Habs’ Brass lets Young Star Walk

12
72

by Rick Stephens, AllHabs.net

MONTREAL, QC — The Montreal Canadiens are very fortunate to have two young goaltenders, Carey Price and Jaroslav Halak. They may be unproven but all signs point to them having excellent potential. There is another goalie in the system, Curtis Sanford, who actually has more NHL regular season starts than Halak.

Sanford’s career NHL numbers are mediocre, with a record of 37-37-11, a 2.76 goals against average and a .901 save percentage. But approaching 31 years old, Sanford is a veteran. He may not be a sexy pick, but you certainly know what you are getting.

Let’s assume, for sake of argument, that Sanford’s family name is St-Fort. Imagine, if you will, that the Canadiens’ brass, in their wisdom decided to release Halak or Price (or both) in order to protect their beloved St-Fort?

Would that make sense to anyone other than president Pierre Boivin and his confreres?

But more importantly, is this analogy starting to ring any bells for you?

It has been reported that the former head coach of the Hamilton Bulldogs, Guy Boucher, has bolted to assume the reins of the Tampa Bay Lightning. This past season Boucher was named the Louis A.R. Pieri Memorial Award winner as the AHL’s outstanding coach. Hamilton set franchise records in wins and points and came within one game of competing for the Calder Cup.

Astonishingly, the 2009-10 Bulldogs set or tied 61 franchise and AHL records.

Naturally, Boucher’s success in Hamilton vaulted him onto the radar of teams in the market for a new head coach. Boucher is seen as being at the top of the list of new breed coaches who brings different philosophy to the rink.

Boucher teaches an aggressive approach to the game. He is seen as an excellent communicator with his players and understands that a variety of approaches are needed to motivate and bring the best out of his charges. Boucher is also creative and has brought innovation to schemes, particularly his power-play.

While Boucher can be described as bright, young, innovative, motivating, and aggressive, a recruiter would be crying foul if any of the characteristics appeared on coach Martin’s resume. Martin has also experienced difficulty getting through to his players and has relied on assistant coach Kirk Muller to be his link.

Perhaps I was too harsh in my opening example of Mr. Martin, errr St. Fort, errr Sanford. Rather than undersell Martin’s talents, I’d be willing to elevate him to an Andrew Raycroft level in the story.

Let’s face it, Jacques Martin is a mediocre coach whose best days are behind him. He is stubbornly clinging to an archaic system that most discarded after the lockout. Martin never was good at connecting with younger players (can we say Jason Spezza?) but is even further out of touch as the age gap has widened.

Under Martin’s tutelage, two Canadiens’ skaters had career seasons, Tomas Plekanec and Tom Pyatt. One can argue that, Plekanec simply rebounded after being unburdened with Alex Kovalev’s departure. It’s also not surprising to see a player perform in his maximum in a contract season.

Congratulations to Pyatt for making a contribution when no one expected it but with all due respect, he isn’t going to be leading the team to Cup number 25. I would much rather that the Habs employed a coach who could be getting the maximum potential from the Kostitsyns, Scott Gomez, Benoit Pouliot, Ryan O’Byrne and P.K. Subban.

We should also stop pointing to the Canadiens’ playoff success as proof positive of Martin’s genius. Coach Martin’s system consisted of piling five skaters like cord wood around Halak to absorb the opposition arsenal. In the first two rounds, the Habs won on offense supplied by the power-play and opportunistic 5-on-5 goals.

We should also give full credit to Kirk Muller, who was solely responsible for making the key adjustments that were critical to the Canadiens’ advancing beyond two rounds of the playoffs.

In the third round, the Canadiens were forced to dismantle the fortress and play a more offensive style the when the power play success dried up. Without the support, their star goaltender was exposed and finished the conference final with an .880 save percentage.

The Martin-system was not sustainable, and certainly not practical for an 82-game regular season. We witnessed the roller-coaster this past year with players struggling to buy-in. The current roster of the team doesn’t lend itself to play a rugged, defense-first type game.

So to some forward-thinking Habs’ fans, the writing was on the wall. The Canadiens would bump their veteran head coach up to the head office with his fellow dinosaurs to fill the vacant position of assistant GM. Boucher, who is a much better match for the current personnel, was the dynamic young coach primed to take over, perhaps in tandem with the other rising star, Kirk Muller.

(I’ll let you decide your own pairings to complete the analogy with respect to Halak/Price and Muller/Boucher.)

Instead the Canadiens have let Boucher walk. Will Muller be next? It’s all in an effort to protect head coach Martin (aka Sanford).

Canadiens President Pierre Boivin has always been more comfortable fishing in a shallow pond. Naturally the talent pool is diminished.

