Leafs search for a new coach/GM

[CarltonTheBear]

We had our first real update on this topic from Darren Dreger today:

[tweet]595747731492237314[/tweet]
[tweet]595752373210996738[/tweet]

Dregs reports that the Leafs have contacted Guy Boucher about the coaching position. This comes a few hours after Boucher told TSN 1050 that he's been approached by NHL teams about a return.

Dreger also says the Leafs are hoping to talk to Jeff Gorton about the GM job. The Rangers won't allow Gorton to talk to other teams until after their season is over.

Obviously the Leafs will probably talk to and be linked to plenty of options in the coming weeks, so this is just a start. I've liked Boucher for quite some time now, I'd be pretty happy with him coming on board.

 

[oldman]

When ever I hear Guy Boucher I think of his 1-3-1 style hockey. I bet Leafs fans would love it.

[youtube]4VV1PrbkK3E[/youtube]

 

[CarltonTheBear]

When ever I hear Guy Boucher I think of his 1-3-1 style hockey. I bet Leafs fans would love it.

For the life of me I'll never understand why the Flyer weren't mocked more than the Lightning for that.

Fun fact: Tampa was tied for the 5th highest scoring team in the league during Boucher's tenure as coach.

 

[herman]

When ever I hear Guy Boucher I think of his 1-3-1 style hockey. I bet Leafs fans would love it.

For the life of me I'll never understand why the Flyer weren't mocked more than the Lightning for that.

Fun fact: Tampa was tied for the 5th highest scoring team in the league during Boucher's tenure as coach.

Leafs get booed on home ice all the time anyway. At least with that system it's not ending up in their own net. It looks like a good way for a team with less skill to reduce the number of chances against.

From TLN's old article about this very topic:

I sent an email to Kyle Alexander of boltstatistics.com and SBN's Raw Charge, who I've talked to a few times about Guy Boucher and the post-1-3-1 era. The story is that after Chris Pronger embarrassed the Lightning system on national TV by not moving the puck forward, Steve Yzerman told Boucher to stop doing it, and the Bolts collapsed. In Boucher's first year, the Lightning were a 51.3% Corsi Tied team. A year later, they were 47.6% with practically an identical roster.

 

[Peter D.]

I know his name's been discussed quite a bit around here, but if the Leafs are indeed looking at promoting an assistant GM from another organization, I'm quite intrigued with Futa.

Just did a quick search about Gorton.  He's the one who orchestrated the Raycroft/Rask trade.  ****!

 

[CarltonTheBear]

From TLN's old article about this very topic:

I sent an email to Kyle Alexander of boltstatistics.com and SBN's Raw Charge, who I've talked to a few times about Guy Boucher and the post-1-3-1 era. The story is that after Chris Pronger embarrassed the Lightning system on national TV by not moving the puck forward, Steve Yzerman told Boucher to stop doing it, and the Bolts collapsed. In Boucher's first year, the Lightning were a 51.3% Corsi Tied team. A year later, they were 47.6% with practically an identical roster.

The only embarrassing part about that story is that the Lightning let Chris Pronger dictate how they won hockey games.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

From TLN's old article about this very topic:

I sent an email to Kyle Alexander of boltstatistics.com and SBN's Raw Charge, who I've talked to a few times about Guy Boucher and the post-1-3-1 era. The story is that after Chris Pronger embarrassed the Lightning system on national TV by not moving the puck forward, Steve Yzerman told Boucher to stop doing it, and the Bolts collapsed. In Boucher's first year, the Lightning were a 51.3% Corsi Tied team. A year later, they were 47.6% with practically an identical roster.

The only embarrassing part about that story is that the Lightning let Chris Pronger dictate how they won hockey games.

Maybe if the writer of that article worked for the team now then MAYBE I could see Boucher being hired.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

From TLN's old article about this very topic:

I sent an email to Kyle Alexander of boltstatistics.com and SBN's Raw Charge, who I've talked to a few times about Guy Boucher and the post-1-3-1 era. The story is that after Chris Pronger embarrassed the Lightning system on national TV by not moving the puck forward, Steve Yzerman told Boucher to stop doing it, and the Bolts collapsed. In Boucher's first year, the Lightning were a 51.3% Corsi Tied team. A year later, they were 47.6% with practically an identical roster.

The only embarrassing part about that story is that the Lightning let Chris Pronger dictate how they won hockey games.

Maybe if the writer of that article worked for the team now then MAYBE I could see Boucher being hired.

Like the Leafs would ever hire a lowly blogger. Get real!

 

[disco]

Greetings CTB and fellow sufferers. Long-time reader / First-time poster...

Seems to me the blueprint for any rebuilding GM in this hard-cap/parity era of the NHL is to:

1. Suck royally for 5-8 years (Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, Boston, Anaheim lesser extent... league laughingstocks for extended periods of time)

2. Draft elite level forwards and defencemen.
(Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Letang, Fleury, Kopitar, Doughty, Quick, Kreijci, Marchand, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Perry...)

