Here's a very blunt read.............

[krsmith17 7,191]

3 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

The same reason my supervisor would get chewed out by his boss if he allowed me to be completely incompetent at work without addressing it.  Blashill is the head coach, he's ultimately responsible for the on ice product.

So wouldn't that make Holland ultimately responsible for the on ice product? Or Illitch?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Over half the teams make the playoffs.  It's not a great accomplishment.  He took over basically the same team Babcock had and made almost every single player worse with his stupid usage and non-existent "system" for the PP.  He's doubled down on all that this year.  So, besides leading an under-performing team to a putrid playoff showing, what makes him an NHL head coach, other than having a GM too complacent to fire him?  Because that doesn't make him an NHL caliber head coach any more than Almquist scoring a goal in the NHL makes in an NHL player.

Because I have to continue to see him bumble his way around the NHL.  Same reason I went off about Matt Millen, Rod Marinelli, and Rodriguez when they were leading my favorite football teams.  He should have been on a short leash to start the season and have been fired long ago.  But Kenny "Mr. Loyalty" Holland can't bring himself to do that.

Im not arguing hes had a good performance. His performance has been just as bad as your own. 

[kliq 3,755]

5 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

The same reason my supervisor would get chewed out by his boss if he allowed me to be completely incompetent at work without addressing it.  Blashill is the head coach, he's ultimately responsible for the on ice product.

Blashill is blinded by hard work, big bodies, "grinding it out" etc.  It's like he has no clue that there are other factors in making a good player.  His ultimate team would be 12 players like Glendening, Helm, Abdelkader, and Sheahan up front with 6 play it safe defensive defensemen.  If you're defending most of the time you're on the ice, that doesn't make you good defensively, it means you don't have the ability to possess the puck, and by doing that score goals.

How do you know what goes on behind closed doors? All we know is if the coach is fired or not fired. What is said between those two is not something any of use know, so lets not pretend to be insiders.

Edited February 5, 2017 by kliq

[kickazz 5,459]

11 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Over half the teams make the playoffs.  It's not a great accomplishment.  He took over basically the same team Babcock had and made almost every single player worse with his stupid usage and non-existent "system" for the PP.  He's doubled down on all that this year.  So, besides leading an under-performing team to a putrid playoff showing, what makes him an NHL head coach, other than having a GM too complacent to fire him?  Because that doesn't make him an NHL caliber head coach any more than Almquist scoring a goal in the NHL makes in an NHL player.

 

Can you explain to me why Babcock did worse in the 2013-2014 season than Blashill did in 2015-2016 season? The answer is because he didn't have his superstars that one year. 

Here you go for your reference. 

 

 

So is it actually Blashill? Sure he's a new coach. But it's alarming that Mike Babcock performed worse than Blashill did when Zetterberg/ Dats got injured that year. To me this shows how much superstar players can really make a difference. Even the great Babcock couldn't do much without his Euro Twins. And we all remember what happened as soon as we lost lidstrom between 2012 and 2013, we finished 7th in the conference in 2013 (down from 5th in the conference with Lidstrom in 2012). Remember the 23 game home win streak with Lidstrom in 2012? What happened to that in 2013? That's right, same coach but no more Lidstrom. 

Like it or not, superstar players make a difference. We have none. Sure Blashill is an issue. He's just a part of it. But let's not scapegoat a guy when his predecessor clearly struggled without the players he needed. (look at the proof above).

I'm not sure if people are having amnesia but Zetterberg and Datsyuk had the ability to single handedly carry the team to victories. Fact of the matter is, we don't have those types of players anymore. 

Edited February 5, 2017 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

How do you know what goes on behind closed doors? All we know is if the coach is fired or not fired. What is said between those two is not something any of use know, so lets not pretend to be insiders.

Nothing has changed and nobody has been fired. It hasn't been addressed.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Can you explain to me why Babcock did worse in the 2013-2014 season than Blashill did in 2015-2016 season? The answer is because he didn't have his superstars that one year. 
Here you go for your reference. 

 

 
So is it actually Blashill? Sure he's a new coach. But it's alarming that Mike Babcock performed worse than Blashill did when Zetterberg/ Dats got injured that year. To me this shows how much superstar players can really make a difference. Even the great Babcock couldn't do much without his Euro Twins. And we all remember what happened as soon as we lost lidstrom between 2012 and 2013, we finished 7th in the conference in 2013 (down from 5th in the conference with Lidstrom in 2012). Remember the 23 game home win streak with Lidstrom in 2012? What happened to that in 2013? That's right, same coach but no more Lidstrom. 
Like it or not, superstar players make a difference. We have none. Sure Blashill is an issue. He's just a part of it. But let's not scapegoat a guy when his predecessor clearly struggled without the players he needed. (look at the proof above).
I'm not sure if people are having amnesia but Zetterberg and Datsyuk had the ability to single handedly carry the team to victories. Fact of the matter is, we don't have those types of players anymore. 

