Measuring Stick #2: Detroit

The big story today seems to be the whole Todd McLellan vs. Mike Babcock sub-plot (I was going to do an Obi-Wan/Darth Vader Photoshop of the two with the "When I left you, I was but the learner. Now I am the master," line but I ran out of time) but that whole thing doesn't really mean that much to me. I mean, these guys are professionals and they knew that some day this was probably going to happen.

My bigger focus is on seeing how the Sharks compare as a whole to the Wings. Like it or not, the god damn Red Wings have been the measuring stick for the league since the mid-90s (give or take a few seasons), and the emphasis is even higher now that they're defending champs. Holding Sidney Crosby and company to just a handful of shots showed that the Sharks were ready to put forth a strong defensive effort against an elite opponent, but I got the sense that the Penguins were off their game on Tuesday. I doubt I'm the only one who thought that the whole game was pretty darn boring.

So, what to expect tonight? The Sharks certainly are playing their own version of the Wings attack style, but I see San Jose as more based on speed and the Wings based more on passing/possession. The idea isn't to necessarily outshine Detroit at their own game; instead, it's all about bringing the necessary effort to make the Sharks' own system the superior one.

A few more random notes:

-Joe Thornton's groin injury seems more obvious with each game. He simply doesn't use his legs or lower body to protect the puck the way that he normally does, and assuming he didn't just revert into a craptacular player over the off-season, I'm assuming this is the lingering effects of his injury. Since I'm not a doctor (and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night), I don't know if this is one of those injuries where you can't rest it, you just have to work through it. I'm doubting that, though, since it seems like any sort of leg/abdomen injury would heal better with resting rather than playing at elite-level competition. Plus the team is scoring by committee right now, and I'd rather have 100% Thornton later than 75% Thornton for the bulk of the season (since these things linger forever).

-For all you King fans...um...well, I see what you were complaining about with Rob Blake. Those first two games kinda seem like an abberation now, don't they?

-The Sharks power play started using a slightly different look with one guy in the crease and another guy in the high slot. The strategy here seems to have the low guy providing a screen while the high player looks to deflect a shot in. Jonathan Cheechoo had a few dandy deflections against the Penguins and it's nice to get some refreshing special teams strategy after the Ron Wilson days.

Good Start...So Far So Good

Opening night is always a fun time. It was a little subdued, no laser light show or other pre-game theatrics. Can anyone tell me where the Sharks head was? The players skating out without it was kinda weird. It was nice to see an unveiling of another division banner but that is not the banner that we want.

The "new" style of play was pretty evident. Centers were driving toward the net and players seemed to be moving all the time. Somebody must of put a picture of Ron Wilson's face outside the crease as Patrick Marleau was actually seen in front of the net screening Giguere. The power play was generating scoring chance after scoring chance. Noticably absent from the half wall, Joe Thornton played more like a power forward. Last year it seems the power play was "let's get Joe the puck and let him create." Sure it is only one game but there was a decided effort to get the puck to the point and let Rob Blake fire away. Opposing defenses will have to start respecting our point men, which they never had to before. Even if Blake's shots were off target, just the threat of him back there seemed to give the forwards extra space. Dan Boyle seemed to never leave the ice and looked like the puck mover we have always needed. Good riddance Brian Campbell.

On a lighter note and Rudy should love this one. This guy behind me was explaining to his girlfriend about all the different players. When he got to Rudy's favorite Corey Perry here is his description: "That guy is a really good player, 50 goal potential, one of the best players in the league (all which is debatable)........but he is a real PRICK. That got me laughing. This weekend is a home/home with the Kings. Rob Blake's homecoming on Sunday night. It will be interesting to see the reaction he gets.

Todd McClellan Hearts BoC

Todd McLellan must read the Battle of California. I'm convinced of it. I mean, why else would he hammer home the same damn points that we've been harping on for about a year?

Mark Purdy of the San Jose Mercury News sat down with McLellan and his key points sounded like a wish list designed to meet BoC complaints:

McLellan wants that commitment to remain. But he also wants the Sharks to score 250 to 260 goals.

