Blackhawks Fire Coach Quenneville

[F.Michael 4,590]

Chances are neither Chris Ilitch, nor Holland have the balls to hire Coach Q at this point in time...I'm certain he'll be with another team within a few days.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Funny names fersure lol another interesting name on their is John James #Based

Coach Q is going directly to the LA Kings, let the countdown begin.

I've said this in many other threads now, and I'm guessing at this point I will be repeating myself all season, REBUILDING TEAMS LOSE, that's what they do. Ya'll have wanted to sell and rebuild for so long, and now we're in the thick of it and you suddenly don't understand why we're losing and you're upsets.

Blashill was brought in because he develops kids and won with kids at the AHL level. That's LITERALLY the exact skillset you want in a coach presiding over a rebuild. But ya'll want to have your cake and eat it too... not gonna happen. We are BAD. Probably gonna be bad for a while bad. So strap in. Swapping out for coach Q is not gonna do anything for us at this point.

Larkin is playing great this year - Blash gets no credit
Athanasiou is playing great this year - Blash gets no credit
Bertuzzi is playing great this year - Blash gets no credit
Cholowski is a gift from god - Blash gets no credit
Rasmussen is now turning it on - Blash gets no credit

Blashill is doing essentially what was asked of him. The only kid struggling under him right now is Mantha.

Welcome to rebuilding Sally's

 

What am I supposed to do with my cake if I can't eat it?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

30 minutes ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

Great points and I agree to some extent.

However, coaching and staff don't go against your cap.  So when a good coach becomes available, I think you have to seriously consider.  If Coach Q came in under the following it may work: Stevie will be GM next year.  Assertions that EVERYTHING will be done to rebuild as quickly as possible, and that he'll get superstars within a few years.  Long term deal.  World class hockey town and fans.  Original 6 team.  Great, I mean GREAT money.  It may work.  

Blash is doing as advertised BUT nothing more.  He's doing some good things with our youth and development.  However, when he was hired, I do believe the expectations were that he was going to do more than just be a great developmental coach to our younger players.  I believe he was expected to do bring these young guys along and put a competitive NHL.team on the ice.  He has not done this.  Not entirely his fault do to many personnel issues/retirements/bad signings. I wouldn't be upset if we didn't make a run at Coach Q, but I'd seriously consider it.  Good coaches are not easy to come by.

Lastly, I believe Babs would have taken the Toronto job regardless if they were coming to the tipping point of going from a rebuild to being really competitive.  $50 million reasons why he likely did this.  Toronto threw a Brinks truck at him..why...cause good coaches are hard to find.  They don't go against your cap, and if you can get them and they align with your vision for the future of the team, you go out and get them.

We've been sellers the last two years and have no superstars. We're a bad rebuilding team. Rebuilding teams are not expected to be competitive, just like we wern't expected to this year... this should come at no surprise.

A Babcock/Bowman combo wouldn't make this team competitive, and neither can Blash.

Coaching should be the farthest of concerns at the present time... we got a guy who can train up kids, now management needs to give him some decent kids.

[The Secret 304]

As has been mentioned... good coaches are hard to come by and one just became available, it is bad management not to pursue it. Love or hate Blashill his record speaks volumes and he has had enough time to figure things out by now. This is not a Stanley cup wining roster but I do believe it can be a lot more competitive and miserable to play against... it is neither. I've been a Wings fan since the early 80's and watched through the Dead Win era and despite a tonne of losing the team was still a lot of fun to watch, this teams play is BO-RING. Think of the difference when Scotty took the reigns and then gave them to Dave Lewis... same team basically with very different results (I don't think Lewis is even coaching in the league anymore). Then from Lewis to Babcock.... BIG change. Now Babcock to Blashill a big change again in the wrong direction. A good coach is a difference maker. Motivates his player and gets the most out of them plus has a good strategies... I see none of that with Blashill. We have a young, big and fast team... we should be at least a team that every other team dreads playing against and we are not even close.

