Well, yesterday was the first day of summer, and the Twins are playing good ball lately, so, naturally, I thought the time was just right to re-introduce the Whangdoodle.
Follow along, and I'll ramble on about the new coach and the upcoming draft.
MIKE YEO IS YOUR NEW WILD HEAD COACH
I freely admit that almost all of my Wild news comes through Russo, so if you've read his thoughts on the hiring of Houston Aeros head coach Mike Yeo as the third head coach in Minnesota Wild franchise history, there may be some overlap here. One thing that Russo really captured was my initial reaction to the announcement. "Wow. Really?" I thought. I don't follow the Aeros much, so I don't have a good sense of what his strategic inclinations are (from all reports, he prefers a defensive style), but he took the Wild's minor league team, which has never been particularly well-regarded talent-wise, and took them all the way to the Calder Cup finals.
So I read Russo's breakdown, in which he points out how GM Chuck Fletcher has surprised people by choosing a coach that is, at least superficially, similar to his previous hire that lasted two years and garnered zero playoff seasons. Both Richards and Yeo, at the time of their hiring, were young guys with no NHL head coaching experience. They both came out of the Pittsburgh minor league system. They are not the same coach, everyone points out that they have different styles, but those surface similarities are going to make for some easy pickings for the "Fletcher's an idiot" crowd.
Then I read Wyshynski's column on Puck Daddy, and looked at some of the other takes from various local columnists. And I found myself liking the decision. The Wild should get younger this year and next. They probably aren't a serious playoff contender next year (although it could happen). I am not sure that any coaching hire, no matter their pedigree, would convince me that their prospects in the 2011-12 season just got better. So, the Wild go with a guy who had success within their organization, with the players that will be (should be) a part of the team over the next couple of years.
Maybe it's the thrill of the unknown, watching Ken Hitchcock grind out a 8th-10th place finish with a team that just isn't talented enough to do better doesn't excite me. I think that's because we know what Hitchcock (or MacTavish, or whoever) can do, and if that's what they produce, well, there it is, that's the ceiling for both the team and the coach. I'm sure there are those who disagree that the same finish under Yeo will be more satisfying, more promising somehow. I'm not even sure that I believe it at this point. But that's the closest I can come to expressing my feelings at this point, so it'll have to do.
NHL DRAFT AT THE EXCEL CENTER
The draft is Friday, and I can't tell you anything about any of the players that the Wild may pick. For that there are lots and lots of mock drafts out there.
Almost all of them that I've seen have the Wild taking a wing or a center. Hard to argue with that. The Wild have a pretty deep blue line right now, with lots of younger guys who are ready to step in. They have been short-handed at center forever (maybe it just seems that way), and they could always use more scoring everywhere in their organization.
Last year, the Wild took Mikael Granlund, the first player from Europe off the board, with the ninth pick. Granlund has really impressed in the Finnish Elite League, playing against much older competition, and helping his team to the Elite League title last season, while averaging a point per game. He probably won't be in a Wild sweater this coming season, but whenever he comes over, it's going to be really exciting.
The Wild pick tenth this year, and it's going to be impossible for them to find anyone who will be able to contribute in the NHL immediately. However, if they can find someone to complement Granlund (and 2nd round pick Jason Zucker, who won the WCHA Rookie of the Year playing for Denver) upon his arrival in a season or two, that would go a long way toward increasing optimism about this franchise.
The Wild do not have a second round pick (having traded it for Chuck Kobasew), but will have one pick in each of the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds.
Just like I don't believe there is such a thing as a "proven closer" I'm not sure there's such a thing as a "proven coach." It would be nearly impossible to study it anyway, as players change regularly and there's no control. All great coaches were once rookies themselves, and were given a chance. I say go with a guy who intimately knows the players he's been working with and is respected by them. To me that's just as important if not more so than strategy.
Guys like Jaques Lemaire and Ken Hitchcock have succeeded in multiple circumstances with a variety of talent levels. I think they have earned the label "proven coach". To me however, that does not mean that they are automatically the best qualified for a particular position. This is what I was trying to articulate above. I'm interested to see whether Yeo's experience with some of the younger players allows him to more easily implement his system of choice, but I think his success in the standings will be limited by the talent level of the team. Which is why I agree with you that the coach's in-game strategy (which is where Hitchcock and MacTavish and the like are more proven) shouldn't have been (and apparently wasn't) the focus of the search.
This is kind of rambly, but I'm trying to figure out and put into words why I ended up in favor of this hiring (so far), so it's a work in progress.
Have an opinion and then find a way to justify it. I hear that's popular these days 🙂
It sounds bad when you say it that way...
