Guy Boucher is still available

[HighOnHockey]

Guy Boucher was an assistant coach for two U18 Canada gold medals, and one WJHC gold medal. He was the one in charge of that devastating powerplay in 2009 with I believe it was Ellis on the point and Subban in the high slot. Seems to me that was long before the 1-3-1 style PP became prevalent across the NHL. It was certainly new to me as a fan, and remains a little unique in that it utilized a 2nd defenseman in what we would now call the "bumper" position. He also won a QMJHL championship in 2009 and then was named AHL coach of the year in 2010, leading his team to the conference finals as a rookie pro head coach.

 

As a first time NHL head coach, he joined a young, fringe playoff team in Tampa Bay in 2010/'11 and immediately led them to the Eastern Conference Finals. He was let go two years later and went over to Switzerland and won the league championship in his second season, and was let go a year later. He also won a Spengler Cup while he was there.

 

He was then hired by the Ottawa Senators, and once again immediately led his new team to the Eastern Conference Finals, and this time within a game seven overtime goal away from the Finals. But again, he was let go not much more than a year later. This time he has opted not to go overseas or accept any minor or junior coaching positions, and is instead is waiting around, hoping for another NHL opportunity.

 

Quite the list of accolades, but it also leaves a lot of questions. Why was he let go so shortly after such success in both Tampa and Ottawa (and I suppose Bern too)? Did he lose the room? Did other teams get wise to his strategies? Perhaps, but he has pretty good excuses in both Tampa and Ottawa. For one thing, neither team really deserved to make it as far as they did, but it was due to his coaching brilliance that they had the success they had, thus creating unrealistic expectations for him going forward. Also in Tampa, they relied on a 41 year old Dwayne Roloson for that 2011 run, and as he rapidly declined after that, their goaltending situation was unsustainable. In Ottawa the situation was very public and well-known, starting from a megalomaniac owner threatening to move the team, down to a toxic locker room situation headlined by a feud between Erik Karlsson and Mike Hoffman.

 

There are at least three things Boucher is particularly known for as a coach:

 

1. His intricate, stifling neutral zone defense. We all remember the Tampa-Philly incident, where Philly refused to exit their defensive zone absent of any kind of forecheck from Tampa whatsoever. I recall listening to Torterella with Columbus repeatedly talking about how unique Ottawa's neutral zone was and how tough it was to crack. I also recall Sid Crosby on Spittin' Chiclets, the hosts were having a laugh about how boring Ottawa's defense was when Pittsburgh played them in 2017, and Sid looked like he was having PTSD flashbacks, "man, that was such a tough defense to play against, nobody wanted to play them." Basically, with the rise of the corsi era staring around 2010 or 2011, the fast-paced back-and-forth hockey of the early post-lockout years came to an end, and the teams that dominated offensive zone possession won playoff rounds. Boucher's system intended to counter this by as much as possible not allowing the opponent to gain the zone in the first place. The strategy was highlighted by the defense jumping up aggressively in the neutral zone to help prevent the zone entry.

 

2. He designs his team's strategies around the star players, and gets the most out of those players. Stamkos and St. Louis both had some of the best years of their careers under Boucher in Tampa. After Matt Cooke stomped Erik Karlsson's achilles tendon it was thought that Karlsson would never be the same. But he ended up having arguably the best year of his career in 2017 under Guy Boucher. Certainly his performance on that playoff run was legendary, and one of the greatest individual performances I've ever seen.

 

3. He likes to play veterans he knows and trusts. This was the big thing Sens fans were calling for his head over in 2019. Fans wanted to play some kids, but Boucher unwaveringly kept returning to Tom Pyatt and Nate Thompson, who knew his systems and executed them faithfully, in addition to being consummate professionals and trustworthy penalty-killers. In retrospect, the kids the fans wanted to play clearly weren't ready, and mostly ended up needing another couple years in AHL or else never amounted to much at all. There was clearly a rift between Boucher and GM Pierre Dorion, who had gone out and acquired guys like Pyatt, Thompson and Burrows at Boucher's behest when they were trying to contend, and then a couple years later when it was time to rebuild, Boucher refused to play the kids and kept playing his trusted veterans.

 

What do people think? Does this sound like a good fit for the Canucks' current situation? I was thinking as with Karlsson, Hughes would be a perfect fit in Boucher's system, using his skating to jump up and break up entries in the neutral zone and create offense out of the transition.