Both teams had 93 points and were 8th in the east. Blashill's team had a worse goal differential. Babcock's team looked ready to play in the playoffs, Blashill's didn't. But tell me again how Blashill did better.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Both teams had 93 points and were 8th in the east. Blashill's team had a worse goal differential. Babcock's team looked ready to play in the playoffs, Blashill's didn't. But tell me again how Blashill did better.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

First of all, we finished 3rd in the division under Blash and were wild card under Babcock. And second of all you're failing to see the point which is mind boggling to me because I know you're smarter than that.

The point is this. You claim that Blashill is not an NHL caliber coach. But I just showed you an instance that Mike Babcock, "the best coach in all  of hockey" finished worse than Blashill did when he was missing certain key players as well. For s***s lets just say they both finished the same because of the 93 points and let's go ahead and look at the silly point you made about goal differential. It was a 5 goal differential (lmao big deal btw) . 

Mike Babcock - 39 wins , goal differential better by 5 , 93 points. 

Jeff Blashill - 41 wins , worse goal differential by 5 , 93 points. 

Since you're saying that Blashill is not an NHL calibre coach, by your own assessment what does that make Mike Babcock? Remember that year Mike Babcock had  Franzen, Alfredsson and Kronwall (still in his prime) playing for him. Blashill had none of those and he had a slow Zetterberg and a slow Datsyuk, his only plus was having Mrazek and Larkin.  If Mike Babcock is really all that great you would think the team would have done far better. So is it the coach? Or is it the fact that neither coach had elite super star players performing well /healthy in those years? 

Also about this statement you made "Babcock's team looked ready to play in the playoffs, Blashill's didn't. But tell me again how Blashill did better."

^ Babcock's team got KO'd by Boston 4-1 in one of the most embarassing ways in recent memory. Blashill too lost 4-1 to Tampa.

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by kickazz

[kliq 3,755]

4 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Nothing has changed and nobody has been fired. It hasn't been addressed.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

A person not being fired does not mean that things have not been addressed.

Either way, that's not what you said. You said that if your supervisor made a mistake, his boss would chew him out, you never said fired. When I bring up the fact that none of us know what goes on behind closed doors, you are change your argument. 

Long story short, I think you bring up a lot of good points Dickie, but when it comes to Blashill you go WAYYY over the top likely due to emotion, and a person can't debate with emotion. It's no different then the Helm/Abby contracts, because you didn't like their contracts, you are no longer fair when critiquing anything about them. 

 

[kickazz 5,459]

Just now, kliq said:

A person not being fired does not mean that things have not been addressed.

Either way, that's not what you said. You said that if your supervisor made a mistake, his boss would chew him out, you never said fired. When I bring up the fact that none of us know what goes on behind closed doors, you are change your argument. 

Long story short, I think you bring up a lot of good points Dickie, but when it comes to Blashill you go WAYYY over the top likely due to emotion, and a person can't debate with emotion. It's no different then the Helm/Abby contracts, because you didn't like their contracts, you are no longer fair when critiquing anything about them. 

 

Ahh yes the good old logical fallacy of "Appeal to Emotion" 

[kickazz 5,459]

Just look at the difference Connor McDavid is making for Edmonton. It's insane. They had 1st picks for years and couldn't get anything done. One guy comes in and changes the franchise.

Bring him here under Blashill's coaching system and we'd be a playoff contender. Just saying. Coaches are being overrated around here. Our players suck (except Mantha and Zetterberg for his age) and so does Blashill. 

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

A person not being fired does not mean that things have not been addressed.
Either way, that's not what you said. You said that if your supervisor made a mistake, his boss would chew him out, you never said fired. When I bring up the fact that none of us know what goes on behind closed doors, you are change your argument. 
Long story short, I think you bring up a lot of good points Dickie, but when it comes to Blashill you go WAYYY over the top likely due to emotion, and a person can't debate with emotion. It's no different then the Helm/Abby contracts, because you didn't like their contracts, you are no longer fair when critiquing anything about them. 
 

Because I'm emotionally involved doesn't make me wrong.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[kliq 3,755]

1 minute ago, DickieDunn said:

Because I'm emotionally involved doesn't make me wrong.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Again, I never said you were flat out wrong, I said you are over the top.

[kickazz 5,459]

38 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Because I'm emotionally involved doesn't make me wrong.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Still waiting for a response. Is Babock at the level of Blashill for having a similar (technically worse) season with better secondary players and the same two elite superstars either injured/not performing as their prime level?

Is the common denominator the coach or is it the Euro-Twins?

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by kickazz

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

About the PP... If there's data out there I'd love to see a heat map of positioning. One thing I noticed last night on the highlights I saw (can't watch much being in the UK, grr) the PP unit we're so deep to the net: both point guys were practically in the faceoff circles. It just meant that any PKers had no need for drastic movement, the clogged the area in front of the net and for a man advantage we didn't seem to make them work. I remember when we were a league leading PP team having two guys on the blue line, passing the puck and making the PK work until they were tired. It was more ruthless if anything rather than just being better skilled players. I think that may be the main problem with our D in general, just not as fit. I mean yeah Lids was a machine, Chelios too and it's no surprise they were so good for so long. Third period last night there were chances where our D didn't do anything wrong as such, but just couldn't react and simple chances were given up. And I guess that's why we get outshot 19-42. Kinda explains how we can be so inconsistent.