The Unofficial Fire Ron Wilson/Ron Wilson is the Greatest Thread

[cw]

I think any expectation that Allaire was going to turn the goalie situation around in a season or two ignores the typical development these guys have to go through. It's going to take a few more seasons before we can fairly judge Allaire's coaching in my opinion.

Isn't this the 3rd season?  A few more seasons and we'll be looking back at more than half a decade.  I should hope we can fairly judge something after so long, although I wouldn't be surprised if someone reaches into the big bag of excuses and argues otherwise.

The average development time for a NHL starter is about 6 and a half years. Add a year for a starter from Europe because they have to get used to the NA rink & game - they tend to be older when they make it as a NHL starter.

And one should add more time for those goalies not drafted in the 1st round - they tend to take an extra year longer as well because they're not as far along.

Allaire joined the Leafs in the summer of 2009 - he's been here less than three seasons. This is Scrivens & Rynnas second season and Owuya's first with the Leafs. That's so short in terms of goalie development time, it's effectively silly to even discuss. I think expecting Allaire to solve the Leafs goaltending problems in a couple of years is just plain unrealistic given the length of time it takes to develop a NHL starter. It's a little like adjusting a golf game.

Patience is a virtue and that applies to goaltenders more than any other position in hockey - by a considerable margin.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

I think any expectation that Allaire was going to turn the goalie situation around in a season or two ignores the typical development these guys have to go through. It's going to take a few more seasons before we can fairly judge Allaire's coaching in my opinion.

Isn't this the 3rd season?  A few more seasons and we'll be looking back at more than half a decade.  I should hope we can fairly judge something after so long, although I wouldn't be surprised if someone reaches into the big bag of excuses and argues otherwise.

The average development time for a NHL starter is about 6 and a half years. Add a year for a starter from Europe because they have to get used to the NA rink & game - they tend to be older when they make it as a NHL starter.

Patience is a virtue and that applies to goaltenders more than any other position in hockey - by a considerable margin.

My question is, then why did Brian Burke let Giguere walk with only Gus and Reimer to carry the team?

To paraphrase Brian Burke's own speech on his first day, "we build our teams from the net out."

 

[cw]

I think any expectation that Allaire was going to turn the goalie situation around in a season or two ignores the typical development these guys have to go through. It's going to take a few more seasons before we can fairly judge Allaire's coaching in my opinion.

Isn't this the 3rd season?  A few more seasons and we'll be looking back at more than half a decade.  I should hope we can fairly judge something after so long, although I wouldn't be surprised if someone reaches into the big bag of excuses and argues otherwise.

The average development time for a NHL starter is about 6 and a half years. Add a year for a starter from Europe because they have to get used to the NA rink & game - they tend to be older when they make it as a NHL starter.

Patience is a virtue and that applies to goaltenders more than any other position in hockey - by a considerable margin.

My question is, then why did Brian Burke let Giguere walk with only Gus and Reimer to carry the team?

To paraphrase Brian Burke's own speech on his first day, "we build our teams from the net out."

Because they hoped Reimer would carry on from where he left off and Giguere hadn't been that good last year. They also expected better from Gus after he got his heart/injury finally resolved and wanted to check him out rather than giving up on a young goalie to hang onto a old goalie.

Burke has signed four young, promising UFAs to try to solve the problem longer term.

 

[slapshot]

I still think its reasonable to question Allaire at this point.

Apparently not...

Either way the point I was starting from is that Ron, as bad as he has been (bad decisions, throwing players under the bus, standing there with a stupid look on his face while the team implodes) might really have been screwed by his buddy Burke on goaltending this year.

Part of why I was mentioning Allaire is that no matter how awesome his technique he has no NHL playing experience of his own to relate to our young goalies.

Reasonable in what sense? What evidence do we have besides "our goalies suck." Going on that one premise I think questioning Allaire is paper thin. "He hasn't played in the NHL." Also paper thin when you consider the players he taught and how much damn research and years he put into this.

http://www.thehockeysource.tv/sectionsourceknowledge/interviews_allaire0505.php

Owuya's doing great in the ECHL and in the A. Must have NOTHING to do with Allaire.

You're being over-sensitive here. I'm not pointing out his lack of NHL career as a reason to fire him, I'm pointing it out as one reason for how awful things have gotten here now.

So far, he's turned one 4th round pick, Reimer, into at least a NHL backup and maybe a starter.

As I recall, UFAs Gustavsson, Scrivens, Rynnas & Owuya all indicated that a key part of the reason they signed with the Leafs was to get coaching from Allaire. In other words, we may not have any of them if Francois wasn't with the Leafs.