Oh, snap! Score more goals, be a better team. I like that formula! Ok, I never complained about things in that simple of terms, but I think we can all agree on this.

McLellan has the numbers to prove his point. In studying the statistical charts from 2007-08, one number popped out at him: shots taken by defensemen. Detroit, the best team in the league, had more than 800 shots from the blue line. Sharks defensemen took only 536 shots.

One of the most common gripes from us at BoC is that the old Ron Wilson power play involved a lot of hesitation. Point man gets the puck, he holds it...holds it...HOLDS IT (anyone get my Simpsons reference?) before faking a shot and passing it to Joe Thornton. The process repeats about four times before the point man finally shoots it into the shin guards of the opposing defenseman.

Quick and crisp. That's how you generate shots from the point.

That leads me to a quick tangent about Christian Ehrhoff. Ehrhoff's probably got the biggest shot of any Shark but he often either shoots high or just doesn't take the shot. I know last season was about Christian becoming a stronger defensive defenseman and that's all well and good. Still, I'm hoping under McLellan he can put it all together.

And I like Drew Remenda's recommendation of Ehrhoff taking shots at the net in practice until he hits the net 100 times.

"If the puck's not at the net, why go there?" McLellan asks by way of an answer. "If we get the back end that's prepared to put pucks through to the net, and we have people going there, we solve two problems. ... The question about whether Joe should be standing net-front or somewhere else ... I don't want Joe to be standing anywhere. I want motion. I want Joe to be moving. I want everyone moving. The unpredictability of where he might be would be a tough thing for teams to handle."

Yes, yes, yes. Oh, the hockey gods have answered BoC's requests. This is comes in two parts. First off, pre-Brian Campbell, the Sharks' power play was extremely static. It usually consisted of giving Thornton the puck on the half boards, then everyone standing still until bad stuff happened. That sucked. After Campbell came on board, his constant movement on the power play forced the entire team to react and rotate, thus freeing up space and passing lanes. And you know what? It freakin' worked, at least until the playoffs.

Second point -- the whole world has been asking Thornton to drive to the net more ever since he got here. I don't think Thornton's ever going to win the Rocket Richard trophy but he's got a better shot than people give him credit for. Also, when he drives the net, it forces the defense to shadow him rather than just block his passing lanes -- which, of course, opens up other passing lanes. Keep them guessing and they won't just take the obvious passing lane to Jonathan Cheechoo.

McLellan's previously talked about another major BoC complaint: the fact that the Ron Wilson Sharks never kept moving their feet. That's hockey 101 and I don't know if the guys didn't listen to Ron Wilson or if wilson just forgot to emphasize the point. Whatever the case, there were far too many times when the Sharks passed the center red line and went into coast mode. McLellan wants speed, speed, and speed -- through the neutral zone, breaking the blueline, and on the pursuit and forecheck.

Yes and yes, I say. I honestly have no clue whether or not McLellan reads BoC or not (though really, if you're researching the Sharks before taking a job, wouldn't this be the first place to visit? Just saying.) but what he's publicly preaching is exactly what's been prescribed here for a long, long time.

Which brings up another question. Does that mean that our wacky family of Sharks bloggers here is smart enough to coach an NHL team?

Hmm...

Kings Coaching Shuffle

So I'm little late on this, but the Kings have brought back Mark Hardy to coach the blueline and the penalty kill. Hardy was previously with the team under Andy Murray and did a pretty good job coaching our penalty kill while he was here. Plus, he laid this hit in the '93 finals, which was definitely charging but I don't care:





The interesting thing about this move is that apparently Terry Murray didn't have too much to do with this hire. At Inside the Kings, Hardy mentioned that he and Murray haven't talked before. That seems weird and kind of points to Lombardi taking a more direct role in the organization. I don't know if that's good or not.

