• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Carlyle fired

More flame to the fire.

Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke
Kypreos also said Carlyle didn't do a lot of 1 on 1 teaching and communicate with players. That's something others have mentioned too.

In fact, big reason for the assistant coaching changes was to create more communication for the players. Goes also back to Dubas' comments where he said it was the team's responsibility to help young players develop rather than just telling them it's all on them.

Ppl want to rip Leafs leadership/character, but it was obvious (from player personnel changes & deployment) RC liked one way & stuck with it

Never adapted and continuously tried to hammer a square peg into a round hole. It hindered development & depreciated assets.

Repeated reports about how Carlyle didn't like Holland and therefore wouldn't play him (Leafs wasted a 2nd rnd pick bc Holland sat on bench). Ray Ferraro came out and said it was because he thought PH was soft cuz of the lace bite

Throughout Carlyle's tenure he has also mentioned over and over again how he doesn't understand why players aren't playing through injuries

Carlyle said he was not here to develop but to win games. Damning considering org pushed "young, developing team" angle
Click to expand...

I think Carlyle would still be the coach today if he focused on developing the young players and their in-game thinking processes (Gardiner!), and didn't worry about the results. It wasn't the wins and losses that sealed his fate. Unfortunately, he thought his seat security came from the final results, and not the underlying metrics of coaching (process, communication, teaching vs. preaching).

I am a bit disappointed his apparent attitude towards the younger players was so sink-or-swim, as now we've lost critical development time on assets. However, the (new) coaching staff now has a strong negative example to play off of to motivate players to try different things.
 
herman said:
More flame to the fire.


Quote<blockquote>Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke
Kypreos also said Carlyle didn't do a lot of 1 on 1 teaching and communicate with players. That's something others have mentioned too.

In fact, big reason for the assistant coaching changes was to create more communication for the players. Goes also back to Dubas' comments where he said it was the team's responsibility to help young players develop rather than just telling them it's all on them.

Ppl want to rip Leafs leadership/character, but it was obvious (from player personnel changes & deployment) RC liked one way & stuck with it

Never adapted and continuously tried to hammer a square peg into a round hole. It hindered development & depreciated assets.

Repeated reports about how Carlyle didn't like Holland and therefore wouldn't play him (Leafs wasted a 2nd rnd pick bc Holland sat on bench). Ray Ferraro came out and said it was because he thought PH was soft cuz of the lace bite

Throughout Carlyle's tenure he has also mentioned over and over again how he doesn't understand why players aren't playing through injuries

Carlyle said he was not here to develop but to win games. Damning considering org pushed "young, developing team" angle
</blockquote>


I think Carlyle would still be the coach today if he focused on developing the young players and their in-game thinking processes (Gardiner!), and didn't worry about the results. It wasn't the wins and losses that sealed his fate. Unfortunately, he thought his seat security came from the final results, and not the underlying metrics of coaching (process, communication, teaching vs. preaching).

I am a bit disappointed his apparent attitude towards the younger players was so sink-or-swim, as now we've lost critical development time on assets. However, the (new) coaching staff now has a strong negative example to play off of to motivate players to try different things.
Click to expand...


The trouble with Carlyle could be that he comes from another era when players either had it or not.  He comes from 'the school of hard knocks', his era, when players were self-motivated, the game was perhaps dirtier & tougher, one was more on their own to learn, etc., coaches had a vastly different approach to coaching, players with character/survivor mentality, etc.


I don't think Randy quite compartmentalized today's athlete nor attitude nor approach.  Carlyle's fort wasn't teaching in the least.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
Thanks Loiselle. If Clarkson's going to go the only way to do it would be by eating $2-3mil in a trade. That would be a better option than the buyout. Might even find a taker at that price.
Click to expand...

Yup. Trading him for peanuts while retaining a good chunk of his salary is really the only palatable option in terms of getting him off the roster. If the Leafs are willing to hold on to 50% of the cap/salary and only take a mid round pick or something back, Clarkson is probably moveable. Teams might balk at the remaining term, but, at $2.625M per, Clarkson would no longer be awful value.
 
bustaheims said:
CarltonTheBear said:
Thanks Loiselle. If Clarkson's going to go the only way to do it would be by eating $2-3mil in a trade. That would be a better option than the buyout. Might even find a taker at that price.
Click to expand...

Yup. Trading him for peanuts while retaining a good chunk of his salary is really the only palatable option in terms of getting him off the roster. If the Leafs are willing to hold on to 50% of the cap/salary and only take a mid round pick or something back, Clarkson is probably moveable. Teams might balk at the remaining term, but, at $2.625M per, Clarkson would no longer be awful value.
Click to expand...

For all the talk that he's "playing better" he's on pace for 18 goals and 8 assists and is $5.25 M against the cap.  that's with 2:00 of PP time per game too.  But all the talk is Kessel, on pace for 84 points.

Seriously, Kessel could lay down in the offensive end whenever the play is in the Leafs' end and I'd still think he was way more valuable than Clarkson.  But Kessel's the problem apparently.
 
Steve Staios becomes the 3rd guy on the bench. He's the Leafs current Manager of Player Development, whatever that means.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
Steve Staios becomes the 3rd guy on the bench. He's the Leafs current Manager of Player Development, whatever that means.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. 

For a second I thought about DeBoer to see if he'd be willing to take on the role.
 
Peter D. said:
That's interesting. 

For a second I thought about DeBoer to see if he'd be willing to take on the role.
Click to expand...

Getting another big name to fill that role would have probably just been a distraction at this point. Let Horachek and Spott do their thing. Staios will just be there for support really.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
Steve Staios becomes the 3rd guy on the bench. He's the Leafs current Manager of Player Development, whatever that means.
Click to expand...

The greatest Edmonton Oiler of all time!
 
Some info on Horachek with comments from his 'mentor' Barry Trotz: http://www.brandonsun.com/sports/hockey/next-phase-for-maple-leafs-in-post-carlyle-era-belongs-to-horachek-spott-287762631.html
 
I know that I've noticed whenever they showed shots of the bench during timeouts or whatever, it was Horachek talking to the players, pulling out the whiteboard and so on, I rarely say Carlyle say much of anything. I know it's a small sample size, but it's something that caught my attention.

If you think about it though, that doesn't bode well, since they haven't been playing well regardless of what Horachek's been trying to coach, so who knows what we'll see.

I'm not really optimistic.
 
Joe S. said:
I know that I've noticed whenever they showed shots of the bench during timeouts or whatever, it was Horachek talking to the players, pulling out the whiteboard and so on, I rarely say Carlyle say much of anything. I know it's a small sample size, but it's something that caught my attention.

If you think about it though, that doesn't bode well, since they haven't been playing well regardless of what Horachek's been trying to coach, so who knows what we'll see.

I'm not really optimistic.
Click to expand...

Until they definitively tell me that it was Horachek and Spott that determined player deployment, ice time, etc., I will maintain my optimism. I am assuming that Horachek and Spott were professionals that respected the chain of command and did their best in an increasingly dour situation.
 
Horachuk was an assistant to the Panthers with Dineen whom was suffering the same way that Randy was, with low possession numbers and he brought them up significantly.  As an assistant you cannot usurp your leader, and now he can lead and hopefully bring the message at this AM's conference to life. I am not expecting miracles either but am looking at the rest of the season as a grounds for improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top