[F.Michael 4,590]

3 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

We've been sellers the last two years and have no superstars. We're a bad rebuilding team. Rebuilding teams are not expected to be competitive, just like we wern't expected to this year... this should come at no surprise.

A Babcock/Bowman combo wouldn't make this team competitive, and neither can Blash.

Coaching should be the farthest of concerns at the present time... we got a guy who can train up kids, now management needs to give him some decent kids.

I get what you're saying, but why not hire a guy who's good at his job?

 

3 minutes ago, The Secret said:

As has been mentioned... good coaches are hard to come by and one just became available, it is bad management not to pursue it. Love or hate Blashill his record speaks volumes and he has had enough time to figure things out by now. This is not a Stanley cup wining roster but I do believe it can be a lot more competitive and miserable to play against... it is neither. I've been a Wings fan since the early 80's and watched through the Dead Win era and despite a tonne of losing the team was still a lot of fun to watch, this teams play is BO-RING. Think of the difference when Scotty took the reigns and then gave them to Dave Lewis... same team basically with very different results (I don't think Lewis is even coaching in the league anymore). Then from Lewis to Babcock.... BIG change. Now Babcock to Blashill a big change again in the wrong direction. A good coach is a difference maker. Motivates his player and gets the most out of them plus has a good strategies... I see none of that with Blashill. We have a young, big and fast team... we should be at least a team that every other team dreads playing against and we are not even close.

This right here

 

[NerveDamage 4,176]

Blash'd be reading this thread like

2 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Not that I necessarily want Coach Q, but how the heck does Blashill still have his job? This loyalty thing has GOT to be thrown out  the window!

#TrusttheProcess

[Learn2LuvIt 245]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Coaching should be the farthest of concerns at the present time... we got a guy who can train up kids, now management needs to give him some decent kids.

But do you believe that Coach Q with 22 years of NHL coaching experience, 3 Stanley Cups, and 18 playoff appearances would be totally clueless on how to go forward with this younger team?  Like is Blash, with his few years of NHL experience and 1 playoff game win the only guy in the world that knows how to coach a younger, rebuilding team?  I think Coach Q would be just fine.  Actually, more than fine.  Again, I won't be upset if we don't get him, but I believe you always go out and get the very best if available.  If he did come here, he'd be fully aware of what he was walking into.  It's not like he'd be surprised at training camp and bail.  If we COULD get him, I'd likely do it under a long term deal.  

Last point - it may be a lot easier and quicker to rebuild if you have a coach with a proven track record of winning cups, handling superstars, etc. to attract top players to come play for the Wings.  I don't think Blash gets any players in a frenzy with all of his hockey cred.

[Dabura 12,228]

Quenneville was fired because he couldn't do anything with a team that's more talented than our team. What makes anyone think he's a great coach for kids? What makes anyone think he wants any part of a rebuilding team that's bereft of elite talent?

Literally the only thing that matters is how our kids are doing -- and, again, our kids are doing fine. Larkin's a point-per-game 1C right now and he's going to be the next captain. Bertuzzi is scoring. AA is scoring. Mantha's in a funk, but he scored 24 goals last season. Cholowski is a revelation. Rasmussen's developing. Veteran and top trade chip Nyquist is scoring at almost a point-per-game clip.

Our record sucks because our team sucks. Which is fine, because our team needs to suck. Sucking for an extended period of time is the only way out of this hole. Blashill is delivering on the sucking part of the equation and I see no solid evidence that he's hurting players' development. And, again, most available coaches probably wouldn't want to come to Detroit anyway, especially with a GM change probably coming soon. (New GM probably gets to pick his coach.)