The Kings also promoted Jamie Kompon (whose previous title was "Coach Who Has to Talk to Tom Murray Between Periods") and Nelson Emerson. They were the two that dealt with prospects and the younger players, so it makes sense to keep them on. Mark Johnston was offered a job within the organization but he didn't accept. It probably didn't make sense to keep him around, seeing as he was the runner-up to Terry Murray. Also fired was Dave Lewis. I don't think Mathieu Schneider would have been comfortable coming here if Dave Lewis was still with the team.

Carlyle gets two-year extension, will he crack a smile?

While the rest of the California teams have opted to fire and replace their head coaches this offseason, the Anaheim Ducks have taken a more controversial approach: extending Coach Carlyle's contract another two years. Carlyle, like 85% of Anaheim's roster, was set to have his contract expire at the end of the coming season.

Now I'm not a guy (surprisingly?) who has a whole lot to say about coaching: a lot of what makes a good coach is a good team, and Carlyle's certainly done well when his roster is stocked with its proper dosage of Pronger and Niedermayer. Aside from his players, though, much of a coach's impact is tough for me to isolate. How good a coach would Carlyle be behind the Kings' bench, for example? I'm not sure, but I can say this: Carlyle is one of the most diligent line-matching coaches I've seen, and he has gotten great mileage out of having Pahlsson manage the murderer's minutes and Getzlaf or Selanne milking the easy minutes. I can also appreciate how his blue line is managed; allocating minutes to Niedermayer and Pronger seems like it would be an easy task, but there's certainly in-game considerations that need to be made.

While I can't fully explain or articulate all the strategic nuances that make Carlyle a good coach, I will add that I appreciate his overall grumpiness. One thing that struck me about the last two cup-winning coaches (Carlyle and Babcock) is how awkward they both looked in trying to crack a smile after their final win. In both cases, the attempted display of joy turned out to be a little bit scary and awfully short-lived; smiles were clearly not a practiced expression for them.

It really makes me wonder: how much of good hockey coaching is demeanor? Can a good Xs-and-Os coach be betrayed by a jovial attitude? I don't really know, but regardless, I'm glad to have the grump extended. His system seems to work for the Ducks, and as Superintendant Chalmers once said semi-approvingly about Principle Skinner, "He seems to know the kids' names."

Go Ducks.

Dumpster Diving

Two rumors to chase down: the Kings want to sign a 40 year-old coming off open heart surgery, and they want to trade for a guy that you'd think just underwent open heart surgery.

Also, Mike Brophy does a good job outlining why Kings' fans shouldn't be jumping off bridges. It's kind of amazing how people bitched and bitched that the Kings have never rebuilt properly and now they're whining because we haven't been good in 2 years. What the fuck did you think rebuilding meant?

Oh, and here's quick little bit on Colten Teubert, Kings' new draft pick and douche bag. I have a feeling this guy is going to get way too much credit over the course of his career. I feel bad but I kind of hope Brown crushes him during training camp.

***

I haven't written much on new coach Terry Murray because what can I say? I don't really know his style of coaching in the "New NHL" and I haven't seen him make a mistake yet. So I'll leave it up to you guys, then: what would you like to see Terry Murray do most with this team? Install a trap? Work on Kopitar's defensive game? Keep lines together for more than 2 minutes at a time? Let me know in the comments.

Kings Close to Hiring Terry Murray

...Who's Terry Murray?

Apparently, Terry Murray is a former coach of the Flyers, Caps and Panthers. I'm pretty sure he was the one that called Eric Lindros a choker after they got their asses kicked by Detroit and was fired. He's had 9 seasons in the NHL and only one of them has been a losing one, so that's a plus. He was an assistant coach with Philadelphia prior to this so we know he has a working relationship with both Dean Lombardi and Ron Hextall.

Oh, and he's Bryan Murray's brother.

I have no idea how this is going to work out because I don't know too much about Murray's philosophy or anything like that, but hey, at least the Kings will have a coach now. Welcome aboard, Terry Murray. Try not to fuck up.