Don’t believe me? Take any characteristic, unrelated to coaching found only in a small percentage of NHL coaches for your selection criteria. How about moustaches? There is a chance you get a good one like Joel Quenneville but more often than not you bypass the best coaches in the NHL by placing an irrelevant requirement above all others.

Similarly, Boivin’s cultural-myopia doesn’t allow himself to consider the league’s cream of the crop when filling a vacancy. But how poor does your eyesight have to be to allow the hottest coaching property in hockey to swim away from your own shallow pond?

Those who reference a lack of NHL-experience as the reason that Pierre Gauthier couldn’t promote Boucher to the big club are missing the point. Mario Tremblay and Guy Carbonneau had zero coaching experience in the NHL or elsewhere which is a major reason each of them were a disaster behind the Canadiens’ bench.

But we are comforted by Montreal radio personalties, Denis Casavant, Francois Gagon, and Tony Marinaro that in three years, Guy Boucher will be better equipped to be coach of the Canadiens after a stint with Tampa Bay. This makes me wonder what advice the trio of gents would give to their sons. After finding the right girl, should he send her to the arms of another to get more ‘experience’ before offering a ring?

Besides, if after three years, Boucher has success in Tampa, why would he want to come back to Montreal? And if he doesn’t, why would the Canadiens be interested?

The worst part is that the Habs are saddled with coach Martin for another three years trying to implement the same stale system. One wonders how many careers of young players will be sacrificed in the process?

The wealth of organizational coaching talent has also been diminished. Boucher, the innovator, is gone. Muller, the communicator, may be next.

Let’s not forget the other superb coach that was unceremoniously dumped to make room for Boucher in Hamilton. Don Lever has enjoyed success at every level and came with the strong endorsement of Scotty Bowman. ‘Scotty who?’ said Boivin.

That’s a lot of talent to lose from an organization who hasn’t had coach earn a Jack Adams award behind a Canadiens’ bench in over 20 years.

So now the duo of Boucher and Steve Yzerman set up shop in Tampa Bay. Both were interested in careers with the Canadiens. Both were told, ‘No thanks!’

It ensures, for now, that mediocrity is in place in the positions of the coach, general manager and president of the organization. Combined with the sacking of six scouts, it hasn’t been a good start to the Canadiens’ off-season.

Is this the group that we trust to make the right move on Price/Halak and the handful of other major decisions facing the Habs in the months ahead? I know where I’m leaning.

Related Story — Montreal Canadiens: Mediocrity from the Top Down

follow All Habs on Twitter
and add us on Facebook

12 COMMENTS

  1. I giggled with dismay throughout this article. You're 100% correct. I am flabbergasted at the direction (or lack thereof) that the Canadiens are exhibiting. When you compound the issue with their maddening secrecy, and outright lies (turned over every rock for Gainey's replacement) it's enough to wonder if they even care about the fans. They know we are slavishly devoted and they can get away with anything, but their moves and policies leave one scratching his head.

    Some have called Boucher a genius. Whether that's true or not is irrelevant. The point is we had a guy in our own backyard that transcended Boivin's stupid linguistic policies. Secondly, you don't let geniuses walk away!!

    Everyone would have been happy with Boucher as coach. But no, instead, he's allowed to walk away, perhaps never to return. Some of the guys on 990 assuming that he'll return one day are simply voicing what fans have been now forced to adopt. Of course, the Habs will say that they are happy with their current coaching staff that just led the team to a lengthy playoff run….more PR noise.

    When Corey, Houle and Tremblay were running the team, I think everyone, including them, knew they were in over their heads. With this current trio, I truly believe that they think they are fit for the job, and are exactly what this organization requires. They're stale, stagnant and obsolete.

    The big mistake was in hiring Martin in the first place. I was willing to give him a chance, but I'm proud to be one of the first, in mid-November of last season, to have soured on Martin. He's no good, nor is his boss, or his boss' boss. This team succeeded despite them, not because of them.

    As fans we have no choice but to cross our fingers and hope we are overreacting and that they've actually got a plan in place that will prove us wrong and keep moving the Canadiens in a positive direction. But I am the furthest thing from hopeful right now.

  2. Okay, i'll comment.
    I truly feel that at this point, it was a question of circumstances as to why we lost Boucher. Currently, Habs could not commit a head coaching job to Boucher, it would not make sense really considering they already have a head coach under contract. That would be have been seen a lack of respect towards Martin, and because he has 3 years left in his contract, they were not going to put themselves into that position. My take on it anyways. Unless they would have ALSO had an arrangement with Martin for that head office position but now it gets complicated with a lot of arrangements, i don't think any "arrangements" had had ever taken place (not saying that either of you said that, but many speculated even myself).

