Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
super_dave_1

Coach Mo gone, confirmed by Mike Maniscalco and Chip Alexander| Coaching and how to fix it discussion

Recommended Posts

The argument for LaRose on the top line and Dalpe on 4th and whatnot is a balanced attack.

Look at our 2 non PP goals from last night - 3rd line and 4th line.

You could also argue that guys like Staal and Skinner, being the most skilled players, need the least amount of talent playing with them to score based on their talent. You could also argue that putting a more skilled player with a guy like Tlusty or Dwyer brings out thier games.

Not saying I agree with the current lines, just playing the other side of the coin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument for LaRose on the top line and Dalpe on 4th and whatnot is a balanced attack.

Look at our 2 non PP goals from last night - 3rd line and 4th line.

You could also argue that guys like Staal and Skinner, being the most skilled players, need the least amount of talent playing with them to score based on their talent. You could also argue that putting a more skilled player with a guy like Tlusty or Dwyer brings out thier games.

Not saying I agree with the current lines, just playing the other side of the coin.

If that's the case, then 29 teams in the league need to reconstruct their lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's the case, then 29 teams in the league need to reconstruct their lines.

Chicago is playing Stalberg ahead of Houssa on their top line.

Washington doesn't play Semin on their top line.

Tampa Bay doesn't play Lecavalier on their top line.

I'm sure there are more examples than this, but don't have the time to look. What Maurice is doing, while on the extreme end of things, isn't atypical.

Edited by golfpro827

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicago is playing Stalberg ahead of Houssa on their top line.

Washington doesn't play Semin on their top line.

Tampa Bay doesn't play Lecavalier on their top line.

I'm sure there are more examples than this, but don't have the time to look. What Maurice is doing, while on the extreme end of things, isn't atypical.

Are these guys playing ahead of Semin, Lacavelier, and Stalberg 3rd/4th liners playing on the 1st lined just to spread out the talent? That is what we are talking about with LaRose on the 1st line.

It didn't work last year. I don't see it working this year. If this was the way it was going to go down, I'd rather have not signed LaRose and signed Stillman instead. My issue is that we will never know if Dalpe, Poni, Tlusty, Boychuk, or anybody else is the answer to the "Who is our other 1st liner" if Mo never asks the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't work last year.

That is my problem with Mo. Why are we trying the same things that didn't work last year instead of trying something NEW???

By the way...I was agreeing with you on the LaRose being a -21 player & being put on the first line for defensive reasons. That statement seems to contradict itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way...I was agreeing with you on the LaRose being a -21 player

I realized that, I was just putting the stat up there with your statement about the reason we were given that Chad was there.

I don't think Chad is necessarily a defensive liability. That was an anomaly when you look at his stats. His first few years, he was mostly a "plus" player. As he moved up the lines and his responsibility increased, his plus/minus got worse. I feel like I need to add a disclaimer every time I bring this up because I like LaRose as a player, I just think Mo is misusing him.

If we truly do not have a player better suited for the top line than LaRose, then JR needs to make some kind of personnel move. I know that we are in a quasi rebuilding mode, but it isn't like we don't have assets that could be used. We are stacked with too many of the same type of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Chad is necessarily a defensive liability. That was an anomaly when you look at his stats. His first few years, he was mostly a "plus" player. As he moved up the lines and his responsibility increased, his plus/minus got worse. I feel like I need to add a disclaimer every time I bring this up because I like LaRose as a player, I just think Mo is misusing him.

If we truly do not have a player better suited for the top line than LaRose, then JR needs to make some kind of personnel move. I know that we are in a quasi rebuilding mode, but it isn't like we don't have assets that could be used. We are stacked with too many of the same type of players.

I agree 100%!!! :goodpost:

Mo is misusing almost as many players as he is using correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They love to put Mo's record on the screen at the beginning of each game, with a win% of over .500. On what planet is 452-447-99-65 an over .500 record? That's 452 wins, and 512 losses, I don't care that you got a point for some of those losses. Spin it anyway you want, in what other sport have you seen a coach with a record this poor get 12 seasons with the same franchise.

You're kidding, right?

Surely you have been around hockey long enough to know that they are not listing his win%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On November 28, 2010, Maurice became the youngest coach in NHL history to reach 1,000 games coached at age 43. Tonight he will coach his 900th game as Hurricanes coach, bringing with him a .472 career win percentage.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On November 28, 2010, Maurice became the youngest coach in NHL history to reach 1,000 games coached at age 43. Tonight he will coach his 900th game as Hurricanes coach, bringing with him a .472 career win percentage.

Correct. And his win percentage is still .472 -- in the playoffs, because there are only wins and losses but his career point% is still .503

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. And his win percentage is still .472 -- in the playoffs, because there are only wins and losses but his career point% is still .503

Sorry, I transposed my numbers, his career regular season win percentage is .427, his playoff win% is .472. FWIW, if they (Canes) want to report the point% as .502 (last night's broadcast) that's fine. But they report it as win%, which is not factual. Not that anybody really pays attention to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big Mo fan but I do at least feel that the Canes, I know it's early but they are playing for him this year.. I don't like some of the lines, and some players are off their game but the effort is there and after last season, we could have saw them give up totally on this year and they haven't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever number you choose, Mo is an average at best coach. .500 is nothing to write home about. I'd be willing to bet he has the worst record of all active coaches who have coached at least 4 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever number you choose, Mo is an average at best coach. .500 is nothing to write home about. I'd be willing to bet he has the worst record of all active coaches who have coached at least 4 seasons.

The Canes are 2-2-1 this season so far, so Mo must be overjoyed that he is living up to his track record.