Edited November 1, 2021 by HighOnHockey

[MaxVerstappen33]

I'd support bringing Guy Boucher in. He has intelligent systems. Like AV had

[Patel Bure]

21 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Guy Boucher was an assistant coach for two U18 Canada gold medals, and one WJHC gold medal. He was the one in charge of that devastating powerplay in 2009 with I believe it was Ellis on the point and Subban in the high slot. Seems to me that was long before the 1-3-1 style PP became prevalent across the NHL. It was certainly new to me as a fan, and remains a little unique in that it utilized a 2nd defenseman in what we would now call the "bumper" position. He also won a QMJHL championship in 2009 and then was named AHL coach of the year in 2010, leading his team to the conference finals as a rookie pro head coach.

 

As a first time NHL head coach, he joined a young, fringe playoff team in Tampa Bay in 2010/'11 and immediately led them to the Eastern Conference Finals. He was let go two years later and went over to Switzerland and won the league championship in his second season, and was let go a year later. He also won a Spengler Cup while he was there.

 

He was then hired by the Ottawa Senators, and once again immediately led his new team to the Eastern Conference Finals, and this time within a game seven overtime goal away from the Finals. But again, he was let go not much more than a year later. This time he has opted not to go overseas or accept any minor or junior coaching positions, and is instead is waiting around, hoping for another NHL opportunity.

 

Quite the list of accolades, but it also leaves a lot of questions. Why was he let go so shortly after such success in both Tampa and Ottawa (and I suppose Bern too)? Did he lose the room? Did other teams get wise to his strategies? Perhaps, but he has pretty good excuses in both Tampa and Ottawa. For one thing, neither team really deserved to make it as far as they did, but it was due to his coaching brilliance that they had the success they had, thus creating unrealistic expectations for him going forward. Also in Tampa, they relied on a 41 year old Dwayne Roloson for that 2011 run, and as he rapidly declined after that, their goaltending situation was unsustainable. In Ottawa the situation was very public and well-known, starting from a megalomaniac owner threatening to move the team, down to a toxic locker room situation headlined by a feud between Erik Karlsson and Mike Hoffman.

 

There are at least three things Boucher is particularly known for as a coach:

 

1. His intricate, stifling neutral zone defense. We all remember the Tampa-Philly incident, where Philly refused to exit their defensive zone absent of any kind of forecheck from Tampa whatsoever. I recall listening to Torterella with Columbus repeatedly talking about how unique Ottawa's neutral zone was and how tough it was to crack. I also recall Sid Crosby on Spittin' Chiclets, the hosts were having a laugh about how boring Ottawa's defense was when Pittsburgh played them in 2017, and Sid looked like he was having PTSD flashbacks, "man, that was such a tough defense to play against, nobody wanted to play them." Basically, with the rise of the corsi era staring around 2010 or 2011, the fast-paced back-and-forth hockey of the early post-lockout years came to an end, and the teams that dominated offensive zone possession won playoff rounds. Boucher's system intended to counter this by as much as possible not allowing the opponent to gain the zone in the first place. The strategy was highlighted by the defense jumping up aggressively in the neutral zone to help prevent the zone entry.

 

2. He designs his team's strategies around the star players, and gets the most out of those players. Stamkos and St. Louis both had some of the best years of their careers under Boucher in Tampa. After Matt Cooke stomped Erik Karlsson's achilles tendon it was thought that Karlsson would never be the same. But he ended up having arguably the best year of his career in 2017 under Guy Boucher. Certainly his performance on that playoff run was legendary, and one of the greatest individual performances I've ever seen.

 

3. He likes to play veterans he knows and trusts. This was the big thing Sens fans were calling for his head over in 2019. Fans wanted to play some kids, but Boucher unwaveringly kept returning to Tom Pyatt and Nate Thompson, who knew his systems and executed them faithfully, in addition to being consummate professionals and trustworthy penalty-killers. In retrospect, the kids the fans wanted to play clearly weren't ready, and mostly ended up needing another couple years in AHL or else never amounted to much at all. There was clearly a rift between Boucher and GM Pierre Dorion, who had gone out and acquired guys like Pyatt, Thompson and Burrows at Boucher's behest when they were trying to contend, and then a couple years later when it was time to rebuild, Boucher refused to play the kids and kept playing his trusted veterans.

 

What do people think? Does this sound like a good fit for the Canucks' current situation? I was thinking as with Karlsson, Hughes would be a perfect fit in Boucher's system, using his skating to jump up and break up entries in the neutral zone and create offense out of the transition.

Not a bad though but I’m kind of “meh” on it.  Claude Julien is still my guy.  Proven winner.

[King Heffy]

Sounds good except for the Plug Love.

[JM_]

Was there other interest in him?

 

This team deserves a proven winner. Lets try that again.

[Down by the River]

 

[timberz21]

You missed an important thing that Boucher is know for.   His systems or style only works temporarily.  His teams regressed both times after the honeymoon first years.

 

And people think (myself included) that Green is a dinosaur with his dump and chase and bag skate approach.  Boucher with isn't so much different with his famous tantrum, which IMHO, seems staged or fake, instead of being spur of the moment type of thing.