If we asked all the hockey experts in the world to rank the goalie coaching in the NHL, maybe Mitch Korn or someone else would take the #1 ranking but I think it would be darn near impossible to expect to find Allaire ranked 30th. He remains a very well regarded goalie coach. I simply can't fathom how that isn't a significant asset - particularly relative to what the Leafs have had over the last couple of decades when goalie coaches started to make their mark.

Like any hockey player, it's up to the player to distill the coaching with his ability. Blaming the goalie coach for what ails the Leafs goalies strikes me as a fair stretch of a conclusion at this point in time. The most experienced of them, Gustavsson, has started all of 103 NHL games. It's a position that requires the most development time and it's the position that seems to be the most difficult to predict - even from NHL season to NHL season.

I continue to thank my lucky stars we have a guy like Allaire attracting and helping to develop prospects.

I think you make a lot of good points CW.

I would like to add a few things of my own:

Unless a goalie is exceptionally gifted it's takes a lot longer to be successfully in the bigs. One reason for that should be obvious. A shooter has to learn the tendencies of what, 30-40 league goalies. A goalie has to learn the tendencies of what, 300-400 shooters. It takes time to gain this experience.
Although some of these examples are from different eras, it's interesting to note:
It to Curtis Joseph 3 seasons to get his save percentage over .900 and his 6th season to get his GAA under 3.00.
Incredibly it was until Grant Fuhr's 17th season in the league that he got his GAA under 3.00 and his save percentage over .900.
More recently, Ryan Miller spent three full years mostly in the AHL with brief stints in Buffalo before he began the go-to guy.
It took Marc Andre Fluery his third full year to establish himself.
It took Patrick Roy four seasons to get his GAA under 2.90
Jean Sebastien Giguere spent four seasons mostly in the AHL before finally breaking through with the Ducks. So when Allaire talks about these guys - Reimer and Gus - being pretty well inexperienced, he's pretty much bang on. They have been rushed into action by the Leafs mainly due to lack of alternatives. Into a pressure cooker at that. The wiser course would have been for Leafs to have gotten an experienced tender for the number 1 spot and gradually tutor one of the younger guys. Look at how Boston is doing it with Thomas and Rask. Or Vancouver with Luongo and Schneider.

What I will say about Gus and Reimer is that while both are "atheletic," I have not seen the blinding quick reflexs of a Curtis Joseph, a Grant Fuhr or more recently Marc Andre Fleury. That does not mean they can not be quality netminders, but it does mean the road to success will be longer because the accumulated experience will have to be developed to compensate for the fact that they aren't blinding fast to bail themselves out of trouble. Sort of like how Gardiner on defence is able to cover for himself when he makes mistakes with his speed. Over time, he simply won't make so many mistakes because he'll have gained the experience.
The same can happen with Gus and Reims if they are able to hang at the NHL level with the Leafs or elsewhere.
I hope this all makes sense?

 

[cw]

I still think its reasonable to question Allaire at this point.

Apparently not...

Either way the point I was starting from is that Ron, as bad as he has been (bad decisions, throwing players under the bus, standing there with a stupid look on his face while the team implodes) might really have been screwed by his buddy Burke on goaltending this year.

Part of why I was mentioning Allaire is that no matter how awesome his technique he has no NHL playing experience of his own to relate to our young goalies.

Reasonable in what sense? What evidence do we have besides "our goalies suck." Going on that one premise I think questioning Allaire is paper thin. "He hasn't played in the NHL." Also paper thin when you consider the players he taught and how much damn research and years he put into this.

http://www.thehockeysource.tv/sectionsourceknowledge/interviews_allaire0505.php

Owuya's doing great in the ECHL and in the A. Must have NOTHING to do with Allaire.

You're being over-sensitive here. I'm not pointing out his lack of NHL career as a reason to fire him, I'm pointing it out as one reason for how awful things have gotten here now.

So far, he's turned one 4th round pick, Reimer, into at least a NHL backup and maybe a starter.

As I recall, UFAs Gustavsson, Scrivens, Rynnas & Owuya all indicated that a key part of the reason they signed with the Leafs was to get coaching from Allaire. In other words, we may not have any of them if Francois wasn't with the Leafs.

If we asked all the hockey experts in the world to rank the goalie coaching in the NHL, maybe Mitch Korn or someone else would take the #1 ranking but I think it would be darn near impossible to expect to find Allaire ranked 30th. He remains a very well regarded goalie coach. I simply can't fathom how that isn't a significant asset - particularly relative to what the Leafs have had over the last couple of decades when goalie coaches started to make their mark.

