All purpose Mike Babcock thread

[kipwinger 8,522]

Yup

But if you don't insist your guy is the best them you're a hater.

He's not even our guy. That's the funny part. It would be like Dallas fans insisting that Ken Hitchcock is the "best coach in hockey". It woudn't make any sense at all. Not only because he's clearly not, but also because why the hell would Dallas fans care about Ken Hitchcock anymore.

[kliq 3,755]

Look at his resume... That should be enough. The fact that Hockey Canada are choosing him again, another solid indication of his ability. Truth is, the Wings missed the play offs 2 and 3 years back if it were for his ability to get the most out of players. He is the best coach in the world, that does not mean he is a miracle worker. Toronto is a team that has few good players and NOTHING in the pipeline. Hate him if you want, think he is traitor, a miserable prick whatever but you can't let that cloud the fact that is is the winningest coach in Red Wing history. 1 tim Stanley Cup Champion, 2 time Olympic gold Champion, and a World Cup champion... Winning is in his blood as it is in Bowman blood also.

Never once did I say he was any of the things in bold.

Out of all the accolades you listed, the only one that matters is the cup. I hate when people use the gold medals when doing a comparison to other coaches. How many other coaches are given an opportunity to win a gold medal with a team that has a chance? The answer at best is 5 other coaches every 4 years. Add in the fact that his roster was stacked, not fair to compare. World Cup Champion? I assume you mean World Championships? If so, winning that tournament does not make you best in the world.

Babcock is a great coach, but to say he is without a doubt the best coach in the world is just wrong. He's one of the best. Just because certain posters feel the need to say it every post, doesn't make it true.

I agree with everything you just said Kip.

[rick zombo 3,739]

Babcock love = Canadian slappies slapping their slap.

(I'm canadian)

[The Secret 304]

Babcock love = Canadian slappies slapping their slap.

(I'm canadian)

This has a lot to do with it too

[DickieDunn 2,571]

He's not even our guy. That's the funny part. It would be like Dallas fans insisting that Ken Hitchcock is the "best coach in hockey". It woudn't make any sense at all. Not only because he's clearly not, but also because why the hell would Dallas fans care about Ken Hitchcock anymore.

But he was our guy and you can't go from best in the world easily to just ok overnight just because he leaves. Give it a year and he won't be the best anymore

[The Secret 304]

Never once did I say he was any of the things in bold.

Out of all the accolades you listed, the only one that matters is the cup. I hate when people use the gold medals when doing a comparison to other coaches. How many other coaches are given an opportunity to win a gold medal with a team that has a chance? The answer at best is 5 other coaches every 4 years. Add in the fact that his roster was stacked, not fair to compare. World Cup Champion? I assume you mean World Championships? If so, winning that tournament does not make you best in the world.

Babcock is a great coach, but to say he is without a doubt the best coach in the world is just wrong. He's one of the best. Just because certain posters feel the need to say it every post, doesn't make it true.

I agree with everything you just said Kip.

The guy wins is the point. It shows his ability to coach no matter where. The old "team was stacked" thing.... Every Canadian Olympic team is stacked but they don't always win, why is that? Takes one hell of a coach to manage the room of ego's and in such a short period of time get them organized and working together enough to win against 4 -5 other stacked teams and their coaches. That is an impressive feat of coaching strength. Now let's look at the team's Babcock worked with compared to Quenville and his 25 stanley cups. Chicago had to suck hairy balls for some time to get that team + 2 drops of Bowman blood and Quenville has done a fantastic job with what he was given. Red Wings glory days after the Dead WIng era ended years ago. The last few seasons especially Babcock worked with far less talent then Chicago + a zillion injuries \ alot of young and inexperienced youth = Yet another feat of coaching strength getting a depleted team into the play offs. 2 of those teams had no business even being there yet they were and they were highly competitive losing in 7 games to the evntual stanlet cup champions for that year.