Leaguewide scoring trends raise a few questions

Well, last August and last January I put together a graph showing post-lockout scoring trends, and seeing as we’ve got another full season under our belts I figured it was due for an update. This graph separates each regular season into 27 weeks, each representing something like 45 games played. For each week, I’ve captured the average number of goals, power play goals, and power play opportunities (multiplied by a 1/6 conversion factor, which approximates PP efficiency).

(click image to enlarge)
Really, there’s nothing new to report: goal-scoring continues to decline on a fairly linear path as power play goals decline, following the steady decline in power play opportunities (I'm not going to explain the decline in whistles in this post -- call it "player adjustment" or "relaxed refereeing" -- it doesn't matter to me).

For reference, in 2003-04, the year before the lockout, the NHL averaged 5.14 goals per game, 1.40 power play goals per game, and 8.48 power play opportunities per game. In March and April 2008 (the most recent 253 regular season games), the NHL averaged 5.27 goals per game, 1.44 power play goals per game, and 8.46 power play opportunities per game.

So with that in mind, here's a couple of questions I've been mulling:

1. Why hasn't even-strength scoring noticeably increased as power play opportunities have noticeably decreased over the three-year stretch?

If you look at the graph, the distance between the blue and red lines stays remarkably consistent over the 3-year period. One thing that hasn't been changing a great deal has been non-PP goals scored per game. Still, context matters here. From one end of the timeline to the other represents a difference of about six power play opportunities per game. That's some nine minutes (or so?) of extra even-strength time per game, with hardly any extra even-strength scoring to show for it.

Two explanations to point to for the declining rate: a) Coaching mechanics. Obviously with the new rules, there was an adjustment in 5-on-5 defense, and though it took some trial and error, generally teams know how to play a consistent even-strength game these days. For the most part, it involves keeping plenty of people back. b) Coaching focus. This is probably slight, but with more games being decided on the power play, the importance of 5-on-5 production lessened. Goal prevention was certainly still important, but a system that produced goals wasn't so critical.

2. How far can this trend continue? Could the "New NHL" with its hyped-up offense-friendly rules end up lower-scoring than before the lockout?

This question is interesting to me on a lot of levels. I had been considering the '03-'04 season as the lowpoint benchmark in scoring rates, and was curious how improved the "new rules" scoring would be once coaches and players had adjusted. It hadn't really occurred to me until today that the lowpoint may still lie ahead.

But why not, really? I mean, I don't really expect referee whistles to slow down any more, but can coaches tighten up even more 5-on-5? They've been improving on that for three years now, who's to say it comes to a stop now?

3. Is the NHL product more (watchable / exciting / dramatic) than it was two years ago? Five years ago?

Here's really where my questions have been leading, and I think it's an important question to answer honestly. Stats and numbers are nice for setting a framework, but really they can't capture why we watch hockey. And they really have no business telling us how "exciting" hockey is or isn't -- that judgment is up to our eyeballs and heart.

I'm not entirely sure where I stand on answering this question, but I think it provides a good lesson in the tradeoff aspect of new rules. Create a rule that is designed to make defending more difficult and there may be a short-term boost in scoring, but unless goal-prevention is made less important coaches will find a way to adjust. In this case, I think the new rules have taken a gamble aspect away from hockey -- in defending against a possible two-line pass and concentrating on defensive body position, teams have held back probably more safely than I'd prefer. Take caution, NHL, in widening the nets as the next scoring solution -- we may see teams pull further back to try to block even more shots, and the result might not be that exciting at all.

Anyway, I don't have a ton of hard answers or solutions, but I did want to show the updated graph and slap a bunch of scrambled thoughts together. Reaction is welcome in the comments, even if it's advice to stop worrying about scoring rates in the summer.

Non-live Todd McLellan press conference coverage

New San Jose Sharks head coach Todd McLellan answered questions 1-on-1 with reporters after the press conference earlier today. He spoke about taking advantage of the depth of talent in San Jose, that he has achieved about as much assistant coaching experience as you could possibly need before moving up to the head coaching position, that a number of factors have to fall into place to win a championship at any level, that a puck possession offense may be a little overstated, that he will try to establish more of a puck pursuit and puck recovery game, and that he would like to encorporate the defense into the offense more.