 

I had high hope for him in junior, I thought he was a cerebral coach that could innovate at the NHL level, but honestly, I think sometimes he actually outsmarted himself by trying to be too different instead of going with plain old logic. 

 

Finally, I think he could be a very good as an assistant coach.  The guy is smart and have some good ideas, but I think it needs to be tempered down, which working under a head coach could help.  Like he did with Quinn at the 2009 WHJC.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

I like Guy Boucher, but he’s a “no” for me, as far as a head coach replacement. 
 

I’d would take him as an assistant coach, if the fit was right with the new head coach.

 

He’s a smart guy (no pun intended). Good at designing and implementing systems. And I think he could be very useful on the right staff. 
 

Definitely a guy (no pun intended) who deserves another shot at a job in the NHL. I just don’t think he necessarily has the profile or track record to be the guy (no pun intended) to replace Travis Green on a midseason coaching change.

 

As an aside, I’m actually warming to the idea of hiring Bruce Boudreau, if the old man still has some gas left in the tank (and if we’re indeed looking at replacing Travis Green).

 

Gabby definitely wanted the recent Seattle job, so I can’t see why he wouldn’t be interested in taking a different gig just up the coast.
 

Apparently the desire to coach in the NHL still burns in the old man. 

 

I actually think our current roster is a pretty decent fit for Boudreau’s coaching style, and could give him a chance to replicate some of his former success. But unlike many of his previous teams, which would dominate in the regular season, before underachieving in the playoffs, this Canucks team has some really good goaltending (assuming “Bubble Demko”

is a repeatable event), and does not seem nearly as likely to have their netminders **** the bed repeatedly in key playoff games.

 

(I think Gabby probably would have either won a Cup, or at least gotten to a couple Finals, if his GMs had given him better goalies.)
 

Boudreau has a history of getting more out of an imperfect roster than most coaches can manage. And he knows how to coach to the talents of elite forwards, designing a playstyle and systems than support their creativity, rather than stifle it. He’s also, while not necessarily known for defence, been pretty successful in getting “good enough” results from weaker/flawed defensive groups.
 

The crucial failures of Boudreau coached teams have always been with their goaltenders, IMO, but I actually think Vancouver has the potential to offer him better goaltending than he’s ever really had available in his NHL coaching career.

 

This post is all just spitballing while I sit and drink a coffee  but I wonder if a Bruce Boudreau, Guy Boucher, Brad Shaw coaching staff might actually work?

[The Lock]

1 hour ago, MaxVerstappen33 said:

I'd support bringing Guy Boucher in. He has intelligent systems. Like AV had

I remember to when AV was our coach and people were having the EXACT same complaints about AV as people seem to have about WD, or at least similar. It seems like every coach we get people will complain about the systems, who gets played more, what line-juggling happens, etc.

 

And I 100% guarentee whoever coach we have next will fall under the same scrutiny, good systems or not, including Boucher if this became reality.

[Rubik]

39 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

But unlike many of his previous teams, which would dominate in the regular season, before underachieving in the playoffs

just to refresh everyone's memory, truly amazing regular season record, but his playoff record is a bit alarming (four straight game 7 exits during those Ducks runs, yikes)

 

edit: just checked it, the first 3 washington runs also ended in game 7s.

 

 

Edited November 1, 2021 by Rubik

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, Down by the River said:

 

I'd completely for got about this, Brilliant when you think about. No fun to watch but it's Tampa  Bay who instigate it with the no attempt to fore check. Mt Betteman would like this now would he LOL

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

37 minutes ago, Rubik said:

just to refresh everyone's memory, truly amazing regular season record, but his playoff record is a bit alarming (four straight game 7 exits during those Ducks runs, yikes)

 

edit: just checked it, the first 3 washington runs also ended in game 7s.

 

 

You should look up the save percentages and shooting percentages for those teams.

 

If memory serves, Boudreau’s teams have something like a PDO of ~940 in playoff game sevens, and similar numbers in close out and elimination games during the postseason.

 

Basically, whenever he really needed a win in the postseason, either his goalies wouldn’t be able to make saves, or his skaters wouldn’t finish their scoring chances (even while generating lots of opportunities).

 

I think his teams generally dominated possession during key games in the playoffs, with numbers around 55% or better for Corsi-for and expected goals percentages.
 

To lose that many deciding games, when you’re consistently “winning” on the analytics, is tremendously unlucky.

 

That’s not to say there weren’t strategic mistakes made by Boudreau in some of his playoff games. 

Just that he definitely didn’t enjoy his fair share of the bounces. And his goalies regularly failed to perform in the games that really counted (ie: Sv% below 0.900).
 