3. Plug holes with cheap young talent you've continued to draft in the high 20's onwards. Teams cannot afford 2 high-paid goalies these days and 1 is rare, so good goaltenders are always available. Sprinkle in savvy free-agent signing/trade (Hossa, Chara, Rask..).

4. Pay them all when their payday contracts come up. Enjoy years of prosperity and Stanley-Cup runs.

5. Become like Detroit in your elder years.

... I would say the key to this model is the level or supreme suckage for that 5-8 year period. I mean, its gotta be LAUGHINGSTOCK level. If you're just good enough to squeak in or bad enough to miss the playoffs you'll never become these kinds of teams. And of course, our boys in blue finally fit the bill for year 1 of that plan. Schenn was a bust and Naz will be a good centre but these teams have elite forwards, skilled all purpose centers, stud defencemen.. guys on the ice at all times for every situation. Phil's a sniper but that's it. We have no elite centre, no stud defencemen.. and in today's hard-cap league free agents are extremely rare.

So yeah, I don't think you need to be a genius in today's hard cap era. Listen to your scouts, more important for #3 than #2 (top 10 picks are pretty much consensus these days). Leafs can get a no namer in there that works well with others.

Just my two cents. Have a great day.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

This is another article by Cam Charron about Boucher and his 1-3-1:

Both come as a result of forechecking and aggressive play. The 1-3-1 wasn't a boring, Jacques Lemaire-esque defensive system. The 1-3-1 was a counter attack formation, the middle guy not there to shadow the puck carrier but to prevent East-West movement. If you made a mistake carrying the puck, the high forward was quick on the puck to create a rush. Skaters were allowed to skate. The point of the system was to minimize the amount of times the opponent got through the neutral zone with control.

Two things that I always remember hearing about Boucher's system is that it was a "counter attack" system, like Charron says, and that it largely relied on having mobile defencemen. This article here kind of goes into more specifics about the actual formation: http://www.rawcharge.com/2011/5/11/2164497/lightning-and-the-1-3-1-tampa-t.

As you can see, is clogs up the neutral zone. The two most likely things that would happen when the other team attempted to bring the puck up would be that they either had to dump it in at centre ice, or they would turn it over at the blueline. If they dumped it in that D2 would have a head start to get to the puck first, and if they turned it over then you had the other 4 skaters ready to pounce and go up the ice with a likely man advantage.

I know the team will likely look a little different in the coming years, but that sounds like what would have been a perfect system for the Carlyle-era Leafs.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Greetings CTB and fellow sufferers. Long-time reader / First-time poster...

Nice first post. I think that the Leafs will more or less follow that type of blue print. I don't think that it's going to take 5-8 years of suffering though. You could argue that the Leafs are already a few years into their rebuild. They're about to add their 3rd top-5 calibre prospect in 4 years (Nylander was a great steal). The Leafs will likely enter the 2016-17 with Rielly, Nylander, Hanifin/Strome/Marner, Matthews/Puljuj?rvi/Chychrun/Brown/Day, and that's a pretty solid core to build around. Sprinkle in guys like Gardiner, Kadri, Brown, plus any other young assets the Leafs can acquire by possibly trading players like Kessel and Phaneuf.

They won't be Stanley Cup contenders right away, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest that the Leafs could be back in the playoffs in 2 years even if they are following a model that relies heavily on patience and building from within.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Greetings CTB and fellow sufferers. Long-time reader / First-time poster...

Nice first post. I think that the Leafs will more or less follow that type of blue print. I don't think that it's going to take 5-8 years of suffering though. You could argue that the Leafs are already a few years into their rebuild. They're about to add their 3rd top-5 calibre prospect in 4 years (Nylander was a great steal). The Leafs will likely enter the 2016-17 with Rielly, Nylander, Hanifin/Strome/Marner, Matthews/Puljuj?rvi/Chychrun/Brown/Day, and that's a pretty solid core to build around. Sprinkle in guys like Gardiner, Kadri, Brown, plus any other young assets the Leafs can acquire by possibly trading players like Kessel and Phaneuf.

They won't be Stanley Cup contenders right away, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest that the Leafs could be back in the playoffs in 2 years even if they are following a model that relies heavily on patience and building from within.

I think another thing all the teams (maybe not Pittsburgh?) that have had sustained success recently have in common is that they also hit on some later round picks that turned out great.  Something Edmonton has failed miserably at.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I think another thing all the teams (maybe not Pittsburgh?) that have had sustained success recently have in common is that they also hit on some later round picks that turned out great.  Something Edmonton has failed miserably at.

Somebody today pointed out how hilariously bad the 2007 draft was for Edmonton. They had 3 1st round picks and took Gagner, Alex Plante, and Riley Nash. The even funnier part? Jakub Voracek was picked directly after Gagner, and Max Pacioretty was picked directly after Nash. Oh what could have been.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I think another thing all the teams (maybe not Pittsburgh?) that have had sustained success recently have in common is that they also hit on some later round picks that turned out great.  Something Edmonton has failed miserably at.

