How helpful is it for a coach to have been an NHL player before coaching NHL players?

[Bob Long]

5 hours ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Coaching in the NHL is a difficult job and the work ethic required to play in the NHL is so much more difficult than other leagues that one has to wonder, if you were an NHL player before being a coach, are you at an advantage to a coach who never did play NHL hockey?

 

There are a few coaches that have made a great career of coaching that didn't make it to the NHL as a player, but many more coaches were NHL players at one point. When I listen to Willie and Travis talk, it seems to me that Travis got a huge advantage in being in the NHL because of two main factors:

 

1) He was able to experience first hand what it is like to be a player and be successful.

2) He was coached by top quality NHL coaches and learned their ways from an observing standpoint before moving into a coaching role, and now he can look back at his own and his teammates experiences when he addresses issues with his current role as a coach.

 

Willies been a very successful minor league coach, but he's been outmatched in the NHL on many occasions imo. To be fair, he didn't exactly have a stellar line up on many nights, but he's not up to AV's level or a guy like Barry Trotz, imo. Vigneault had fewer than 50 games in the NHL. Trotz never made it out of the WHL. Quenneville on the other hand had 800 games in the NHL. WD himself was a WCHL guy, never in the NHL, but he was apparently a small winger with  a good shot (hence is love for Vey?). Boudreau has a lot of minor league and personal NHL experience, but he seems to be on the bubble this year on a team that should be more capable of being motivated. 

 

So its not necessary to have been in the NHL, but its critical to be a good motivator and someone that can win match-ups night after night.... is that WD? On motivation I'd say yes with some of the younger players, the Sedin's are self motivating, but we had way too many veterans not pull their weight this year.  On match-ups, I can't really think of a night where I said man Willie really out-coached the other bench, maybe someone else can give an example of that. Next year will tell all - he'll have a lot less dead weight in declining vets, and more young talent. If he can't be competitive for a playoff spot next year with a motivated group then I'd say he's shown he's maxed out his abilities. I doubt any personal NHL experience he may have had in the 1970's early 80s would be the difference maker. 

 

 

 

[19Nazzy91]

I'd imagine that it would help you relate to the players more than anything, but I don't think it's completely necessary. You don't have to be a retired NHL star to understand how the game works.

The biggest thing is that they might understand how pressure can affect players a little bit better. If you've never experienced such a high level of playing it might be harder to understand the game mentally affects them, not just physically. If you're not in the right head space even the smallest thing can cause you to choke at the worst time.

[Mustapha]

Bruce Boudreau

Alain Vigneault

Torts

Peter Laviolette

Marc Crawford

Claude Julien

 

These guys did play a lot of hockey, but their NHL careers were all quite modest. (Or non existent)

 

Pro hockey experience is probably more important than simply NHL experience in that regard.

[Dazzle]

7 hours ago, LaBamba said:

The greatest player in the history of the game couldn't coach a fat girl into a pizza. 

 

I think the lesser known coaches get recognized because they can coach. While ex players get recognized because they are ex players. 

Ouch. That's probably true too.

[Bob Long]

8 hours ago, LaBamba said:

The greatest player in the history of the game couldn't coach a fat girl into a pizza. 

 

I think the lesser known coaches get recognized because they can coach. While ex players get recognized because they are ex players. 

Oh god, I just realized there's probably some people who would want Messier as a coach too.... 

[Mustapha]

Jacques Lemaire was a great player AND a great coach, some do exist.

 

He's had some ups and downs but Roy is also shaping up to be a decent NHL coach as well, he put in his time in junior. 

[ABNuck]

I think the personal motivational connection with the team seems to be the biggest factor, but obviously the pro hockey experience helps mainly to show the players who really is the leader (someone above mentioned the respect aspect above, and it is true that it is easier to have a leader who has had similar experiences). So here is where Vancouver has an incredible opportunity before us...we get to grow both coach and players together, so that they will experience the ups and down together, and come out the other end together (got each others' backs, working out solutions together etc). I do think that it is vitally important that the coach has chemistry with his team (look at the longer tenured coaches who seem to bond well with the team, their teams seem to enjoy success year after year). So Willie is fairly new, but so are a lot of our players...I think we need to keep this core together (Willie plus a half dozen of the younger guys) for a long time and then multiple years of success will follow. Once Bo is captain and him along with Virt, Boesser, Demko, Baer, Hutton etc etc are the veteran core, they will be able to help the younger ones and newer ones coming to the team to respect the coach and the system we play here (please oh please don't keep the coaching carousel going in Vancity...let's stick with Willie and build a winner together with all the young talent we have in place).

 

So like with anything, talent will get you so far but chemistry seems to be the factor that keeps you there.