Like any hockey player, it's up to the player to distill the coaching with his ability. Blaming the goalie coach for what ails the Leafs goalies strikes me as a fair stretch of a conclusion at this point in time. The most experienced of them, Gustavsson, has started all of 103 NHL games. It's a position that requires the most development time and it's the position that seems to be the most difficult to predict - even from NHL season to NHL season.

I continue to thank my lucky stars we have a guy like Allaire attracting and helping to develop prospects.

I think you make a lot of good points CW.

I would like to add a few things of my own:

Unless a goalie is exceptionally gifted it's takes a lot longer to be successfully in the bigs. One reason for that should be obvious. A shooter has to learn the tendencies of what, 30-40 league goalies. A goalie has to learn the tendencies of what, 300-400 shooters. It takes time to gain this experience.
Although some of these examples are from different eras, it's interesting to note:
It to Curtis Joseph 3 seasons to get his save percentage over .900 and his 6th season to get his GAA under 3.00.
Incredibly it was until Grant Fuhr's 17th season in the league that he got his GAA under 3.00 and his save percentage over .900.
More recently, Ryan Miller spent three full years mostly in the AHL with brief stints in Buffalo before he began the go-to guy.
It took Marc Andre Fluery his third full year to establish himself.
It took Patrick Roy four seasons to get his GAA under 2.90
Jean Sebastien Giguere spent four seasons mostly in the AHL before finally breaking through with the Ducks. So when Allaire talks about these guys - Reimer and Gus - being pretty well inexperienced, he's pretty much bang on. They have been rushed into action by the Leafs mainly due to lack of alternatives. Into a pressure cooker at that. The wiser course would have been for Leafs to have gotten an experienced tender for the number 1 spot and gradually tutor one of the younger guys. Look at how Boston is doing it with Thomas and Rask. Or Vancouver with Luongo and Schneider.

What I will say about Gus and Reimer is that while both are "atheletic," I have not seen the blinding quick reflexs of a Curtis Joseph, a Grant Fuhr or more recently Marc Andre Fleury. That does not mean they can not be quality netminders, but it does mean the road to success will be longer because the accumulated experience will have to be developed to compensate for the fact that they aren't blinding fast to bail themselves out of trouble. Sort of like how Gardiner on defence is able to cover for himself when he makes mistakes with his speed. Over time, he simply won't make so many mistakes because he'll have gained the experience.
The same can happen with Gus and Reims if they are able to hang at the NHL level with the Leafs or elsewhere.
I hope this all makes sense?

Some of the old stats like Grant Fuhr's, Cujo's or Roy's for example were skewed some because they took place prior to '93 - the start of the clutch and grab trap era and before the "science of goaltending positioning" got going and before the bigger equipment stepped in to increase save%s.

In the 60s through to the early 90s, I think we saw more acrobatic goaltending. I liked it more as it seemed more exciting to watch and athletic to me. I hoped it would return with the new rules changes. It has some. But with these new sticks increasing puck velocity so much, the goalies have had to hang onto positioning to let the puck hit them more than I hoped.

I don't think those remarks change the essence of what you were saying about goalie development.

Another point I've made before: I find the predictability of how a goalie will play from season to season in the NHL more unpredictable then ever since the 60s (when I started watching). It continues to confound me some. It has to make the drafting, development and coaching of these players more difficult than ever - it could drive a GM nuts.

One other example: like Reimer, Price had a pretty good first season with a .920 save%. The following year, Habs fans and Habs media were pulling their hair out when he slipped to .905 save%. Folks were talking bust. I wouldn't count James Reimer out just yet. It could well be just a sophomore slump like Price experienced or hangover from his concussion.

 

[slapshot]

Good points CW. Yes, I knew there were different trends and factors from era to era, but like you noted it doesn't really change the whole point. Also, clutch and grab is also not part of the current NHL climate either.
I, too, am a hockey product of the 60s. Thanks.

 

[slapshot]

Since this is the "Wilson" thread, I also wanted to chime in on this a bit.
I have been for the most part a Wilson supporter over the course of his tenure, largely because I knew a rebuild with a young group was underway and I felt patience was reasonable. I also had no problem with Wilson a) being curt or snippy with the media or b) commenting on players lack of performance to the media.

Let me explain. First, many members of the media simply ask stupid, goading or leading questions for the purpose of creating controversy. They whine about Wilson being sarcastic, but their columns are among the most sarcastic you'd ever want to find. They are hypocrites. Not all media but some have an obvious axe to grind. One reasonable column was in today Yahoo Sports.
Second, players get paid the big bucks so their egos should not be so fragile that they can't take some honest criticism whether behind closed doors or in public.

