in 2009. Don't get me started.

If the Jack Adams was legit, Babs would win it almost every season. But when it comes down to it, the Jack Adams should be re-branded "Most Improved Team Award"

[kickazz 5,459]

If the Jack Adams was legit, Babs would win it almost every season. But when it comes down to it, the Jack Adams should be re-branded "Most Improved Team Award"

He didn't win it when the team won the presidents trophy and was the best in the league. He didn't win it when the team overcame injuries and got into the playoffs either. If he can't win it when both extremes happens, you know there's something the hell wrong with the league. He should have gotten it last year with all the man games lost and the way we still got into the playoffs. He took a bunch of AHL players and turned them into pro hockey players on the fly.

NHL is ridiculous.

[kliq 3,755]

He didn't win it when the team won the presidents trophy and was the best in the league. He didn't win it when the team overcame injuries and got into the playoffs either. If he can't win it when both extremes happens, you know there's something the hell wrong with the league. He should have gotten it last year with all the man games lost and the way we still got into the playoffs. He took a bunch of AHL players and turned them into pro hockey players on the fly.

NHL is ridiculous.

To just look at it from just Babcocks perspective is only telling half the story. Patrick Roy took a team that was 2nd worst in the NHL the year before, and got them in the playoffs at 2nd seed. I don't see how that is less impressive then what Babcock did (not taking anything away from Babcock). Its almost as if your holding the team improvement against Roy.

The coach of the year should be given to the coach who got the absolute most out of his players based on his players skill set on paper and their previous year's performance. The reason why most coaches dont get Jack Adams Award when their teams win the presidents trophy is because usually the team is stacked and is doing what it should be doing. I agree it shouldn't automatically go to the most improved team's coach, but typically the most improved team is improved because of either additions from the GM or coaching. I think Babcock did a hell of a job in 2014, but I think what Roy did was more impressive.

Think about it like this.....if Babcock went to Edmonton next year and they ended up the #2 seed, I guarantee you he wins the Jack Adams.

[kickazz 5,459]

To just look at it from just Babcocks perspective is only telling half the story. Patrick Roy took a team that was 2nd worst in the NHL the year before, and got them in the playoffs at 2nd seed. I don't see how that is less impressive then what Babcock did (not taking anything away from Babcock). Its almost as if your holding the team improvement against Roy.

The coach of the year should be given to the coach who got the absolute most out of his players based on his players skill set on paper and their previous year's performance. The reason why most coaches dont get Jack Adams Award when their teams win the presidents trophy is because usually the team is stacked and is doing what it should be doing. I agree it shouldn't automatically go to the most improved team's coach, but typically the most improved team is improved because of either additions from the GM or coaching. I think Babcock did a hell of a job in 2014, but I think what Roy did was more impressive.

Think about it like this.....if Babcock went to Edmonton next year and they ended up the #2 seed, I guarantee you he wins the Jack Adams.

That's the thing. I don't think you should take previous year and define it into what you do. If its an award for 2014-2015, it should be for that season. What if the coach before Roy was just terrible but the players always had it in them? Did they do better because Roy is better or was it because the coach the year before wasn't good enough? It's too subjective. Way too subjective.

Edited May 2, 2015 by kickazz

[Buppy 1,720]

Yes, I am saying that.

Neither Kane, nor Toews, have been as good as Zetterberg and Datsyuk were in 2008. That's a fact. They simply weren't. Kane had 88 points and was a joke defensively defensively. Toews was better at defense, but scored 68. Datsyuk and Zetterberg score 90+ points, were world class defensive players AND played on both the PP and penalty kill to boot.

If you think Toews and Kane in 2010 and 2012 were better (or as good) as Dats or Z in 2008 you're nuts. They weren't, by any objective measure.

Kopitar is an excellent player. World class. He's never score 90+, played on both special teams, and played world class defense. Neither did Carter. Or Brown. Or Richards. Or Gaborik.

No team, in the modern era has won the Cup with two players that good. Not Pittsburgh. Not Chicago. Not Los Angeles or Boston.

People forget just how good Dats and Z and Lidstrom were in 2008. They were simultaneously two of the top five best offensive AND the defensive fowards in the world, at the same time. Lidstrom was THE best offensive and defensive defenseman at the same time. Nobody you mentioned was has every been that good. Period.

And I'm honestly not even trying to rag on Babs here. I don't think he needs players that good to win. And if he does, I hope he's not holding his breath, because you're not likely to find anybody that good in a while. I'm criticizing folks who think that Babs is looking for another Pav and Z for his next job. There aren't another Pav and Z. Anywhere.

Please, if you've got a single argument that suggests that any of Kopitar, Kane, Toews, Crosby, Malkin, or anybody else was as good as Dats and Z were in 2008, I'd love to hear it.

Edit: I'm focusing on the forwards because that was the original context of the debate, but the same applies for the defense. Doughty and Keith are amazing. They're not better than Lidstrom was in 2008. Not even close.