    That said, Guy Boucher, yeah he's a coach but he's human just like the players. What does anyone want to do when their on the doorstep of the NHL? Play in the NHL whether player or coach. So if i'm Boucher, i have 2 options, stick it out 3 more years in the AHL and then most probably will get coaching job in MTL, maybe 2 years if lucky, OR, go to the NHL now, while your value is high, and while you're seen by some as the most coveted coach in America. He took his options, and i think he made a great decision.

    Will he come back to Montreal, in so much a question of circumstances, he has 4 years, Martin has 3, Martin could leave after the next year, or 2, the timing has to happen, it might, it may never.

    What i'm almost hoping now is that 1 more year of this, 1 more year of grumbling from Fans, and the Mr. Molson might decide to clean shop and make the team at his own vision which i don't think anyone's quite sure what it is right now.

    As you say Kyle, we'll kinda have to wait and see until next season and the moves that are made until then, but i'm feeling rather pesimistic for now, and almost feel like this organization now has the ball in their court to prove to everyone what they can really pull off. Time will tell i guess.

    One thing is for sure, i'll be looking really closely at that Tampa team next season, no matter his decision, i'm still a fan of Guy Boucher.

  3. Stevo – I know that the Habs "couldn't" bump/fire Martin as coach…optically it wouldn't make sense to many in the hockey world. But I also think those who are paying attention would understand the situation the Canadiens found themselves in and agree that they did the best thing for the future.

    But they took the easy way out again.

    Instead, we'll watch as the Habs churn out another mediocre season under Martin that will undoubtedly be chalked up to some kind of injury, or maybe Markov's pending free agency will be a distraction…something will be the cause for it. The real problem is that Martin should not have been hired in the first place. He was hired for his mother tongue and cardboard personality. That's it. Of course, the garbage veneer the team puts on it is that he's a veteran coach that is in the top 10 all time in wins and has been around forever. Simply ridiculous.

  4. While I agree with most everything in this piece, there is one blatant contradiction that everyone appears to be making these days.

    Martin, it appears, was the idiot who came up with a moronic system built around a playoff goaltender, something he's never had as a coach. And that goalie masked the warts of his horrendous system that frustrated the hell out of the best regular season team in the league and the defending Stanley Cup champs. Yet, at the same time, Muller was "solely responsible" for working within that brutal system but making the "key adjustments" that got Montreal past Washington and Pittsburgh? He alone overcame the sheer stupidity of one of the winningest coaches of all time? Really? It was only him? Who told you that? And he did this without Martin's approval?

    I can accept that letting Boucher walk is a potential disaster, and that the Canadiens policy of requiring a bilingual GM is being blatantly over-sensitive to an issue that should really only apply to the coach, if that. If you watched the press conference announcing Gauthier's hire, you would have noted I was the one who questioned Boivin about the extent of his search for Gainey's replacement because I found it ridiculous you wouldn't at least interview external candidates. That's how we found out the GM of the Habs had to be bilingual.

    But that's no reason to belittle a tremendous playoff run, one where Martin put together the best playoff coaching performance of his previously piss-poor post-season career. It's also no reason to give Muller all the credit for the team's success while Martin weathers the blame for it's failings.

    Guy Boucher may turn out to be a wild success in Tampa and next season may turn into a disaster for Martin. All that is true. But it doesn't change what happened this past spring. And like it or not, Martin deserves some credit for that.

  5. @Arpon – what is an upgrade on piss poor? A gust to mediocre? I can't give Martin much credit for a system that involved giving up 40 or more shots and praying for a 2-1 win. I understood Muller's involvement to be more motivational than anything.

    Martin gets credit for the success in so far as any department head gets credit for his team's effort!

  6. Stevo, I appreciate that you are in agreement with the points made in the article but also glad that you re-considered and added a few comments. I agree that Guy Boucher made a good decision for his career. He has a bright GM to work with, was able to name his staff, and inherits a roster with Lecavalier, St Louis, Stamkos and Hedman. Dustin Tokarski is their goaltender of the future and the Lightning will add a good player with the 6th pick in the upcoming draft.
    Would it have been straightforward to keep Boucher with the Habs? No. But it could have been workable, and sellable if Boivin et al had an eye towards the future.
    Guy Boucher was supposed to be part of the succession plan towards a more modern, exciting team. No wonder pessimism is starting to creep in.

  7. Kyle, I think you said it best: the current group running the team is "stale, stagnant and obsolete."

    Retaining Boucher in the organization as head coach of the Canadiens would have required some creative solutions but none beyond the normal capabilities of an NHL general manager and president.