People who want Wilson fired because they just don't like his personality or communications style are entitled to their opinion, but it just doesn't hold any merit in my mind.

Now if you want to talk results, that is where my support of Wilson has really started to fade badly. While he certainly doesn't shoulder all the blame, I am pretty convinced that he has not judged properly the best system for this current group. Obviously, he knows them a lot better than any of us, but sometimes you can convince yourself that something is best -- and should work -- when it really isn't. And, rather than change your approach, you simply keep trying new things, or simply practice the same things, to make you system work, when it's the system itself that needs changing. Here's what I am coming to.
Burke and Wilson have been looking at this fast young squad and have been implementing a high speed game. A high speed game has worked really well for a couple of teams from the past. The Montreal Canadiens of the Guy LaFleur, Jacques Lemaire, Yvon Cournoyer era. This was largely a "veteran" club with speed, with solid d (Robinson, Savard, Lapointe) and a Hall-of-Fame netminder.
The young Edmonton Oilers. This club was so laden with high-end talent that goals that wound up in their own net never mattered. Grant Fuhr never had a GAA under 3 or a save percentage over .900 in all those years with the Oilers. Their forwards were simply so awesome, they'd just pump 5 goals a night in, budda boom, budda bing.
These young Leafs are obviously neither of those clubs, so what happens when play a wide open uptempo game, without the experience, the high end skill set or all-world goalie? Things get out of control. Lots of turnovers, sloppy coverage, people out of position, goalies hung out to dry. Sound familiar?

This system, or lack thereof, that Wilson and company seems to be running with needs to be dialed back. Focus totally on defence first, and use the speed and transition when and where it makes sense to do so, strategically, rather than just this free-for-all approach we see night after night.

Maybe that was what Wilson had really intended all along and the players just aren't executing, but it sure doesn't look that way?
 
These young players, in my mind, need a more controlled environment, with more attention to detail and less freelancing all over the place.

Until that happens, I think we're just in for more of the same.

 

[Corn Flake]

*thinking out loud here.... might want to stand back*

Post-Wilson, I wonder if Burke should consider hiring a co-coach pair vs. one guy.  All the jokes about media influence aside, you have to wonder how much time and energy it saps from a guy over the course of a season.  If you think about how much time the coach spends in front of cameras and mics, it adds up.  post-practice, pre-game, in-game sometimes, post-game, call-in interviews, etc etc.

You could in theory have two guys either split the duties or one who is almost the "face" who provides all the quotes and anecdotes and the other who gets to focus more on the team itself and not have to deal with being all politically correct when the questions start coming.  Hell, there have been 4 coaches behind the bench since Wilson took over, so it wouldn't get any more crowded back there than it already is.

I know everyone hates Wilson but according to some in the Western media, he wasn't difficult to deal with at all when he was in San Jose.  Remember that Pat Quinn for a long long time had a terrible relationship with the media and got into it with them several times as well.  Remember the famous shoving incident with the photographer in the ACC lobby?  So its not as if Wilson is the only coach who experienced this.

Just an idea.

 

[Fanatic]

Cox: Eakins Should Be Next Coach

 

[Corn Flake]

Cox: Eakins Should Be Next Coach

Ok, but the reasoning he uses is that the Leafs had Crawford and Quenneville in the system 20 years ago and they went on to win, so that's why they should hire Eakins.  :

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Flake, as to your idea about one coach not being the one to shoulder all of the media duties.  In soccer most of the top teams send an Assistant to around 50% of the media obligations, I see no reason why they cannot do the same in hockey as long as everyone is clear on message.  I mean both Assistants in Toronto have media handling experience on some level but alas the press in Toronto would probably cry bloody murder, but who cares?

Some managers will flat out black out certain publications if they moan too loudly.

 

[cw]

Cox: Eakins Should Be Next Coach

Ok, but the reasoning he uses is that the Leafs had Crawford and Quenneville in the system 20 years ago and they went on to win, so that's why they should hire Eakins.  :

At least Crawford and Quenneville had coached a pro hockey playoff game in their career before they got anointed.

I think the notion to install Eakins as the Leafs coach has some concerns. He seems like a decent guy. Maybe the Leafs could do worse. But it concerns me that it's a little like JFJ's hiring - putting someone with relative inexperience in the position into a media hotbed like Toronto - that would test even the most experienced NHL coach. See the recent Paul Maurice interview.