His opening statment from the press conference, will work on a full transcript on Sharkspage:

"This is a special opportunity, there are only 30 of these positions available in the world. I feel very fortunate to be involved with one of if not the top organizations in the National Hockey League. I am very excited about it. There are some very good things that have happened here in the San Jose Sharks organization. You don't win close to 50 games a year by accident. There is an incredible amount of skill on this hockey team. If you combine the skill with the will, good things can happen. We look forward to doing that."

"It is my job as the coach to push this team, push them hard. Push them outside their comfort zone, and get them doing things that they may not be comforable doing but while I am doing that make sure they enjoy the process. That is the only way championship teams evolve. I look forward to that opportunity and can not wait for it to start."

If anyone has a link to the full press conference video or audio, add it in the comments section. The AP's Greg Beacham, Tony Khing of the San Jose Sharks, and a KLIV reporter asked the questions in the above 1-on-1 clip.

- Martin Brodeur was awarded the Vezina Trophy earlier today. It is hard to overly debate the selection, but it appears as if many of the NHL general managers put their eggs in the reputation and save percentage basket. If you look at wins, goals against average, and strength of conference or even strength of division, then Nabokov should have been the clear winner. There should be no debate that three of the best four NHL teams reside in the Pacific Division, and the fourth won the Stanley Cup. It was a brief aside on the blog at the time, but the start of the Sharks monster February road trip began with rocky losses to the Rangers, Islanders, and New Jersey. Dropping three games on the big east coast stage probably solidified Brodeur's dominance among a few general managers.

Welcome to the Todd McLellan Era

Tomorrow at 11:00 we will start the Todd McLellan era. He has cancelled his trip to Atlanta and the Detroit Free Press has reported that he has signed a 3 year contract. Can I be happy with someone who I have never seen? Well..yes. This was the guy I was rooting for the whole time. The only thing I know about him is his Detroit pedigree and he coaches the offense and power play for the Stanley Cup champs. That is enough for me. I didn't want a "retread" like Tortorella or Quenneville even though they are proven winners. I will have to do some more research on McLellan but looking at his resume, he is a proven winner...in the minors. I am curious to see what kind of style he is? Player's coach? Hard-ass? hopefully he is a combination of the two.

Predicting the next Kings coach: look out for Boudreau 2.0

So much of sports management is about running after trends. Every NFL coach would prefer a quarterback who can run like a running back. Lower budget baseball teams feel like they can survive because of MoneyBall.

It happens all the time.

And that's why the Los Angeles Kings might end up looking for Bruce Boudreau 2.0. Indeed, if a trend holds true at least one NHL team will probably promote a highly successful AHL coach with the hope of Catching the Next Rising (Coaching) Star.

There had to be a few GMs deeply intrigued by the concept of under-paying a (usually) younger, harder working prodigy/super secret Herb Brooks-type mind. (This would replace the old standby: sign a big name who almost certainly is running on fumes at this point)

Just looking at the playoffs, there were of course the Washington Capitals making a late season surge with Boudreau. Not to be outdone, John Stevens' Philadelphia Flyers managed to be the only true Cinderella team of this year's playoffs.

Despite his sort of Shrek-like features and Crawfordian line changes, Therrien is a success

Some people think that coaching the Penguins would be about as intellectually challenging as changing a tire, but Michel Therrien was able to guide the team to a 2nd seed in the Eastern Conference despite having their two no. 1 picks out for huge chunks of the season.

Maybe the minor leagues are going to be a GMs equivalent to a Gold Rush and the next guy promoted will end up being in over his head. Or maybe the Kings will go for another glitzy, potentially overrated coach in John Tortorella.

But don't be shocked if someone gets called up to be the next Kings head coach...