Tough for any coach to control when his goalie will make a save (or his shooters will hit the net).

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Rubik said:

just to refresh everyone's memory, truly amazing regular season record, but his playoff record is a bit alarming (four straight game 7 exits during those Ducks runs, yikes)

 

edit: just checked it, the first 3 washington runs also ended in game 7s.

 

 

Maybe he just needs to lay off the bacon and pancake stacks, you know "carb loading pre-game coaching meals?

[IBatch]

7 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

You should look up the save percentages and shooting percentages for those teams.

 

If memory serves, Boudreau’s teams have something like a PDO of ~940 in playoff game sevens, and similar numbers in close out and elimination games during the postseason.

 

Basically, whenever he really needed a win in the postseason, either his goalies wouldn’t be able to make saves, or his skaters wouldn’t finish their scoring chances (even while generating lots of opportunities).

 

I think his teams generally dominated possession during key games in the playoffs, with numbers around 55% or better for Corsi-for and expected goals percentages.
 

To lose that many deciding games, when you’re consistently “winning” on the analytics, is tremendously unlucky.

 

That’s not to say there weren’t strategic mistakes made by Boudreau in some of his playoff games. 

Just that he definitely didn’t enjoy his fair share of the bounces. And his goalies regularly failed to perform in the games that really counted (ie: Sv% below 0.900).
 

Tough for any coach to control when his goalie will make a save (or his shooters will hit the net).

He's a good coach, who coached good teams.   Reminds me a little of Don Cherry for some reason.   Maybe his face.     It's not time (yet) for a coaching change.   I really hope we go on a ten game winning streak.   But not expecting it either.   Travis Green is on the hot seat.   That much is certain. 

[MaxVerstappen33]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

I remember to when AV was our coach and people were having the EXACT same complaints about AV as people seem to have about WD, or at least similar. It seems like every coach we get people will complain about the systems, who gets played more, what line-juggling happens, etc.

 

And I 100% guarentee whoever coach we have next will fall under the same scrutiny, good systems or not, including Boucher if this became reality.

AV had some rough years with transition teams. But he got more wins out of the WCE/Sedin transition years than our team deserved with intelligent systems. The Dallas Stars playoff round should have never happened.  And we lost to the cup winning Ducks. That team would have been steamrolled if it played without AV's systems.

 

The length of Boucher's terms is a little strange for a coach that got results but who knows what the details are. We aren't Edmonton. This is Greens 5th year. He had a good run. There is no loss of face in replacing Green.

Edited November 1, 2021 by MaxVerstappen33

[MaxVerstappen33]

It would be cool having a Bond villain coach

 

Edited November 1, 2021 by MaxVerstappen33

[The Lock]

32 minutes ago, MaxVerstappen33 said:

AV had some rough years with transition teams. But he got more wins out of the WCE/Sedin transition years than our team deserved with intelligent systems. The Dallas Stars playoff round should have never happened.  And we lost to the cup winning Ducks. That team would have been steamrolled if it played without AV's systems.

 

The length of Boucher's terms is a little strange for a coach that got results but who knows what the details are. We aren't Edmonton. This is Greens 5th year. He had a good run. There is no loss of face in replacing Green.

I guess what I'm getting at here is I bet in about 10 years there will probably be fans saying the exact same thing about Green as you are right now about AV. For the record, I get it. It's about the heat of the moment and where we are at now, but the problem with that is there ends up being tunnel vision in my opinion.

 

It's kind of like how after a relationship when it's only after a while when you're truly able to reflect on if it was a good or bad relationship.

[HighOnHockey]

4 hours ago, timberz21 said:

You missed an important thing that Boucher is know for.   His systems or style only works temporarily.  His teams regressed both times after the honeymoon first years.

 

Nope, I definitely talked about that.

 

5 hours ago, HighOnHockey said:

Quite the list of accolades, but it also leaves a lot of questions. Why was he let go so shortly after such success in both Tampa and Ottawa (and I suppose Bern too)? Did he lose the room? Did other teams get wise to his strategies?

[HighOnHockey]

3 hours ago, Rubik said:

just to refresh everyone's memory, truly amazing regular season record, but his playoff record is a bit alarming (four straight game 7 exits during those Ducks runs, yikes)

 

edit: just checked it, the first 3 washington runs also ended in game 7s.

 

 

Anybody remember or able to find R.J. Umberger's comments about Washington? I believe it was while Boudreau was there. How they could score during the regular season but they're too run and gun and any good Western Conference team would beat them in the playoffs?

[AK_19]

I mean I'd still prefer Boudreau. I understand he has his warts when it comes to playing in the playoffs but I'd rather be complaining about that than not making the dance altogether. At the very least the team will be more fun to watch.