I've listed about 40 NHL coaching candidates previously that were available. This is hardly a concern about the ones that got away - because there are plenty of good ones out there. If someone like Carlyle would come, I think someone with that sort of experience would stand a better chance to survive in this market. And no, I don't buy that a coach of the Marlies would experience anything close to what the Leafs coach would.

If Eakins is truly good at what he does, and to some extent the jury is still out on that, they might consider throwing some good bucks at him to keep him in the franchise and maybe he gets a shot in the next go round. Or maybe they catch him on the rebound down the road like they could Crawford (I'm not keen on) who is also available now.

 

[Zee]

I'd like to see Burke not fire Wilson after this late season collapse. What excuse can Burke use this time around?  He's given the players a vote of confidence at the deadline so in his eyes this group was good enough to compete. He can't point to Ron's excellent record after a certain date any longer, maybe he blames the poor goaltending and defense?  "no coach can win when players execute like that"

I would seriously laugh if Burke doesn't fire Wilson after this season. Laughing in a mental breakdown kind of way.

 

[Zee]

Cox: Eakins Should Be Next Coach

Ok, but the reasoning he uses is that the Leafs had Crawford and Quenneville in the system 20 years ago and they went on to win, so that's why they should hire Eakins.  :

Cox is using those 2 as an example. I remember when Crawford was coaching our AHL team and people pegged him as a coach of the future,
Eakins seems to be in the same boat. The thing that works in Eakins advantage is all the players on the Marlies that he's worked with already, they all speak glowingly of him and how he motivates them and challenges them each game. Even the departed Keith Aulie had nothing but great words about Eakins. He is used to working with young players, I say he deserves a shot.

Of course Burke will hire Carlyle though.

 

[maplesyrup]

I agree with most of this article;

Toronto Maple Leafs shouldn't fire coach Ron Wilson (until they miss the playoffs)

http://www.thehockeynews.com/yahoosports/45181-Toronto-Maple-Leafs-shouldnt-fire-coach-Ron-Wilson-until-they-miss-the-playoffs.html

"...Would firing Wilson turn around the Leafs immediately? Would hiring Randy Carlyle or Marc Crawford squeak them into eighth in the East? If they make the playoffs, will they have much hope of upsetting the top-seeded New York Rangers no matter who is behind the bench?

No. So let this play out. If Wilson doesn't make the playoffs, let him go and let the new guy start fresh..."

 

[Andy007]

CW- I don't see how Eakins is relateable to JFJ. Ferguson was an executive/scout who promoted to the role of GM without any GM experience.

Eakins is a former player who is having success as a head coach. He is young, heavily praised by his players and employs a defensive approach in his system. I see far less risk in his hiring.

Also, just because JFJ failed miserably, it doesn't mean anyone without big league experience is destined to fail.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

I'm still not convinced this is entirely a coaching issue.  It's an easy out to blame the coaching staff.  There were many games when the team was "on" and Wilson looked like a Jack Adams shoe in. 

The team demonstrated at times that they knew what they were doing, were well prepared for the games.  When Reimer went down and Gus was playing lights out, the team won, and looked really good doing it.

The biggest thing that sunk this team this year was goal tending.  Most of the people on this board, the media and fans in general suspected the Leafs were going to be as good as Reimer was.  There were many rumblings in the summer questioning if going into 2011/2012 with Reimer and Gus with no veteran goalie was a good idea.

Yes everyone knew Giguere didn't have a good season last year.  But as CW pointed out goalies are the most fickle players and take the longest to develop.  Signing Giguere to a $1.25 mil contract wouldn't have been the end of the world, even if he didn't play that well.

Pinning this seasons hopes on Reimer was a HUGE mistake on Burke's part. I pin this years debacle squarely on Burke, not on coaching. 

 

[Andy007]

I agree with most of this article;

Toronto Maple Leafs shouldn't fire coach Ron Wilson (until they miss the playoffs)

http://www.thehockeynews.com/yahoosports/45181-Toronto-Maple-Leafs-shouldnt-fire-coach-Ron-Wilson-until-they-miss-the-playoffs.html

"...Would firing Wilson turn around the Leafs immediately? Would hiring Randy Carlyle or Marc Crawford squeak them into eighth in the East? If they make the playoffs, will they have much hope of upsetting the top-seeded New York Rangers no matter who is behind the bench?

So are Crawford, Carlyle and Eakins considered the 'potential' frontrunners?

You know I always liked Charbenneau (sp), whatever happened to him?

 

[maplesyrup]

So are Crawford, Carlyle and Eakins considered the 'potential' frontrunners?

I'd have to think Carlyle and Eakins would top a potential list right now but why not see who else is available down the road?

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Marc Crawford is a moron, I'd be extremely upset if we hired him.