    Simply adding Boucher as an assistant with a built-in transition plan would require little more than doing nothing. Yet Boivin and Gauthier couldn't even manage that.

    As you predict, I think we are in store for another mediocre regular season which which will be seen as a major failure by fans who now have elevated expectations based on this year's playoff success.

  8. Arpon,

    I'm glad that you agree with most every point in the article. As far as coach Martin deserving more credit for the teams playoff success, perhaps you have a point. What I cannot concede is the Canadiens' playoff success is vindication of Jacques Martin's system or his ability to connect to players as some are claiming.

    So let me give credit to Martin for listening to Kirk Muller' suggestions. The adjustments that made a difference to the Canadiens turning around the Washington series were the brainchild of Muller (Moen to the top line, reduced even-strength minutes for Bergeron, …) but it was Martin who approved them.

    But is that the hallmark of anything more than a mediocre coach?

    Listen I've never said that Martin is a bad coach. I have given him credit for bringing structure and a professional approach to practices. That is a huge improvement over the Carbonneau years.

    So, with Martin, the Canadiens are part way there to having the coach that they deserve. Martin isn't Carbo, and he isn't one of the top coaches in the league. Debating where he falls on that continuum seems irrelevant and begs the question, why aren't the Canadiens recruiting (or retaining) the best?

    I can also credit Martin for developing game plans even though it didn't seem to make the best use of his players.

    In your excellent article http://dailyhab-it.blogspot.com/2010/06/will-real-montreal-canadiens-please.html you wrote about a difference if opinion between Gill and Gomez about the style of play that was best suited to the team. Its not a leap to say that the dispute extended to the coaching staff and other players. It could be seen in the team's play from game to game, and many times within games.

    Whether Martin is simply a bad match for the current personnel or a coach whose system doesn't fit the post-lockout NHL, he clearly hasn't been able to get the majority of his team on board.

    Simply pointing to Martin's won-loss record is not indicative of anything other than his longevity in the league. Only 149 of his 556 career wins have come since the lockout and the Canadiens 8th place finish is his best in that time period.

    You have my admiration for raising the issue of Boivin's search process and challenging his claim that every rock was overturned. We know that not to be the case.

    I'm not sure that Boucher is the genius that many claim he is. But he seems to have all the ingredients missing from the current head coach. I think many fans were excited to see what he could do with the current roster.

  9. The Soft European,

    Thanks for your regular readership. I'm sorry that this article annoyed you a little. Beyond what you explored, I think that the Canadiens had other options. Organizations both inside and outside hockey find ways of retaining talented personnel. They also have ways of transitioning personnel who are past their prime to other positions where they can still be effective.

    I believe the best organizations don't just toss up their hands when faced with unfortunate situations. They find creative solutions.

  10. I have to agree with Arpon that Martin does deserve some credit. Whether we like him or not, he went with what worked and it worked for the time it did.

    I also would have liked for the Habs to work something out with Boucher, don't get me wrong on that one. I simply feel they put themselves into this awkward situation with no way out.

    Seems like with all the importance and emphasis that was put on getting a french speaking coach, it would of naturally happened on its own but they chose to force it and this is where they failed, and this is now where we are, IMO.

    What scares me is that i truly feel that if not for our goalies this year, or Halak if you prefer, we would have finished at least 10 points back in the standings missing the playoffs by a landslide. We got in by a hair, and then we found a way to make something of it. But next year? I don't think we currently have a team to make the playoffs. I feel that they have much much work to do in the offseason.

    So yeah, in the end, i wish they would have done more, but they didn't plan ahead, and it doesn't seem like they are doing it now either…

  11. @Arpon: "But that's no reason to belittle a tremendous playoff run, one where Martin put together the best playoff coaching performance of his previously piss-poor post-season career. It's also no reason to give Muller all the credit for the team's success while Martin weathers the blame for it's failings."

    How do you figure? Personally I found Martin's playoff coaching performance to be quite poor. He didn't coach much differently in the playoffs than he did in the regular season; it was the same old obsolete, ineffective passive defend-against-the-goalie system we all know and loathe. Predictably, it allowed both Pittsbrugh and Washington to rack up some ludicrously lopsided scoring chance counts; and I cannot fathom any way in which that could be construed as "success".

    The only difference between Martin's regular-season coachign and Martin's playoff coaching was Halak standing on his head. Otherwise, same old tired nonsense — spend so much time defending that you end up sucking at defense. IMO Martin's been a bad coach for the Habs all year, and it was no different in the playoffs.

Comments are closed.