It's true, I am a Babcock slappy... I think he is the best in the world, apparently the powers that be in Canadian hockey believe it so also or they'd choose Quenville and how ever many cups he has to lead (but they don't)

Edited November 4, 2015 by The Secret

[kipwinger 8,522]

It's problematic that you're seemingly equating being the best coach with being Canada's National team coach. It makes your argument at tautology . Babcock is the best because regardless of his NHL successes (by which he's been good but not great) he's been REALLY successful with Team Canada, and he's REALLY successful with Team Canada because he's obviously the best.

Which would work were it not for the fact that there's this whole other level of hockey, which is WAY more difficult to succeed at. And at that level, Babcock has been notably outshined by several other active coaches.

Quenneville is pretty clearly the best hockey coach in the world. At the highest possible level, in the best possible league, he's got the most wins and the most championships. That's a lock.

[The Secret 304]

If it's a lock then why isn't Q the coach for Team Canada? Seem he was chosen to be the assistant to the best coach in the world

[kipwinger 8,522]

If it's a lock then why isn't Q the coach for Team Canada? Seem he was chosen to be the assistant to the best coach in the world

Who knows? Probably for the same reason that John Tortarella is the Coach for Team USA instead of better coaches like Laviolette, or Cooper, or Bylsma.

You're not the best because you have a particular position. You're the best when you've had more success at the highest possible level. And by that (completely reasonable) standard, Quenneville is the best.

Edit: That's like saying whoever is Team Canada's captain is by default the best player in the world (so long as they win Gold), regardless of what they've done in the NHL. Which is absurd.

Edited November 4, 2015 by kipwinger

[The Secret 304]

Who knows? Probably for the same reason that John Tortarella is the Coach for Team USA instead of better coaches like Laviolette, or Cooper, or Bylsma.

You're not the best because you have a particular position. You're the best when you've had more success at the highest possible level. And by that (completely reasonable) standard, Quenneville is the best.

Edit: That's like saying whoever is Team Canada's captain is by default the best player in the world (so long as they win Gold), regardless of what they've done in the NHL. Which is absurd.

Sorry. I don't think you measure success solely on the number of Stanley Cups you have won. To me the way Babcock coached some of these teams even into the play offs (the one's that had no business to be there) is as big a measure of success if not more. The greatest challenge Quenville's hawks faced on route to the Cup a few years ago was Babcock's limping, battered and bruised Red Wings. Team Canada chose Babcock because they believe him to be the best despite others having more cups.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

How many Stanley Cups does Joel Quenneville have to win before people stop calling Babcock the "Best coach in the world"? Six? Seven? Fifteen?

This is the biggest issue I have with Babcock. He's clearly a good coach. Nobody would argue that. But it's this asinine insistence, by his legion of acolytes, that he's "the bestest of the bestest" that drives mef****** crazy.

He's not. There's not a single objective measure that indicates he's the best at anything. Other people have more wins. Other people have a higher win percentage. Other people have more Cups.

To keep everything completely honest, he is the only triple gold coach. He's also the only one to win back-to back golds as head coach (maybe in history - somebody might know better than I). But I know the arguments against that - that few get the chance to be national coaches and that Canada's team was stacked.

Most of Hockey's big pundits are Canadian so that plays a factor with the plies of love he gets since he has the national attatchment that olympic winners get.

Quenville should get more love.

[kipwinger 8,522]

Sorry. I don't think you measure success solely on the number of Stanley Cups you have won. To me the way Babcock coached some of these teams even into the play offs (the one's that had no business to be there) is as big a measure of success if not more. The greatest challenge Quenville's hawks faced on route to the Cup a few years ago was Babcock's limping, battered and bruised Red Wings. Team Canada chose Babcock because they believe him to be the best despite others having more cups.

Lol. Way to rewrite history. Babcock had as good, or better, teams that Quenneville for the vast majority of his career. Quenneville has NEVER coached a single player better than Datsyuk, Zettererg, or Lidstrom. Babcock had all three, in their primes, at the same time. Babcock had 2 Hall of Fame goalies (yes, Osgood will get in), Quenneville has had none. And you're trying to make it seem like he had nothing to work with. Lol. Even the last few years Babcock has had playoff caliber teams. He wasn't coaching the Buffalo Sabres into the playoffs. He was coaching a perennial winner with a number of stars, some of whom were occasionally hurt. Big deal.