Somebody today pointed out how hilariously bad the 2007 draft was for Edmonton. They had 3 1st round picks and took Gagner, Alex Plante, and Riley Nash. The even funnier part? Jakub Voracek was picked directly after Gagner, and Max Pacioretty was picked directly after Nash. Oh what could have been.

Getting far off-topic here, but I don't know if I've seen a stranger junior career than Alex Plante.

He's a defenceman and had 38 points in 58 games during his draft year.  The season before his draft year he had 4 points in 54 games.  The season after his draft year he had 2 points in 36 games.  His final season he had 45 points in 68 games.  But the 2 seasons around his draft year he had 6 points in 90 games.

 

[bustaheims]

Somebody today pointed out how hilariously bad the 2007 draft was for Edmonton. They had 3 1st round picks and took Gagner, Alex Plante, and Riley Nash. The even funnier part? Jakub Voracek was picked directly after Gagner, and Max Pacioretty was picked directly after Nash. Oh what could have been.

Dallas also took Jamie Benn basically right after Edmonton's 5th round selection of Milan Kytnar. That draft really could have been franchise changing for the Oilers.

 

[Highlander]

Welcome Disco to the insaniacs who dwell here. We do have one stud defenseman in Rielly. Loov potentially could be stud, he hits like a horse.  Grandberg, Niilson, McWilliam  also play a very physical game.

As this is a coach GM thread, if Babcock does not come then Boucher would be a good choice. There are a heck of alot of coaches out there that I am not interested in. I am a bit worried about his Veterans not buying into the 1-3-1 plan however how many vets will be left on this team after June?
Regarding GM if this Gorton chappie organized the rape of Rask for Raycroft then come on down.

 

[L K]

Welcome Disco to the insaniacs who dwell here. We do have one stud defenseman in Rielly. Loov potentially could be stud, he hits like a horse.  Grandberg, Niilson, McWilliam  also play a very physical game.

As this is a coach GM thread, if Babcock does not come then Boucher would be a good choice. There are a heck of alot of coaches out there that I am not interested in. I am a bit worried about his Veterans not buying into the 1-3-1 plan however how many vets will be left on this team after June?
Regarding GM if this Gorton chappie organized the rape of Rask for Raycroft then come on down.

I like Loov but he's not a top pairing guy.  The other guys are all 5-6 type defensemen.

 

[Kin]

... I would say the key to this model is the level or supreme suckage for that 5-8 year period. I mean, its gotta be LAUGHINGSTOCK level. If you're just good enough to squeak in or bad enough to miss the playoffs you'll never become these kinds of teams.

You might be exaggerating here a little. Look at the Blackhawks. Their dynasty was really only built on 4 years of having top 10 picks and in two of those years, they more or less blew the picks(Jack Skille and Cam Barker). Likewise the Kings only had two top 10 picks who made much of a difference for them in Doughty and, I guess, Schenn being a big part of the Mike Richards trade.

I agree that getting bad and getting real bad is the best way to add talent but I think if you can do it right, luck out with the lottery and the draft class a little, and combine that with really smart player acquisition elsewhere it really won't take 5-8 years of being terrible.

 

[L K]

... I would say the key to this model is the level or supreme suckage for that 5-8 year period. I mean, its gotta be LAUGHINGSTOCK level. If you're just good enough to squeak in or bad enough to miss the playoffs you'll never become these kinds of teams.

You might be exaggerating here a little. Look at the Blackhawks. Their dynasty was really only built on 4 years of having top 10 picks and in two of those years, they more or less blew the picks(Jack Skille and Cam Barker). Likewise the Kings only had two top 10 picks who made much of a difference for them in Doughty and, I guess, Schenn being a big part of the Mike Richards trade.

I agree that getting bad and getting real bad is the best way to add talent but I think if you can do it right, luck out with the lottery and the draft class a little, and combine that with really smart player acquisition elsewhere it really won't take 5-8 years of being terrible.

Assuming the Leafs pick up a handful of early round picks through offseason trades they potentially could really accelerate a rebuild  if they are successful.  This is a great draft to restock the cupboard.  And while the Leafs certainly aren't teeming with talent they have enough players who are tradeable for some value that can help out.  Next year is also a pretty fantastic draft to be pushing for the #1 pick too.

 

[Kin]

Assuming the Leafs pick up a handful of early round picks through offseason trades they potentially could really accelerate a rebuild  if they are successful.  This is a great draft to restock the cupboard.  And while the Leafs certainly aren't teeming with talent they have enough players who are tradeable for some value that can help out.  Next year is also a pretty fantastic draft to be pushing for the #1 pick too.

Right and I think the key really is patience. The Leafs might luck out and take Hanifin and Mathews next year and those two guys might be the sort of difference makers who would not only be good enough that you could start adding complimentary pieces to but also good enough that the team just wouldn't be bad enough to draft that high again.

Then again, they might not be that lucky. The key is to not take that next step and really build up the team until you're pretty sure you have those foundational pieces in place.