Edited November 6, 2018 by Dabura

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

13 minutes ago, The Secret said:

As has been mentioned... good coaches are hard to come by and one just became available, it is bad management not to pursue it. Love or hate Blashill his record speaks volumes and he has had enough time to figure things out by now. This is not a Stanley cup wining roster but I do believe it can be a lot more competitive and miserable to play against... it is neither. I've been a Wings fan since the early 80's and watched through the Dead Win era and despite a tonne of losing the team was still a lot of fun to watch, this teams play is BO-RING. Think of the difference when Scotty took the reigns and then gave them to Dave Lewis... same team basically with very different results (I don't think Lewis is even coaching in the league anymore). Then from Lewis to Babcock.... BIG change. Now Babcock to Blashill a big change again in the wrong direction. A good coach is a difference maker. Motivates his player and gets the most out of them plus has a good strategies... I see none of that with Blashill. We have a young, big and fast team... we should be at least a team that every other team dreads playing against and we are not even close.

How would you know? You don't watch games

11 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

I get what you're saying, but why not hire a guy who's good at his job?

 

This right here

 

Blashill is great a developing kids, at least that's the narrative this fan base fed me starting in 2014 when I said letting go of Babcock was a huge mistake.

1 minute ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

But do you believe that Coach Q with 22 years of NHL coaching experience, 3 Stanley Cups, and 18 playoff appearances would be totally clueless on how to go forward with this younger team?  Like is Blash, with his few years of NHL experience and 1 playoff game win the only guy in the world that knows how to coach a younger, rebuilding team?  I think Coach Q would be just fine.  Actually, more than fine.  Again, I won't be upset if we don't get him, but I believe you always go out and get the very best if available.  If he did come here, he'd be fully aware of what he was walking into.  It's not like he'd be surprised at training camp and bail.  If we COULD get him, I'd likely do it under a long term deal.  

Last point - it may be a lot easier and quicker to rebuild if you have a coach with a proven track record of winning cups, handling superstars, etc. to attract top players to come play for the Wings.  I don't think Blash gets any players in a frenzy with all of his hockey cred.

I'm not saying Coach Q isn't a decent coach or that he doesn't know how to coach youth, I'm saying swapping out Blash for Coach Q will do nothing to remedy anything. If we fired Blash this instant and hired Q, you would all praise the hockey gods and get super hype... that hype would wear off in about a year or two when you realize we're still losing games and nothing has really changed, and then you all will turn on coach Q at that point, just like you've all done with Blash already.

The problem is not with the coach, the problem is with this roster.

This team is 5 years from winning anything, and unfortunately it'll probably be even longer than that. Coach Q has ZERO desire to strap himself to that, and it wouldn't do us much good anyway to hire him. He'll be an LA King soon enough.

Losing, it's what's for dinner.

[The Secret 304]

3 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Quenneville was fired because he couldn't do anything with a team that's more talented than our team. What makes anyone think he's a great coach for kids? What makes anyone think he wants any part of a rebuilding team that's bereft of elite talent?

Literally the only thing that matters is how our kids are doing -- and, again, our kids are doing fine. Larkin's a point-per-game 1C right now and he's going to be the next captain. Bertuzzi is scoring. AA is scoring. Mantha's in a funk, but he scored 24 goals last season. Cholowski is a revelation. Rasmussen's developing. Veteran and top trade chip Nyquist is scoring at almost a point-per-game clip.

Our record sucks because our team sucks. Which is fine, because our team needs to suck. Sucking for an extended period of time is the only way out of this hole. Blashill is delivering on the sucking part of the equation and I see no solid evidence that he's hurting players' development. And, again, most available coaches probably wouldn't want to come to Detroit anyway, especially with GM change probably coming soon. (New GM probably gets to pick his coach.)

What happened to the "human eraser"? The kid that stepped in out of college and had an immediate impact? He was thriving under a real coach and has withered since his departure. What about "the best 3rd line C in the league" as named by Babs? Withered as well. Larkin has finally been thrust into the 1C spot but I would bet my saving that if Z were around Blashill would be doing hand-stands on that crutch as he has in the past... lean on the crutch to try to mask his inabilities. Heck, keep Blashill under Q (or another good coach) and hope in the very far future he learns and is worth the wait but having him "learn to drive on the track during a race" is a bad strategy and it is showing so on the ice.