But again, my point is that I doubt finding "another Pav and Z" is Babs' primary motivation. Because he won't be able to, and he shouldn't need to. And if it is his primary motivation, then he's not that great.

And what, if not an attempt to rag on Babs, would make you assume that "Datsyuk and Zetterberg" means specifically Datsyuk and Zetterberg at their absolute peak?

Some believe Babs may be looking for that kind of player because he specifically mentioned those two (and Kronwall). Then he said, "You've got to have big-time players up the middle and on the back to be successful". Big-time players. Not "90+ pt Selke finalists and generational defensemen". I'll bet you won't find many successful teams that didn't have big-time players.

Look at Zetterberg in terms of his whole career rather than just his best year and you could argue that Kopitar and Toews are at a very similar level. Crosby and Malkin aren't as good defensively but much better offensively, and most would say they're better overall. Getzlaf, Seguin, Giroux, Tavares, Stamkos, and I'm sure several others could be considered close or even better. Same goes for Datsyuk, really. Maybe not a lot will reach their peak point totals, maybe none who are also Selke candidates the same year, but you're the only one taking it so overly specific.

Teams are rarely successful without superstars. Replacing ours is a legitimate concern. Most likely isn't going to happen until we get much worse. I'd be surprised if that concern isn't a major factor in Babs' decision. Fortunately, there aren't likely to be many teams that are better off in the "star" department and also looking for a coach.

[kliq 3,755]

That's the thing. I don't think you should take previous year and define it into what you do. If its an award for 2014-2015, it should be for that season. What if the coach before Roy was just terrible but the players always had it in them? Did they do better because Roy is better or was it because the coach the year before wasn't good enough? It's too subjective. Way too subjective.

The award is for 2014-2015, the problem is you cannot assess the skill set of a team without looking at the previous year. You cant just give the award to the coach who gets the most points, that's the presidents trophy. If you were simply looking for the coach who got the most out of a team, most points would be the way to do it.

Like it or not, you have to take the year before into consideration as that's the closest thing to an accurate benchmark that you have to analyze and assess the skill set and abilities of your players. Could this assessment be skewed by an awful coach the year before....of course, but there is no perfect system. People will complain regardless of what the NHL does for this award.

[kickazz 5,459]

The award is for 2014-2015, the problem is you cannot assess the skill set of a team without looking at the previous year. You cant just give the award to the coach who gets the most points, that's the presidents trophy. If you were simply looking for the coach who got the most out of a team, most points would be the way to do it.

Like it or not, you have to take the year before into consideration as that's the closest thing to an accurate benchmark that you have to analyze and assess the skill set and abilities of your players. Could this assessment be skewed by an awful coach the year before....of course, but there is no perfect system. People will complain regardless of what the NHL does for this award.

Even if you used that anaology. Babcock the year before had a roster that was uninjured and got them thru the playoffs. Then the year after he had an incredible amount of man games lost and got the Wings through the playoffs with basically an AHL roster. In my opinion that's a bigger feat than what Roy did. Roy had Mckinnon and Duchene. He had a pretty good team he took with him last year. We had neither of our superstars.

And that's the thing. Babs did it AGAIN this year. But Roy didn't. They didn't even make the playoffs. They ended up 12th in the conference (yikes). Hindsight: Who is the better coach then? I'm telling you, year in and year out they chose guys that might seem great candidates on the surface but that's about it.

Why did MacLean win it in 2013? Their team qualified the year before. What was so special? Why did Dan Balysma win it in 2011? His team had the same exact record the year before and the year he won it. Pittsburgh was 4th in the standings both years.

A very inconsistent way to chose if you ask me. It's extremely biased against certain coaches, including Babs. He's proven time and again the he deserves it. There's a reason people are shocked that he has yet to win it because the fact of the matter is he IS the best coach in the league atm.

Edited May 2, 2015 by kickazz

[13dangledangle 957]

I really hope Babs sticks around. I think as he wants to keep winning-he has stated it often-that he'll stay with the team that has 24 straight playoff's in a row, not all great show's but attempts none the less.

This team has the potential to be absolutely fantastic, with a few additions, Pulks, Landon, Marchenko all full time would be awesome, time will tell i guess

[kliq 3,755]

Even if you used that anaology. Babcock the year before had a roster that was uninjured and got them thru the playoffs. Then the year after he had an incredible amount of man games lost and got the Wings through the playoffs with basically an AHL roster. In my opinion that's a bigger feat than what Roy did. Roy had Mckinnon and Duchene. He had a pretty good team he took with him last year. We had neither of our superstars.

And that's the thing. Babs did it AGAIN this year. But Roy didn't. They didn't even make the playoffs. They ended up 12th in the conference (yikes). Hindsight: Who is the better coach then? I'm telling you, year in and year out they chose guys that might seem great candidates on the surface but that's about it.