The year we had the 2nd most man games lost to injury we limped into the playoffs and lost in the first round. That same year the Pens had the MOST man games lost and won their division...and a playoff series. Yet nobody says Bylsma is the greatest coach in the league (despite having as many Cups and a higher win percentage than Babcock I might add).

You're selectively remembering the past to support an untenable argument. And I don't understand why. Canada DOES have the best coach in hockey. A guy who consistently wins. A guy who consistently brings out the best in his talent. A guy who displays, and expects, excellence. His name just isn't Mike Babcock. Embrace it.

[rick zombo 3,739]

You're selectively remembering the past to support an untenable argument. And I don't understand why. Canada DOES have the best coach in hockey. A guy who consistently wins. A guy who consistently brings out the best in his talent. A guy who displays, and expects, excellence. His name just isn't Mike Babcock. Embrace it.

Ah but the problem is that one guy looks like John Oats and the other guy has a chin like Batman. Also one guy doesn't use "u" to replace all other vowels when speaking which perhaps doesn't appeal as much to the Molson-swilling disciples of Cherry.

[kipwinger 8,522]

To keep everything completely honest, he is the only triple gold coach. He's also the only one to win back-to back golds as head coach (maybe in history - somebody might know better than I). But I know the arguments against that - that few get the chance to be national coaches and that Canada's team was stacked.

Most of Hockey's big pundits are Canadian so that plays a factor with the plies of love he gets since he has the national attatchment that olympic winners get.

Quenville should get more love.

I don't even ague that. Nobody can take Babs' successes in international play away from him. I'm certainly not trying to. I'm simply stating that it's easier to win a Gold Medal than to win the Stanley Cup. So holding up gold medals as accolades is dubious. Especially when Quenneville has as many Cups as Babcock has Cups AND Gold Medals.

It's like saying a guy with 1 Superbowl Championship and 2 NCAA championships (Pete Caroll) is a better coach that a guy with 3 Superbowl Championships and zero NCAA championships (Joe Gibbs, Bill Walsh). Nobody would believe it in any other sport, but they do in Babcock's case for some reason.

[kickazz 5,459]

I think Scotty Bowman was twice the coach Babcock is.

[rick zombo 3,739]

I think Scotty Bowman was twice the coach Babcock is.

He was the Penguin to Babcock's Batman.

[kipwinger 8,522]

I think Scotty Bowman was twice the coach Babcock is.

By my count he's about 9X the coach Babcock is.

[kickazz 5,459]

Quineville's gotten eliminated by Detroit in the playoffs 5 times. I'm not arguing for or against his coaching.

Just a random statistic I kind of found funny.

[The Secret 304]

I don't even ague that. Nobody can take Babs' successes in international play away from him. I'm certainly not trying to. I'm simply stating that it's easier to win a Gold Medal than to win the Stanley Cup. So holding up gold medals as accolades is dubious. Especially when Quenneville has as many Cups as Babcock has Cups AND Gold Medals.

It's like saying a guy with 1 Superbowl Championship and 2 NCAA championships (Pete Caroll) is a better coach that a guy with 3 Superbowl Championships and zero NCAA championships (Joe Gibbs, Bill Walsh). Nobody would believe it in any other sport, but they do in Babcock's case for some reason.

It's easier to win a Gold medal then a Stanley Cup is it? Really? Explain how that is. You keep ignoring that the chosen leaders of these useless National teams (normally they are the best players in the NHL for their respective countries of origin) are chosing Babcock again over Quenville.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

I don't even ague that. Nobody can take Babs' successes in international play away from him. I'm certainly not trying to. I'm simply stating that it's easier to win a Gold Medal than to win the Stanley Cup. So holding up gold medals as accolades is dubious. Especially when Quenneville has as many Cups as Babcock has Cups AND Gold Medals.

It's like saying a guy with 1 Superbowl Championship and 2 NCAA championships (Pete Caroll) is a better coach that a guy with 3 Superbowl Championships and zero NCAA championships (Joe Gibbs, Bill Walsh). Nobody would believe it in any other sport, but they do in Babcock's case for some reason.