[Hockeymom1960 5,107]

1 hour ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

Great points and I agree to some extent.

However, coaching and staff don't go against your cap.  So when a good coach becomes available, I think you have to seriously consider.  If Coach Q came in under the following it may work: Stevie will be GM next year.  Assertions that EVERYTHING will be done to rebuild as quickly as possible, and that he'll get superstars within a few years.  Long term deal.  World class hockey town and fans.  Original 6 team.  Great, I mean GREAT money.  It may work.  

Blash is doing as advertised BUT nothing more.  He's doing some good things with our youth and development.  However, when he was hired, I do believe the expectations were that he was going to do more than just be a great developmental coach to our younger players.  I believe he was expected to do bring these young guys along and put a competitive NHL.team on the ice.  He has not done this.  Not entirely his fault do to many personnel issues/retirements/bad signings. I wouldn't be upset if we didn't make a run at Coach Q, but I'd seriously consider it.  Good coaches are not easy to come by.

Lastly, I believe Babs would have taken the Toronto job regardless if they were coming to the tipping point of going from a rebuild to being really competitive.  $50 million reasons why he likely did this.  Toronto threw a Brinks truck at him..why...cause good coaches are hard to find.  They don't go against your cap, and if you can get them and they align with your vision for the future of the team, you go out and get them.

He also has a huge ego and gloating probably at the chance to be the savior of this franchise. 

[F.Michael 4,590]

1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

How would you know? You don't watch games

Blashill is great a developing kids, at least that's the narrative this fan base fed me starting in 2014 when I said letting go of Babcock was a huge mistake.

I'm not saying Coach Q isn't a decent coach or that he doesn't know how to coach youth, I'm saying swapping out Blash for Coach Q will do nothing to remedy anything. If we fired Blash this instant and hired Q, you would all praise the hockey gods and get super hype... that hype would wear off in about a year or two when you realize we're still losing games and nothing has really changed, and then you all will turn on coach Q at that point, just like you've all done with Blash already.

The problem is not with the coach, the problem is with this roster.

This team is 5 years from winning anything, and unfortunately it'll probably be even longer than that. Coach Q has ZERO desire to strap himself to that, and it wouldn't do us much good anyway to hire him. He'll be an LA King soon enough.

Losing, it's what's for dinner.

Didn't the Kings 'hire' a guy already?

As far as developing kids...I dunno - some nights the team looks clueless out there....The AHL Toronto Marlies would probably win the best of 7 series against the Wings right now.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I'm not saying Coach Q isn't a decent coach or that he doesn't know how to coac

h youth, I'm saying swapping out Blash for Coach Q will do nothing to remedy anything. If we fired Blash this instant and hired Q, you would all praise the hockey gods and get super hype... that hype would wear off in about a year or two when you realize we're still losing games and nothing has really changed, and then you all will turn on coach Q at that point, just like you've all done with Blash already.

The problem is not with the coach, the problem is with this roster.

This team is 5 years from winning anything, and unfortunately it'll probably be even longer than that. Coach Q has ZERO desire to strap himself to that, and it wouldn't do us much good anyway to hire him. He'll be an LA King soon enough.

Losing, it's what's for dinner.

Eloquent, logical, clear, and to the point. 

The only issue? I WANT TO WIN ALL THE GAMES AND DRAFT JACK HUGHES!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dabura 12,228]

7 minutes ago, The Secret said:

What happened to the "human eraser"? The kid that stepped in out of college and had an immediate impact? He was thriving under a real coach and has withered since his departure. What about "the best 3rd line C in the league" as named by Babs? Withered as well.

