Chris in Syracuse Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 I was thinking if Babcock is available he may want control over the team or at least GM. Make him highest paid is a given. Would you fire GMTM? Tell Babcock he can hire whoever he wants or be a GM and coach. I say let's start fresh and rid ourselves of two miserable years of losing. It may be the only way to get a great coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 No. I wouldn't fire GMTM just to get Babcock. Is there a case of coach/GM in NHL history? I honestly don't remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabresith Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 Also heard GMTM was the guy who originally hired Babcock for his first AHL coaching gig. So I think you would want to keep that connection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 No. I wouldn't fire GMTM just to get Babcock. Is there a case of coach/GM in NHL history? I honestly don't remember. Â We've had two: Imlach and Bowman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in Syracuse Posted March 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 I did not know that. It seems in sports coaches want more and more power. GMTM seems to have a system where he has complete control of personnel and allows coaches to coach. I am not sure Babcock wants that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 We've had two: Imlach and Bowman. I should've thought about it. But I'm still thinking more modern. Doesn't seem to be something that teams do today. Also no reason to think Babcock would have any clue what he's doing in the personnel department. Â Â Speaking of Babcock: his father passed away last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 Â I should've thought about it. But I'm still thinking more modern. Doesn't seem to be something that teams do today. Also no reason to think Babcock would have any clue what he's doing in the personnel department. Â Â Speaking of Babcock: his father passed away last night. Â Â Â Lou in NJ for parts of 2 seasons would be the most recent I can think of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 29, 2015 Report Share Posted March 29, 2015 Lou in NJ for parts of 2 seasons would be the most recent I can think of. Â Not counting Lou/MacT who are in that position mainly due to their recent incompetence and refusal to actually hire somebody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Not counting Lou/MacT who are in that position mainly due to their recent incompetence and refusal to actually hire somebody. You're killing us here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Glen Sather did it for awhile as well, but I suppose he doesn't fit the tight restrictions on the question either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Don't be . I think it's fair to discount guys that are just plugging in for part of a lost season and guys from the beginning of time and space. Â Thinking at least 90s to now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in Syracuse Posted March 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 The topic is a what if scenario. Show Mr. Babcock our commitment to winning is greater than loyalty to anyone. If you are going to fire Nolan and try to make him a scapegoat, fire Murray as well. He may have hired Babcock years ago but to tell Babcock he has no authority in personnel seems less attractive. Let's see, most money and most control. Eichel/McDavid. Kane. mmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 The topic is a what if scenario. Show Mr. Babcock our commitment to winning is greater than loyalty to anyone. If you are going to fire Nolan and try to make him a scapegoat, fire Murray as well. He may have hired Babcock years ago but to tell Babcock he has no authority in personnel seems less attractive. Let's see, most money and most control. Eichel/McDavid. Kane. mmm? Showing commitment to winning isn't just firing a guy because he may not want to work with him. That shows that you're willing to sell yourself to a name. It's not about loyalty to a person, but to a plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Not much. Is he the best coach in the NHL? Maybe, but I don't see anything special that he does that other coaches can't do. Â Personally, I'd rather go the route of a younger coach who is thought of pretty highly. Â Would I take his as coach? Sure, but not at the expense of giving him ANY more power than you would any other coach. If he asks for a lot of control over the roster, or an outrageous salary, I'll pass. Â Â I want a GOOD coach with Great players. This is hockey, I don't need to stretch myself out too far with a coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Alcohol for the summer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Don't be ######. I think it's fair to discount guys that are just plugging in for part of a lost season and guys from the beginning of time and space. Â Thinking at least 90s to now. Â Â Â Is there a case of coach/GM in NHL history? Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in Syracuse Posted March 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) Showing commitment to winning isn't just firing a guy because he may not want to work with him. That shows that you're willing to sell yourself to a name. It's not about loyalty to a person, but to a plan. Â Why is that any different than intentionally finishing last two years in a row. We are selling ourselves and have been for two years for McEichel. Edited March 30, 2015 by Chris in Syracuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Don't want the coach trying to take on the G.M. duties as well. Coachings a hard enough job as is G.M. For a winning formula I believe its been shown that G.M. hires coach and they work together hashing out player moves etc with the G.M. asking the coach his opinion and the G.M. making the final decision. Let GMTM finish the job he inherited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 A GM must focus on the 25 guys on the active roster, and everyone else in the system to maintain the pipeline of talent. A coach stops at the active,roster. I imagine you could reorganize your scouting and player development, but I think the two roles should be separate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in Syracuse Posted March 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) Don't want the coach trying to take on the G.M. duties as well. Coachings a hard enough job as is G.M. For a winning formula I believe its been shown that G.M. hires coach and they work together hashing out player moves etc with the G.M. asking the coach his opinion and the G.M. making the final decision. Let GMTM finish the job he inherited. It seems there is no hashing out with Murray. He has hung Nolan out to dry before. Nolan needed a center and Murray said no. Kaleta had to play center which he hadn't in years. I can't see how any good coach would want to work with Murray. Edited March 30, 2015 by Chris in Syracuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 Â Â Â Â No I get it. I already admitted that my original post was off. But it's hard for you to get past that. It's completely fair to exclude blips like Lou/MacT... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 It seems there is no hashing out with Murray. He has hung Nolan out to dry before. Nolan needed a center and Murray said no. Kaleta had to play center which he hadn't in years. I can't see how any good coach would want to work with Murray. But there's a pecking order in any managerial situation such as this. Coach has to work with what he has most times when it comes to injuries etc. so most good coaches are aware of that. Just my opinion of course. Also what we hear in the media and what G.M. /coach actually talk about are prolly to different things. They keep much of what they discuss close to the vest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 30, 2015 Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) It seems there is no hashing out with Murray. He has hung Nolan out to dry before. Nolan needed a center and Murray said no. Kaleta had to play center which he hadn't in years. I can't see how any good coach would want to work with Murray. It seems like you're completely ignoring the situation the team is in and the obvious plan that has been in place for years now. Edited March 30, 2015 by Tank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in Syracuse Posted March 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2015 But there's a pecking order in any managerial situation such as this. Coach has to work with what he has most times when it comes to injuries etc. so most good coaches are aware of that. Just my opinion of course. Also what we hear in the media and what G.M. /coach actually talk about are prolly to different things. They keep much of what they discuss close to the vest. Agreed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.