Requiem for a Madman

As you all are well aware, I wasn't Marc Crawford's biggest fan. I famously (I think it was mentioned on Nightline) called for Crawford's head near the middle of last season when he claimed that the Kings had played their first poor game in months... right at the tail end of a 10-game losing streak. I've softened a little bit since then, but I am still happy with this move. Crawford just didn't mesh with this team and an injection of new blood will hopefully get the whole squad setting their sights a little higher.


My biggest problem with Crawford, obviously, was his obsession with line changes. He constantly double-shifted his best players with the 4th line, a move that was not only ineffective but wasted the talents of our top guys. In contrast, Randy Carlyle will shift his 4th line guys with his top 2 lines when he wanted to give a player a rest. For example, take this line-up configuration:

O'Sullivan-Kopitar-Brown
Ivanans-Ellis-Willsie

Crawford would shift O'Sullivan with Ellis and Willsie, or Brown with Ivanans and Ellis. This shifts the top line player's role (Brown, for example, goes from getting to the front of the net to playmaking) and renders the entire line ineffective (because it doesn't matter how well Kopitar sets up Ellis, he ain't scoring). Carlyle would shift Ivanans with Kopitar and Brown, allowing the other two to work together while the 4th line player can work around them. It's subtle and the players end up playing the same amount of minutes, but it makes the Ducks a lot better and it's something Crawford never did.

"Nope, can't see my career from here either."

Another problem was that Crawford never seemed all that happy with the Kings. He constantly complained that the team wasn't experienced enough, acted like the team was fine when they obviously weren't, and just kind of looked pissed all the time. (I think he always looks like that, though.) I mean, Andy Murray showed more emotion behind the bench, and Andy Murray looks like a wax figurine. I don't know where Crawford goes from here (I personally think he'd make a helluva junior coach if people can get passed the whole, you know, taking out a hit thing), but hopefully he can find a place that makes him happier than he was in LA.



Finally, Crawford's system worked in theory but not in practice. On paper, the Kings do seem like they'd benefit from a coach that encouraged wide open play, but in reality they were often out of position and failed defensively. Forwards didn't backcheck enough, defensemen were misused, and goalies were often hung out to dry. The Kings are going to score plenty no matter what coach they have because they have talented forwards; they need a coach that can shore up the defensive part of the game.

So, where do the Kings go from here? Marc Crawford was an interesting coach because he was offensive-minded but he was also a dick. A coach that would be the opposite of him would be Ron Wilson, who's laid back and an excellent defensive coach. I won't bother you with a rundown of the coaching options because frankly I have no idea who Lombardi is looking at. Tortorella would be nice because he's proven to be a good coach and both he and Lombardi are Italian (Italians are easy to mock), but maybe he's already looking at San Jose. Whoever the coach is, his first priority should be fixing Lubomir Visnovsky. Lubo blossomed under Andy Murray and he needs someone who will work around him and not the other way around. Hopefully he'll work with our secondary young guys (Purcell, Boyle) and instill defensive responsibility into them. Finally, the Kings desperately need to cut down on the number of shots they allow.

Wins would be nice, too.

Marc Crawford Has Been Fired

Holy fuck.

Coaching Rumor Roundup

Take all this with a grain of salt...

-Most people know that Joel Quenneville was in town last week to see Santana Row and the Computer History Museum. Ottawa Sun's Bruce Garioch reports that the Sharks are too penny-pinching for Quenneville's demands. That's gotta be the first time I've ever heard a coach demanding too much money. That's not the first time I've heard the Sharks be too cheap, though.

-I can't remember where I read it, but Detroit assistant Todd McLellan confirmed that he's got an interview with Doug Wilson once the Red Wings finish off the Penguins.

-The CBC is reporting that the Doug Wilson has asked good ol' Brian Burke for permission to speak with Kevin Dineen.

-In the same report, the CBC claims that Toronto really, really, really wants Ron Wilson. Somehow, I'm not surprised.