Those teams were better than this team. In the absence of elite insulation, those players -- DeKeyser, Helm, et al. -- are now being forced to take on tougher roles. The result: They're being exposed as thoroughly mediocre players.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Dabura

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

4 minutes ago, The Secret said:

What happened to the "human eraser"? The kid that stepped in out of college and had an immediate impact? He was thriving under a real coach and has withered since his departure. What about "the best 3rd line C in the league" as named by Babs? Withered as well. Larkin has finally been thrust into the 1C spot but I would bet my saving that if Z were around Blashill would be doing hand-stands on that crutch as he has in the past... lean on the crutch to try to mask his inabilities. Heck, keep Blashill under Q (or another good coach) and hope in the very far future he learns and is worth the wait but having him "learn to drive on the track during a race" is a bad strategy and it is showing so on the ice.

How bout this?: The tire-pumping coach left and took these absurd claims with him. I think he calls Kadri "the most underrated mathmatician in the history of Poland" now. 

[The Secret 304]

Just now, Dabura said:

Those teams were better than this team. In the absence of elite insulation, those players -- DeKeyser, Helm, et al. -- are now being forced to take on tougher roles.The result: They're being exposed as thoroughly mediocre players.

Or perhaps their talents were recognized and used in a better way by a great coach? Helm is mediocre and always has been (a faster draper to me) and yet Babs found a way to maximize his specific skill set and he thrived. This team shouldn't have been in the playoffs even in the last few years under Babs and he managed to get the most out of what he had and made it all work as best he could.

[Dabura 12,228]

4 minutes ago, The Secret said:

Or perhaps their talents were recognized and used in a better way by a great coach? Helm is mediocre and always has been (a faster draper to me) and yet Babs found a way to maximize his specific skill set and he thrived. This team shouldn't have been in the playoffs even in the last few years under Babs and he managed to get the most out of what he had and made it all work as best he could.

Babcock is an outstanding coach who specializes in getting the most out of what he's given (unless that entails winning the Cup, in which case he's mostly just a master of the choke job). I've no doubt the team would be performing better under Babcock.

But here's the thing (*AGAIN*): I don't want better performance. At least, not at the team level.

Babcock dragging this team into the playoff picture does nothing for us, at least not in a material way. If we get a "Coach Q" and we finish just outside/inside the playoff picture for the next three years, everyone will go from complaining about Blashill's "terrible coaching" to complaining about how the Wings are stuck in No Man's Land and aren't rebuilding properly.

[F.Michael 4,590]

2 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Babcock is an outstanding coach who specializes in getting the most out of what he's given (unless that entails winning the Cup, in which case he's mostly just a master of the choke job). I've no doubt the team would be performing better under Babcock.

But here's the thing (*AGAIN*): I don't want better performance. At least, not at the team level.

Babcock dragging this team into the playoff picture does nothing for us, at least not in a material way. If we get a "Coach Q" and we finish just outside/inside the playoff picture for the next three years, everyone will go from complaining about Blashill's "terrible coaching" to complaining about how the Wings are stuck in No Man's Land and aren't rebuilding properly.

Or we'll keep complaining how Blashill is clueless, and why guys like Abdelkader/Helm/etc are getting more minutes than AA/Mantha/Ras/etc, and how poorly the team is playing...

I get it - we need to be bad to be good - but when the Wings look lost most nights...

[The Secret 304]

1 minute ago, Dabura said:

Babcock is an outstanding coach who specializes in getting the most out of what he's given (unless that entails winning the Cup, in which case he's mostly just a master of the choke job). I've no doubt the team would be performing better under Babcock.

But here's the thing (*AGAIN*): I don't want better performance. At least, not at the team level.

Babcock dragging this team into the playoff picture does nothing for us, at least not in a material way. If we get a "Coach Q" and we finish just outside/inside the playoff picture for the next three years, everyone will go from complaining about Blashill's "terrible coaching" to complaining about how the Wings are stuck in No Man's Land and aren't rebuilding properly.

We don't need a complete rebuild we are well on the way and have some great young players in the system.... and sucking the most doesn't guarantee anything. I think you could put McDavid on this team and it would have minimized impact due to a terrible coach and system. Look at all the talent that Edmonton has from years at the bottom and yet they have not yet found a coach that is good enough to get all that talent to work together. The coach is key  to a team coming together and moving in the right direction... if not team Canada should win just about every Olympic game with a mascot on the bench.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

The question is not: Do you think Coach Q is a better coach than Blash? I'd agree he probably is.