Why did MacLean win it in 2013? Their team qualified the year before. What was so special? Why did Dan Balysma win it in 2011? His team had the same exact record the year before and the year he won it. Pittsburgh was 4th in the standings both years.

A very inconsistent way to chose if you ask me. It's extremely biased against certain coaches, including Babs. He's proven time and again the he deserves it. There's a reason people are shocked that he has yet to win it because the fact of the matter is he IS the best coach in the league atm.

I'm not saying Roy is the better coach, what I'm saying is that for that particular year Roy deserved to win. Bringing up the point that Colorado sucked again this year may even be a point towards Roy. Maybe his roster wasn't as good as people thought.

Babcock did have alot of AHL guys, but it was AHL guys who recently won a Calder cup and were definitely NHL ready. Also, If it wasn't for Nyquist leading the NHL in scoring from I believe Jan-April, I don't think Detroit even makes it last year.

Either way, I don't want it to sound as if I'm taking anything away from Babcock. He and Roy both did amazing jobs last year, I just think what Roy did was more impressive, you think what Babcock did was more impressive.

As far as 2013 & 2011, I don't remember all the different factors that would have gone into it those years, and I don't care enough to go back and look lol.

In 2011.....is that the year Malkin & Crosby were injured most of the year? I so, and they kept the same place in the standings, that's my guess as to why he won. (I could be completely wrong with this though)

I believe that the coach who gets the most out of what he has, deserves to win the Jack Adams Award. I also believe that to assess what the coach has, you have to factor in how his players performed the previous year. It may not be the only factor, but it is a major factor.

[marcaractac 3,960]

To just look at it from just Babcocks perspective is only telling half the story. Patrick Roy took a team that was 2nd worst in the NHL the year before, and got them in the playoffs at 2nd seed. I don't see how that is less impressive then what Babcock did (not taking anything away from Babcock). Its almost as if your holding the team improvement against Roy.

The coach of the year should be given to the coach who got the absolute most out of his players based on his players skill set on paper and their previous year's performance. The reason why most coaches dont get Jack Adams Award when their teams win the presidents trophy is because usually the team is stacked and is doing what it should be doing. I agree it shouldn't automatically go to the most improved team's coach, but typically the most improved team is improved because of either additions from the GM or coaching. I think Babcock did a hell of a job in 2014, but I think what Roy did was more impressive.

Think about it like this.....if Babcock went to Edmonton next year and they ended up the #2 seed, I guarantee you he wins the Jack Adams.

Hence why it should be rebranded as the most improved team award. Besides that, were are the Avs this year? Oh right. They are back to being a non playoff team. I think the Avs last season had a lot more to do with overachieving than Roy being the best coach that season.

[marcaractac 3,960]

Griffins force game 5. Road trip for Holland and Babs it is!

[kliq 3,755]

Hence why it should be rebranded as the most improved team award. Besides that, were are the Avs this year? Oh right. They are back to being a non playoff team. I think the Avs last season had a lot more to do with overachieving than Roy being the best coach that season.

That doesn't do justice to the award. Previous years performance is just one piece of criteria of many when it comes to determining the winner. Last year it just happened to work out that way since Colorado saw such an amazing turnaround (2nd worst to 2nd best doesn't happen often).

I actually think your last line works against your point. Typically, overachieving has a direct correlation to coaching. My guess is that Roy came in and turned the team around with a whole new approach, but after a years worth of video for opposing coaches to watch, his methods/strategies were exposed.

[marcaractac 3,960]

That doesn't do justice to the award. Previous years performance is just one piece of criteria of many when it comes to determining the winner. Last year it just happened to work out that way since Colorado saw such an amazing turnaround (2nd worst to 2nd best doesn't happen often).

I actually think your last line works against your point. Typically, overachieving has a direct correlation to coaching. My guess is that Roy came in and turned the team around with a whole new approach, but after a years worth of video for opposing coaches to watch, his methods/strategies were exposed.

Perhaps. But regardless, I do think what Babs accomplished last year was far more impressive. Obviously there is no way to prove it, but in imaginary land, I bet if Babs were coaching the Avs the last two seasons they'd have made the playoffs for both of them.

Just to nitpick a little bit, if it was because of Roy the Avs finished 2nd last year, and missed the postseason this year because other coaches figured him out, then that IMO makes him a coach that couldn't adjust or change things up.

I absolutely believe Roy belonged in the Jack Adams conversation. But I just think what Babs accomplished with the Wings was more impressive, and was the result of the best coaching.

[MrazekFanBoy 223]

babs is prettygud

[Rhah 195]

I think what might have hurt Babs more last year was didn't Pitt have more total man games lost ? So that one little stat is 2nd most man games lost due to injury instead of top?

[marcaractac 3,960]

I think what might have hurt Babs more last year was didn't Pitt have more total man games lost ? So that one little stat is 2nd most man games lost due to injury instead of top?

True, but the Pens also still had some of their best players around all year to carry the burden. The Wings had un-experienced kids carrying the load almost all season.

babs is prettygud

realgud