You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on LA Kings Talk within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. I'm not saying fire Crawford in this thread but my question to all of you is when do you start holding a coach accountable? Today the Senators fired their
I'm not saying fire Crawford in this thread but my question to all of you is when do you start holding a coach accountable? Today the Senators fired their coach because of the slump they have been in recently. They are currently in second place in the East just 2 points behind NJ.
So in a rebuild, if loses are acceptable, does a formal announcement have to be made that we are no longer in a rebuild stage before the coaching is responsible for losses?
I'm not saying fire Crawford in this thread but my question to all of you is when do you start holding a coach accountable? Today the Senators fired their coach because of the slump they have been in recently. They are currently in second place in the East just 2 points behind NJ.
So in a rebuild, if loses are acceptable, does a formal announcement have to be made that we are no longer in a rebuild stage before the coaching is responsible for losses?
In the past, some people on these boards have pointed to Special Teams as a good measure of a coach's ability behind the bench. There's also an adage about adding up the PK and PP percentages - if they're over 100%, the coach is doing his job.
Ottawa:
17.5 PP
81.4 PK
98.9% total
Kings:
18.6 PP
77.7 PK
96.3% total
St. Louis (I couldn't resist)
14.0 PP
84.2 PK
98.2% total
Dallas (I wish Tippet never left LA):
19.1 PP
86.8 PK
105.9% total
So yeah, there's room for improvement... Just one way to look at it anyway.
Bandit, DRD, this isn't a fire Crawford thread. You guys know the game pretty well. I am aware the Sens are in a different situation. My question is if a coach will get canned with a high ranking team, where will the Kings draw the line. I can understand keeping Crawford for now since this is early in the rebuild but how much time and space do you give him before saying this might be a coaching problem? Can it be measured in years, progress? When do you say "the players have reached their goals, but the coaching hasn't"?
Bandit, DRD, this isn't a fire Crawford thread. You guys know the game pretty well. I am aware the Sens are in a different situation. My question is if a coach will get canned with a high ranking team, where will the Kings draw the line. I can understand keeping Crawford for now since this is early in the rebuild but how much time and space do you give him before saying this might be a coaching problem? Can it be measured in years, progress? When do you say "the players have reached their goals, but the coaching hasn't"?
You give him a lot of space. As I have said in the past as long as the youngsters are showing noticable improvement and Crawford is developing them in the proper way, then his job is secure.
That proper development sometimes leads to losing hockey games because the youngsters are put into key situations where mistakes turn into losses. The problem with that is that some fans don't get it and get their panties in a bunch about the losses.
I think if you have a great or an elite team and you're underacheiving, then you start to blame the coach. Lou did it in NJ last year because he didn't like the focus of the team going into the playoffs, and now Murray can see the writing on the wall in Ottawa. When Colorado won the cup under Crawford, that was the team that should've won the cup that year and they did. My guess is if Crawford doesn't win the cup that year, he gets let go in the off season. I feel Crawford is doing a good job with what he has to work with. The talent on this team is up front and it has shown up all year with our offensive statistics. Our weakness is on D and in net and that is showing up as well. As soon as our D talent can match our O talent, then you can start to look at coaching IMO.
__________________
Miss Slovenia 2005, Sanja Grohar
I think if you have a great or an elite team and you're underacheiving, then you start to blame the coach. Lou did it in NJ last year because he didn't like the focus of the team going into the playoffs, and now Murray can see the writing on the wall in Ottawa. When Colorado won the cup under Crawford, that was the team that should've won the cup that year and they did. My guess is i
When is the coach to blame? 
Bandit
