MVN - Most Valuable Network

Who Will Take the Islander Helm?

*sigh* Cross one name off your list. Wait, what? Terry Murray wasn’t on your list? Mine neither.

Assuming hockey genius Larry Brooks is happy in his current job, Stan Fischler doesn’t want the travel, and Al Arbour is happily re-retired in Florida, who should be Charles Wang’s next left-field GM Garth Snow’s pick to coach the Islanders? As the real dirt on this divorce finally starts to show itself, let’s consider the options.

Plumbing the depths of juniors is en vogue this time through the NHL’s firing cycle; perhaps the right candidate in those ranks would be best for the Youth, Now! Islanders. But I don’t follow juniors and minor hockey, so I’m not going there with this assessment.

But here are the pros and cons with choosing (if they’d even be interested) some NHL retreads who are on a lot of napkin lists. With the obvious caveat that I don’t know these coaches personally, and neither do you.

For the following assessment, the givens are that the Islanders have committed to rebuilding with youth and asset protection (i.e. hanging on to picks and prospects rather than dealing them for short-term fixes); and that the Islanders cannot attract premier free agents until, at least, they have a new facility:

Joel Quenneville

Pros: Does best, frankly, when expectations are low, which obviously fits the Island situation. He earned his rep turning young, unheralded Blues teams into overachieving faux contenders. He was handed meatloaf when he began in St. Louis, but through a disciplined defensive system he had the Blues performing near the top of the league. They even led the league in scoring with a roster that had no business doing so.

Cons: But that was in the Pro-Obstruction Trap Era. That was when he merely tolerated stars like Brett Hull and Pierre Turgeon, while relying on the Mike Eastwoods and Scott Pellerins of the world to do his trench and trap work. He was generally perceived as being outcoached in the playoffs, usually by Scotty Bowman (not that such a description is rare for Bowman’s opponents). Several times he had teams that didn’t go as far as they should have. Rarely — alright, fine: never — did he have a team overachieve in the postseason.

It’s risky business to damn anyone’s work — player or coach — by how they fared in a crapshoot, small-sample-size tournament where goaltending and injuries mean everything. Nonetheless, the best evidence for his critics is that his teams always sat on leads, from preseason game 1A to playoff game 14. Many a Blues game was eked out — or blown — after his team went into conservative mode for the final period and a half. This seemed to betray an inability to adapt or change his system to the situation.

Prediction: Quenneville seems to rate himself highly, as a “contender’s coach,” despite a lack of success when it counts. The San Jose job appeared to be his if he wanted it, but he declined (reportedly over money) to take over that perennial team “on the cusp.” Was it self-belief or self-doubt that made him blink? Ironically, he’s best fit to take a rebuilding team and help it overachieve than to take a contending team all the way. So he would fit this era on the Island, but I doubt he sees himself that way.

Bob Hartley

Pros: Has had success, mostly with a loaded Colorado team that he almost ran out of time with before winning the Cup. Did well in retrieving the Thrashers — whose mismanagement rarely helped — from the ashes. By all accounts, handled the Dany Heatley/Dan Snyder tragedy nimbly.

But most important of all, given the Islanders’ situation, he apparently has a positive relationship with GM Garth Snow. Since Snow will be around a while, and smooth GM/coach relations are absolute necessity for a successful long-term rebuild, that could be his best attribute. A coach needs to believe in the GM, and believe (see Nolan) that losses with the youngsters will not be held against him. A GM needs to reassure the rebuilding coach and make him believe he’ll be around for the salad days after the rebuild’s trials and tribulations.

Cons: His act clearly wore out, as the Thrashers absolutely flopped in their first playoff “run” (a sweep by the lower-seeded Rangers), then began the next season 0-6. But with the Thrashers, it’s hard to separate the on-ice record from poor drafting and long-term planning. As a young coach in Colorado, he could be flaky or snippy at times (obviously, I’m reaching), but he was under immense pressure to keep alive what others saw as a dynasty in the making.

Prediction: Of the established coaches speculated to be on the short list, I imagine Hartley is the most likely to be offered, and accept, the job — except for one big IF: He would probably want a premium salary to come on board. I’m not sure if Charles Wang will be convinced. But if Hartley’s game, I’m game.

John Tortorella

Pros: He’s a “top tier” name now, but ironically The Fonz earned his way by taking over a young, jumbled Lightning team and nurturing them into to a Cup champion. Had several run-ins with budding star Vinny Lecavalier, but clearly he pushed the right buttons to help that enigma turn himself into the type of guy who receives $85 million contracts. The fact that they faltered after the Cup has more to do with hangover and management’s decision to part with their premier goaltender while not leaving enough cap room to replace him.

Cons: Not really a con, but: His up-tempo offensive style is right for the current NHL, but perhaps not right for the Islanders. If Snow thought Nolan’s style was better fit for a dangerous Red Wings-type team, he won’t want to see another version in Tortorella. The Fonz is also mouthy and direct — which is entertaining as hell, but might not fit the soldier description Snow is looking for.

Prediction: I’d love it, but Tortorella is probably in the best position of his career in terms of leverage and track record. If he took the Island job, he’d need a pile of money to give that up, as he would be ensuring — barring a miracle — that next time he’s on the market his record won’t look as good. I wouldn’t bet a single peso on him being the next coach.

Paul Maurice

Pros: Well, he’s a good company soldier. Consistently did more with little in Hartford/Carolina, and maintained a successful relationship with GM For Life Jim Rutherford. Paid his dues to get the Dead Man Walking Toronto job, which no one, Bowman included, could have turned into anything worthwhile. Has generally adapted over his NHL career, and has shown a penchant for following bad seasons with good ones — so he probably doesn’t lose his teams. Has the potential to surprise.

Cons: Certainly not a pick that would excite the fan base. Has no career highlight to point to. No idea how Snow perceives him. Not an inspired choice — but again, the Islanders aren’t gearing for a Cup run.

Prediction: In terms of bargaining power and likelihood to desire and accept the job — anyone who wanted to coach in Toronto last year just wants to be in the NHL — he might be the most likely choice.

Gerard Gallant

He’s not necessarily on the list (i.e., I’ve only seen him speculated once), but as a former NHL head coach already on staff, his name might come up. So I thought I’d give him a brief mention. That prior experience in Columbus, however, looks rather Glen Hanlon-esque. Maybe he’s learned since that experience and would like another shot, but I fear he’s better cast as an assistant. He seemed to do fine in that role last season, expressing lucid in-game thoughts in between-period interviews and handling the wee Marc-Andre Bergeron flair up firmly but quickly. It doesn’t look good that the powerplay did not excel under him, but that may have been affected by both personnel issues and Nolan’s often-puzzling choices (remember Chris Simon?) of who gets powerplay time.

Well, there you have it. Enjoy the search, and enjoy the trickle of info, criticism and guesses about which vets wanted Nolan out, and who knew what and when.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 at 12:46 pm and is filed under Coaching. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.