Saying all the right things

You might have heard buzz about Detroit assistant Todd McLellan rumored for a number of head coach positions. Well, his philosophy fits in with what a number of teams want to do, including one particularly squad in San Jose. From the Denver Post:

"I've had a chance to coach under some very good mentors," said McLellan, who then alluded to Minnesota general manager Doug Risebrough and coach Jacques Lemaire. "If you look at the Minnesota organization and the number of Stanley Cup rings they've won, and perhaps the type of game they play, that would be considered more of a defensive style.

"Then you come to Detroit and see the number of Stanley Cup-winning people around here, and the type of game they play. It's a very good mix, and to steal from both would be something I think a wise coach would do.

"I think there's a balance. I really like the way the Detroit Red Wings play.

Coming here as a coach, you hear about it and you're not convinced until you actually see it. You see the way the hockey club plays, the way the puck means so much to them while they have it.

"So I'd like to coach a high-tempo, fast, puck-possession type team."

I'm guessing McLellan's already on Doug Wilson's short list.

Barry Melrose still interested in coaching, says San Jose Sharks at the top of anyone's list

I spoke briefly with ESPN analyst and former Kings coach Barry Melrose today to see if he was still interested in coaching, if he would be interested in the opening with the San Jose Sharks, and if he thought the lineup in San Jose was more talented than the Detroit Red Wings or Dallas Stars. His answers were yes, yes and yes.

The full post is on Sharkspage here. At the State of the Sharks question and answer session next tuesday, President and Chief Executive Officer Greg Jamison, Sharks Executive Vice President and General Manager Doug Wilson and Sharks forward Jonathan Cheechoo will be available to answer questions.

Another article worth reading

Message to NHL GMs: stand by your man/coach/mustache

The Sharks next head coach search will one of the most intriguing stories going into this year's off-season, especially considering the fact that there aren't really a ton of big names in free agency.

I'll leave the SJ bloggers to decide whether the Wilson (non)brothers possessed the shared vision, open communication lines and other intangibles it takes to make a good GM-coach tandem (I assume they thought pretty similarly, but that's just because they share the same last name). It's certainly helpful that Doug Wilson will get to choose his own coach, but it's important to remember that a well-run franchise can still hit a brick wall after making foolish coaching decisions.

As much love as Loophole Lou gets in New Jersey, he obviously lacks the ability to find coaches who can satisfy his considerable ego. His late season firing tendencies show that an ill-advised coaching hire can mean big problems.

I think that's one reason why Dallas and Detroit have maintained such high levels of success. Detroit wisely chose Mike Babcock, easily one of the best coaches in the NHL. And the Stars stood behind Dave Tippett even though people listed him as one of the scapegoats for the Stars' first round exits year after year.

The stability of Tippett and the all-around brilliance of the Red Wings' management should stand out to copy cat teams, rather than their playing styles. Though top-to-bottom competence requires a disciplined, intelligent plan of action.

So don't expect to see that happen with teams like the Panthers or Islanders.

Check out this interesting article, which is actually on the higher profile GM-coach dynamic in the NFL (most hockey GMs are vaguely anonymous by comparison).

One quick aside: Brian Campbell is not worth $6M. It has to be said and I will say it many, many times.

Player's Coach or Ex-Cop?

With the Red Wings and Penguins turning the Semis into a preseason morning skate, there is not much to talk about except for the Sharks new coach. The San Jose Mercury News has 2 separate articles saying that the "perfect" candidate is Pat Burns. Ex-Cop, Stanley Cup Winner, 3 time Jack Adams winner, Ties to Joe Thornton, it all makes sense. With the majority of the team in the prime of their career, it makes no sense for Doug Wilson to bring in a 'young" coach who will take 1-2 years to integrate his system. The only issue is that he is still under contract to NJ till July 1st. Does Doug Wilson want to wait that long to find a coach? Does Burns really want to move West? Those are things that Doug Wilson needs to find out.

The coaching search is not the only issue to resolve. Changing the coach and not the players will show that Ron Wilson was used as a scapegoat for the season. With the cap expected to rise, the Sharks will have plenty of cap space (10 million plus the rise of the cap). Most of that money will go to Brian Campbell if he decides to re-sign. Raises will be expected for restricted free agents Pavelski and Clowe. But that still leaves enough money to sign another scoring forward and some more blueline help.