I want to make it clear I'm not arguing for the "Babcock is the greatest" and is untouchable. But Quenville wasn't head coach of the Olymipic teams so saying he has as many gold medals as Babs seems dubious as well.

I agree that cups are harder to win than the gold - except if you're the Latvian coach. Coach of Canada is the just don't f*** it up position.

More of Bab's bonefides from wikipedia: Babcock is the only coach to win five distinct national or international titles, guiding Canada to gold at the IIHF World Junior Championships in 1997 and the University of Lethbridge to the CIS University Cup in 1994.

He does a more diverse set of championships than Quenneville. Over course, Cups are the ultimate prize. I don't think you can just count cups, though, and say the guy with the most is the best.

Edited November 4, 2015 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[frankgrimes 1,836]

TheSecret

why are your even arguing with the anti Babcock crowd? It's not worth it let them think whatever they want

The people who are in the know or tasked with building and leading team Canada's all-star roster know it and most normal fans do too, it's Babcock without question.

But hey now that the ABC has their own thread it's going to be fun seeing how emotionally attached they are because others don't share their viewpoint rotfl.

Edited November 4, 2015 by frankgrimes

[kipwinger 8,522]

It's easier to win a Gold medal then a Stanley Cup is it? Really? Explain how that is. You keep ignoring that the chosen leaders of these useless National teams (normally they are the best players in the NHL for their respective countries of origin) are chosing Babcock again over Quenville.

Lol. Because you have to play 82 games just to qualify, and then for several more months in the post season, overcome a grueling travel schedule, and win 16 games to win the Stanley Cup. You have to win 4 games in one place to with an Olympic Gold. How is that not apparent?

I'm not ignoring anything, I've already told you why that's silly. If being Canada's coach makes you the best coach, then being Canada's captain makes you the best player. Which means that in 1994 Fabian Joseph was the best player in the world, and not Sergei Fedorov. Lol.

I want to make it clear I'm not arguing for the "Babcock is the greatest" and is untouchable. But Quenville wasn't head coach of the Olymipic teams so saying he has as many gold medals as Babs seems dubious as well.

I agree that cups are harder to win than the gold - except if you're the Latvian coach. Coach of Canada is the just don't f*** it up position.

I didn't say he had as many gold medals. I said he has as many Cups as Babcock has Cups AND Gold Medals. And Cups are harder to win.

Edited November 4, 2015 by kipwinger

[kickazz 5,459]

It's easier to win a Gold medal then a Stanley Cup is it? Really? Explain how that is. You keep ignoring that the chosen leaders of these useless National teams (normally they are the best players in the NHL for their respective countries of origin) are chosing Babcock again over Quenville.

I think what he meant to say was -

It's easier to win the Gold medal coaching a CANADIAN roster than it is with an NHL team.

I can't really think of any national team besides Sweden that can compete against Team Canada.

It's usually a sure shot to win it coaching Canada these days. Regardless of whether your name is Babcock, Quenneville, Roy, Monkey, Batman, Wonder woman.

Edited November 4, 2015 by kickazz

[rick zombo 3,739]

It's easier to win a Gold medal then a Stanley Cup is it? Really? Explain how that is. You keep ignoring that the chosen leaders of these useless National teams (normally they are the best players in the NHL for their respective countries of origin) are chosing Babcock again over Quenville.

Yzerman and Holland and co. went "in house" back in 2010 for the olympics. They knew Babcock and knew him well. His Canadian team barely and I mean barely beat an inferior USA squad. He got the call again in 2014 because of experience.

Also, "Best coach in the world evah!!!!" and "right man for the job" are not necessarily synonymous.

[The Secret 304]

You coach and practice and get to know and tweak the same team for months vs. You get a team of unknown players and have weeks to get them to win a tournament against the very best in the world... one loss in the finals and you're out. Not saying it is easy to win the Cup... it is not at all but winning a gold medal let alone 2 back to back... How is that not apparent?

I never said being Canada's coach makes you the best in the world btw. It just so happen's that for now, it is true!