He had a winning record with Toronto when they pulled the plug. He was 76-66-22, I guess you add in those 22 OTL's and then he's 76 wins and 88 losses which is dead on his lifetime numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever number you choose, Mo is an average at best coach. .500 is nothing to write home about. I'd be willing to bet he has the worst record of all active coaches who have coached at least 4 seasons.

Not a pretty picture. You can sort by column.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_head_coaches

I suspect the Wins include Shootout wins and OTL includes actual OT and Shootout losses. IMO that inflates the Win % and the Points per game value, too. A better measure would at least include true OT losses, even if the wins are inflated by shootout wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certainly glad to have the two wins, but I still want to know why it took three losses to juggle the lines and get LaRose away from Staal? Of course now, he's still overslotted and on the line with Skinner.

I wish that Mo would get LaRose back to the third or fourth line. I have harped on this so much that it looks like I'm anti-LaRose, and I'm not. I am pleased to see the fourth liners get more than the 5 minutes a game that Mo has done in the past.

I changed the name of the thread to be a little more accurate so nobody stumbles in here and gets offended. :spin:

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go back an forth on Mo. He is far from the bumbling simpleton that the Mo haters portray, but I also find myself scratching my head with certain moves that he keeps going to despite a history of not working (Staal taking PP faceoffs with Jussi right there, LaRose on the first line, having a high skill 4th line and playing it 5 minutes). Still, his teams seem to really play for him.

On the win/losses you really have to look at the talent level of the teams he's had. Some outside media wonder why he keeps getting chances while not making the playoffs, but since that cup team started fading, we've never had more than a mediocre mix of talent. And that deep playoff run with a very mediocre team should not be underestimated. If you keep having mediocre teams that kind of run sounds pretty good. Lavi missed the playoffs a bunch also. That cup team had serious offensive talent and Ward arriving about 3 years ahead of schedule (he regressed back after that, and only found that level again last year).

This team is still one talented forward away from being a top tier team (IMHO). So as long as our top line is as weak as it is, then this team is going to HAVE to scrap for 60 minutes and Mo teams do that consistently as well as any other coach's teams. People who want a coach to come in and ride guys...they'll get some effort from that, and also create some negatives that over time add up. Lavi was tougher. Lavi's teams seriously let down in long stretches. Mo teams seem to keep at it.

I don't think he is the most brilliant tactician, and if thing start to slide, he'll be on the hot seat, but given what he has, he gets'em to play for each other, and you never know.

I still think getting that top forward would create an interesting test for Mo. Because I think you slot one seriously talented forward on our top line, and we are a team that should win. Until then, Mo always has the excuse, "I did the best I could with the players I had".*

Now if he can just get Staal to back-check and either win face-offs or stop taking the key ones....

*not an actual quote.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I changed the name of the thread to be a little more accurate so nobody stumbles in here and gets offended. :spin:

Why not just call it the Paul Maurice discussion thread? Adding the rainbows and lollipop free criteria limits who you're suggesting should post in the thread based on their opinion. Wouldn't a discussion be better and more interesting if all opinions were welcome?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just call it the Paul Maurice discussion thread? Adding the rainbows and lollipop free criteria limits who you're suggesting should post in the thread based on their opinion. Wouldn't a discussion be better and more interesting if all opinions were welcome?

Done. We don't want anyone to feel unwanted.

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done. We don't want anyone to feel unwanted.

Come on,,,man ------I hate the word "OFFENDED",, SUPER DAVE, DON'T GIVE IN!! If people are offended they can stay out of this or any other thread that offends them.. This is a "HOCKEY" board not a "soccer" board.. Boo hoo to the offended!!!

Free PUFF's PLUS's to the offended!!!

Oh yeah to stay on topic,,,,Mo GOTTA GO----- :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on,,,man ------I hate the word "OFFENDED",, SUPER DAVE, DON'T GIVE IN!! If people are offended they can stay out of this or any other thread that offends them.. This is a "HOCKEY" board not a "soccer" board.. Boo hoo to the offended!!!

Free PUFF's PLUS's to the offended!!!

Oh yeah to stay on topic,,,,Mo GOTTA GO----- :cheers:

I supported the name change because it involved "discussion." But, thanks DJ for making up my mind to stay out of this thread for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on,,,man ------I hate the word "OFFENDED",, SUPER DAVE, DON'T GIVE IN!! If people are offended they can stay out of this or any other thread that offends them.

"Unwanted" not "offended". I quit trying to be unoffensive long ago.

I used the term "rainbow and lollipop free zone" so people would expect some negativity. If the staff thinks all would profit from discussion, them I'm all for it. Sometimes people stumble in to a thread and are upset by it's contents and I was going to try to avoid that.

Mo has been a hot topic ever since he was re-hired. I'd bet that his past relationship with PK and JR as well as his willingness to come in on the cheap (speculation) had a lot to do with that hiring. He did a good job that season with Lavi's team and the team made a miraculous run. He earned a contract, but I said it then, I would have been much happier with a two year deal. I'd have to say that I fell off the bandwagon supporting Mo during the 14 game winless streak. It has continued with his habit of putting the players in (what I and many other think) the wrong spots. He also pretty much never has been willing to put a struggling player in the press box. Add in the boring style of hockey he seems to bring and that doesn't leave me with a lot of excitement.

This season, he put LaRose on the top line and that has never worked in the past. He has buried Dalpe in on the 4th. I don't see where he has changed his tendencies any at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I supported the name change because it involved "discussion." But, thanks DJ for making up my mind to stay out of this thread for good.

I originally had "(rainbow and lollipop free zone)" in the title. I changed it at TSA's request and I think that is what DJ was referring to. I'm sure you had that figured out, but I'm just trying to make sure everyone feels wanted. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...