The Search Begins

Well, that was fast. I mean, didn't Doug Wilson say that he was going to do his customary cooling-off period before making any key personnel decisions? Was that all lip service or was that his honest opinion -- and if it was his honest opinion, what made him change his mind?

Whatever the case, Ron Wilson's gone (though as of now, Tim Hunter and Rob Zettler remain). I'd posted my thoughts on the situation on my blog last week, and I haven't particularly changed in that regard -- I'm still thinking that the right situation is a player's coach. That is, a motivator instead of a disciplinarian.

How is this going to affect things? Whoever Doug Wilson hires, it's absolutely imperative that he doesn't turn this speed/skating-based team into a trapping machine a la Minnesota. That means trap-enthusiasts should be out of the question; however, if someone with a history of trapping (such as Paul Maurice) approaches the Sharks with a little bit of sensibility to understand what assets he'll be working with, then that's ok.

I think Doug Wilson's got two things he needs in his new coach. First, he's gotta be a brilliant leader. Leaders don't necessarily have to be buddy-buddy with everyone, but they've got to generate that level of inspiration that forces teams to want to go through the wall for them. Countless players under Ted Nolan talk about him with that kind of reverence, and it's unfortunate that Nolan has another year under his contract with the Islanders. A leader like this not only binds a team together, but inspires them to try to elevate their game -- and when you have sheer talent that doesn't always seem harnessed, tapping into that can be rocket fuel for success.

The second key trait is that he's got to be a brilliant tactician. And that goes far beyond writing down X's and O's on a white board. While I always thought Darryl Sutter was too stubborn for his own good, one of the most brilliant lineup moves I can remember was replacing Jeff Friesen (back when he was good) on the Owen Nolan-Vincent Damphousse line with grinder Dave Lowry. Why did he do that? Because Sutter knew that going against the powerhouse St. Louis Blues, one of the keys to success was getting then-captain Chris Pronger agitated and off his game. Since Pronger was going to be matched against Nolan, Sutter placed Lowry on the with the sole mission of hitting Pronger every chance he got, wearing him down until he started taking dumb penalties.

That sort of adjustment is different from the way Ron Wilson's "If it ain't broke..." mentality. While I understand you should go with something that's working, that simply doesn't always work in a playoff series. Different teams have different specialties and strengths, and if you can't properly adjust to those -- either by proactively shifting lines or changing defensive schemes -- you'll wind up shooting yourself in the foot. That doesn't mean you can't play to your own strengths or stick with your own system; it just means that it's better to be proactive and augment things in anticipation of your opponent rather than reacting to what they throw at you.

Unfortunately, the best person at combining those two traits is the one unemployed guy who probably would be impossible to coax into coming to Silicon Valley and that's Scotty Bowman. After that? Well, if you'll recall my last piece for FoxSports, recent history shows that a long NHL coaching record isn't eactly necessary to find success. We'll see.

Bye Bye Ron Wilson

To almost nobody's surprise Ron Wilson was relieved of his duties today. I don't necessarily blame him but this had to be done. I don't know if the players had stopped listening to him but a new voice was needed. I have faith in Doug Wilson so he is sure to have some names in mind. I just hope it is not one of the retreads...Burns, Maurice etc. I don't think giving the job to Tim Hunter or Rob Zettler is the answer.

I like Ron Wilson, he knows his hockey and brought high-tech teaching techniques to the Sharks, but there comes a time when the voice in the room needs to be changed. There are stories around that Ron was rough with the players and even called them out in front of the rest of the team. There is one story I read where he wrote Carle, Vlasic and another player's name on the board and bluntly told the rest of the team that those guys were letting everyone else down. If true, no wonder Carle and Vlasic regressed this year. I immediately don't have a successor in mind but I am sure the names will be flying and this will be a well-sought after job with the talent on this team.