As good a job as Blashill has done with the Griffins, there is no evidence he will be a good NHL head coach. Look at Dallas Eakins -- everyone's darling a year ago coming out of the AHL, then had a lousy season were the Oilers appeared to regress. The assumption some have that Blashill is just gonna walk into Babcock's job a year from now and be as good a coach and we all live happily ever after strikes me as folly in the extreme. We have the best coach in hockey, by far IMO, and we should be trying to re-up him for several more years. The idea that his shelf life is coming to an end might have some validity, but all the roster turnover we have had and that is still coming would seem to mitigate that.
I agree with this. I hope Blashill is a solid head coach in the NHL, but we really have no clue whether he'll be phenomenal or a total bust until he's been behind the bench. What makes me optimistic is that several coaches who have worked alongside Babcock have gone on to have successful coaching gigs elsewhere, and Holland and co decided to retain Blashill, which may speak to his potential. He has also had amazing (and surprisingly immediate) success at the college level, and in the AHL. He already coaches a similar style to the Wings' system, as evidenced by how successful our call-ups have been. Everyone was expecting Nyqvist to shine, but probably not as brightly as he did. I wasn't expecting Jurco and certainly not Sheahan to steal spots this year, and Glendening also came out of nowhere. I think their success at the NHL level is partly due to how they were coached in the years leading up to this.
Anyway, I guess if and when the time comes that Babcock moves on from his current position, unless Trotz or Tippet are available, I would be comfortable taking a chance on Blashill. He's certainly done everything he can do to at least earn the opportunity to be a head coach.
- Hockeymom1960 likes this