Guy Boucher hired as Ottawa's head coach + Crawford signed as assistant

wprager wrote:Whoa!

Аrpon Basu
‏@ArponBasu
Paraphrasing Boucher in French, if you only work on weaknesses, strengths become lessened and you become an average team with no identity

Anyone else feel like that's exactly what happened to the Senators?

Big time.

wprager wrote:Whoa!

Аrpon Basu
‏@ArponBasu
Paraphrasing Boucher in French, if you only work on weaknesses, strengths become lessened and you become an average team with no identity

Anyone else feel like that's exactly what happened to the Senators?

Yeah, that's interesting.
Actually the most optimal thing I'm seeing about Boucher that I didn't know is that he studied sports philosophy. That could be really interesting in developing a better locker room mentality and maximizing certain players.

Hobiesens wrote:Crawford confirmed as an assistant coach by Boucher himself.

Missed this, and to add to that:

#Sens GM Pierre Dorion confirms that new associate coach Marc Crawford will also act as a liaison between the coaching staff in Binghamton.

I've never been a big fan of Ted Purcell, but during the Boucher era in Tampa Bay, he was a massive part of the team, putting up seasons of: 51 points, 65 points and 36 points (in 48 games).

We need a right winger, and I doubt he'd cost too much. That might be an option.

As a side note the Habs forum on HFB is pure comedy cold now that we hired Boucher and they still have Therrien

This probably keeps with the philosophy of developing an organizational coaching style so that players are used to the system when they transition between bingo and ottawa

If nothing else, we should finally see a system that's consistent on a night by night basis. That'll be refreshing.

SpezDispensed wrote:If nothing else, we should finally see a system that's consistent on a night by night basis.  That'll be refreshing.

Well yes and no. I read the transcripts from this morning and it really sounds like he adapts quite a bit to different situation. If anything I found the read encouraging as I like the underlining of playing to players strength. All year when I was supporting the play of Hoffman I was saying his in strength were probably greater than his weaknesses. I think boucher might be able to get the most out of him and likely won't be moving him down the line-up the way the previous coaches did. Seems to be very in tuned with motivation with his background in sports psychology. I'm slowly becoming more intrigued with what he might be able to do it here.

Flo The Action wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:If nothing else, we should finally see a system that's consistent on a night by night basis.  That'll be refreshing.

Well yes and no. I read the transcripts from this morning and it really sounds like he adapts quite a bit to different situation. If anything I found the read encouraging as I like the underlining of playing to players strength.  All year when I was supporting the play of Hoffman I was saying his in strength were probably greater than his weaknesses.  I think boucher might be able to get the most out of him and likely won't be moving him down the line-up the way the previous coaches did. Seems to be very in tuned with motivation with his background in sports psychology. I'm slowly becoming more intrigued with what he might be able to do it here.

Yeah, I think he'll be quite effective with this lineup, particularly because he has Crawford with him, a guy he seems to really look up to.

I don't think I heard Murray's name mentioned during the conferences.

Even the other senior advisor(Alfie) sat in on the interview.

LeCaptain wrote:I think Pierre Dorion, with that last sentence, just shut all the naysayers' mouths about Boucher being his favourite candidate and not Boudreau.

Yeah, that's not going to deter the tin foil hat crew on here...

ddt wrote:

LeCaptain wrote:I think Pierre Dorion, with that last sentence, just shut all the naysayers' mouths about Boucher being his favourite candidate and not Boudreau.

Yeah, that's not going to deter the tin foil hat crew on here...

SpezDispensed wrote:

ddt wrote:

LeCaptain wrote:I think Pierre Dorion, with that last sentence, just shut all the naysayers' mouths about Boucher being his favourite candidate and not Boudreau.

Yeah, that's not going to deter the tin foil hat crew on here...

My tin hat is on because I think he was forced to step down. That only reinforces the structure of the tin hat.

The more interview I hear with guy the more I'm starting to think I pegged him wrong. Then again these are just words and they have to translate into actions.
He sure is saying all the right things.

I'm not a big fan of analytics but I think a certain measure of use is good in evaluating the team.
Could this be a new turn for Dorion with Boucher?

Perhaps Dorion always wanted to use analytics? I wouldn't be surprised at all. Murray was a good builder, but he didn't appear to use analytics the way some of the successful GMs were and perhaps he was stuck in a bit of a rut.

I think we all knew we needed fresh blood in the GM position.

wprager wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:I'm still divided about what we have here. The D is a work in progress and always an injury away from a disaster. Nothing good to look at on the third pairing. The top 6 is getting there but a really big question marks on the left side. the 3rd line is ok but it's likely going to drop off since there is no possible way zach smoth comes close to reproducing his success and we are going to need a replacement for Chiasson that can score in the right
Hoffman is likely getting dealt and I really doubt we will get something back that can help us in the same respect.
So no I'm not sure we have a better team to be honest.

First off no team has a great third pairing.  Secondly, Zachary Smith certainly has a chance to come close to 20 again, he might not do it but there is a chance.  Lastly, how the hell do you know Hoffman is likely to be dealt, Dorion has no track record for you to base this on.  

I actually assumed the comment about the third pairing was facetious.  The reason your top-pairing guys are supposed to be playing 25+ minutes is so that you don't have to rely on your third-pairing for more than 6-10 minutes, against the other team's worst line.  Any team whose biggest issue is to improve their third pairing is probably a Cup contender.

Can you find a team that plays it's third pairing under 10 minutes?

spader wrote:

wprager wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:I'm still divided about what we have here. The D is a work in progress and always an injury away from a disaster. Nothing good to look at on the third pairing. The top 6 is getting there but a really big question marks on the left side. the 3rd line is ok but it's likely going to drop off since there is no possible way zach smoth comes close to reproducing his success and we are going to need a replacement for Chiasson that can score in the right
Hoffman is likely getting dealt and I really doubt we will get something back that can help us in the same respect.
So no I'm not sure we have a better team to be honest.

First off no team has a great third pairing.  Secondly, Zachary Smith certainly has a chance to come close to 20 again, he might not do it but there is a chance.  Lastly, how the hell do you know Hoffman is likely to be dealt, Dorion has no track record for you to base this on.  

I actually assumed the comment about the third pairing was facetious.  The reason your top-pairing guys are supposed to be playing 25+ minutes is so that you don't have to rely on your third-pairing for more than 6-10 minutes, against the other team's worst line.  Any team whose biggest issue is to improve their third pairing is probably a Cup contender.

Can you find a team that plays it's third pairing under 10 minutes?

Chicago Blackhawks, 2014-2015, all the way to the Stanley Cup.

SpezDispensed wrote:Perhaps Dorion always wanted to use analytics?  I wouldn't be surprised at all.  Murray was a good builder, but he didn't appear to use analytics the way some of the successful GMs were and perhaps he was stuck in a bit of a rut.

I think we all knew we needed fresh blood in the GM position.

I am more impressed we seem to be seeing some more progressive out of the box thinking. Murray would have never hired Boucher.

As for analytics, Dorion already hired someone part time last year to crunch some numbers so hopefully they will go from there. Marc Crawford is a big proponent of it. Other teams are doing it, Sens should be at least investigating it. A team with a restricted budget should be looking for any possible advantage.

Not doing analytics because it doesn't work in horse racing is not a valid reason.