The question is: Do you think Coach Q is better enough that he can take this team to the cup?

If you didn't answer yes to the second question, then what's the point in hiring him?

Let's pretend Blash really is as god awful as you all love to assert, and we hire Q. Coach Q immediately makes a big impact like you all believed he would. What is the magnitude of that impact? Instead of finishing 31st we finish 25th? 20th? 15th? We make the playoffs?

I think he's probably a better coach, but not enough to get us into the playoffs. Any other shifts up the standings then just hurt us and our draft position. This is the rebuild everyone wanted, we must commit to the rebuild everyone wanted, this means losing.

[F.Michael 4,590]

5 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

The question is not: Do you think Coach Q is a better coach than Blash? I'd agree he probably is.

The question is: Do you think Coach Q is better enough that he can take this team to the cup?

If you didn't answer yes to the second question, then what's the point in hiring him?

Let's pretend Blash really is as god awful as you all love to assert, and we hire Q. Coach Q immediately makes a big impact like you all believed he would. What is the magnitude of that impact? Instead of finishing 31st we finish 25th? 20th? 15th? We make the playoffs?

I think he's probably a better coach, but not enough to get us into the playoffs. Any other shifts up the standings then just hurt us and our draft position. This is the rebuild everyone wanted, we must commit to the rebuild everyone wanted, this means losing.

Do you want to lose 7 to 1, and appear clueless, OR lose 4 to 2, but appear competitive?

That'll most likely be the difference between Blashill, and Coach Q.

[Dabura 12,228]

9 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Or we'll keep complaining how Blashill is clueless, and why guys like Abdelkader/Helm/etc are getting more minutes than AA/Mantha/Ras/etc, and how poorly the team is playing...

I get it - we need to be bad to be good - but when the Wings look lost most nights...

I mean, I'm not interested in defending Blashill's honor and arguing that it HAS to be him at the helm. There are nights where I think maybe Blashill just isn't the right guy. But then I think about alternatives and nothing really jumps out at me as really plausible or so tempting that Holland would be totally justified in calling him up and saying, "Hey, [insert coach] is available, so we're firing you. Peace."

Edited November 6, 2018 by Dabura

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

8 minutes ago, The Secret said:

We don't need a complete rebuild we are well on the way and have some great young players in the system.... and sucking the most doesn't guarantee anything. I think you could put McDavid on this team and it would have minimized impact due to a terrible coach and system. Look at all the talent that Edmonton has from years at the bottom and yet they have not yet found a coach that is good enough to get all that talent to work together. The coach is key  to a team coming together and moving in the right direction... if not team Canada should win just about every Olympic game with a mascot on the bench.

But this team ,after years of mediocrity under Babcock, IS finally moving in the right direction

 

[F.Michael 4,590]

1 minute ago, Dabura said:

I mean, I'm not interested in defending Blashill's honor and arguing that it HAS to be him at the helm. There are nights where I think maybe Blashill just isn't the right guy. But then I think about alternatives and nothing really jumps out at me as really plausible or so tempting that Holland would be totally justified in calling him up and saying, "Hey, [coach is available], so we're firing you. Peace."

Why not fire Blashill?

Is there some unwritten rule out there that I'm not familiar with that a owner/GM cannot drop kick a guy for any little reason {cough}Gallant{cough}.

I'm not trying to be an @ss here - just saying that when there's a better option - why not take it?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Do you want to lose 7 to 1, and appear clueless, OR lose 4 to 2, but appear competitive?

That'll most likely be the difference between Blashill, and Coach Q.

If you don't think Q garners more wins and only makes us "appear" more competitive, what's the point, your personal dignity? A loss is a loss. Also we arn't losing games 7 to 1.