Per usual, I agree with your take. From watching the NHL Network's coverage of the playoffs, the only commonality among the coaches that made the conference finals is the ability to conclude a press conference in French. So my only question is how is Yeo's francais?
Ha. That has been an under-reported aspect of this hiring process for sure.
He's Canadian though, so there's an outside chance that the Wild have that going for them.
Wild's schedule to be released Thursday. Wonder if they travel to Winnipeg this year?
I am less suspicious of decisions to hire successful minor league head coaches to major league head coaching positions than I am suspicious of recycling the same coaches over and over again. Or hiring a guy with little head coaching experience. (This is largely why I believe Kill will be much more successful than Brewster ever should have been expected to be.)
To make an arbitrary cutoff, consider all MLB managers who are 100 games or more over .500 and started managing major league clubs after 1960.
Bobby Cox -- 503 G>.500 -- Six years as minor league manager, won two league titles going 459-387.
Earl Weaver -- 420 G>.500 -- 11.5 years as minor league manager, won three titles and went 841-697.
Sparky Anderson -- 360 G>.500 -- Managed in the minors from '64 to '68 and won pennants in four straight years from '65 to '68.
Tony LaRussa -- 351 G>.500 -- Partial seasons in the minors in '78 and '79. Started by managing the White Sox, they are a minor league team, right?
Joe Torre -- 329 G>.500 -- No minor league experience, transitioned briefly as a player-manager.
Billy Martin -- 240 G>.500 -- Half-season managing a AAA team.
Mike Scioscia -- 175 G>.500 -- One season managing a losing AAA team.
Charlie Manuel -- 164 G>.500 -- Nine years in the minors, 610-588. Won two league titles and three MOY awards.
Tommy Lasorda -- 160 G>.500 -- Managed in the minors from '66 to '73. Won four PCL titles and a Caribbean World Series (managing Tigres del Licey.) Not sure what his overall record was.
Whitey Herzog -- 156 G>.500 -- Mainly a scout and director of player development before managing in the majors. No minor league managing experience.
Ron Gardenhire -- 140 G>.500 -- Went .572 managing three seasons in the minors, one 2nd-place finish and one 1st-place finish. Twins' third-base coach for 11 seasons. (Note: I didn't actually know all that about Gardy.)
Dusty Baker -- 123 G>.500 -- Gained experience as a first-base coach and hitting coach in the majors. No minor league managing experience.
Lou Piniella -- 122 G>.500 -- Briefly a hitting coach in the majors. No minor league managing experience.
Dick Williams -- 120 G>.500 -- Two seasons at AAA. A 3rd-place and 2nd-place finish with about a .558 winning percentage.
Terry Francona -- 111 G>.500 -- Four seasons in the minors, .525 winning percentage. Won a league title and MOY in '93. Managed Michael Jordan in 1994. (That's gotta count for something, right?)
I don't know if you can draw many firm conclusions since I'm biased in the first place by looking only at successful MLB managers, but of those who were good in the majors and managed in the minors, they tended to win in the minors. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some successful AA/AAA managers out there right now who would make quality major league managers.
I am less suspicious of decisions to hire successful minor league head coaches to major league head coaching positions than I am suspicious of recycling the same coaches over and over again.
I agree, with the caveat that, in this case, Fletcher is probably betting his GM job that Yeo will succeed quickly (I'm guessing if there are no playoffs in 2 years, both are gone), which is a little bit of a different criterion than what was used to select the managers you mention.
More importantly, thanks for the numbers. Those are some very good, relevant data points. Perhaps when I get home tonight I'll search out some NHL coaches with minor league pedigrees (beside the obvious*) and see how things went for them.
*Todd Richards -- 2 seasons for PIT AHL team, 98-49 (.667) regular season, 19-15 (.559) in playoffs, one Finals appearance. -- 2 seasons for MIN, 77-71-16 (1.04 pts/gm) 13th and 12th in the West.
Off the top of my head, there's Bruce Boudreau, postseason flops notwithstanding (looks like he had a career 340-216-56-43 AHL record, and I think he won a Calder Cup in there).
Couple others:
Barry Trotz had a 186-149-54-11 AHL record and an AHL championship before being hired to coach the Preds (he is, of course, still there).
Mike Babcock had a 74-59-20-7 AHL record in two seasons before being promoted from the Ducks' AHL affiliate to the NHL job (he later, of course, coached the Ducks in the finals and won the cup with the Red Wings).
What's your view on Richards? No one seemed to think this Wild squad was brimming with talent and they played about .500 under his watch. With a couple more scorers on the team, do you think he would still be coaching the Wild?
I don't think he ever really convinced the players that his system would work. It seemed like it was a constant battle to get them to commit to his plan. The team showed some stretches of good play, but wow did they crash and burn once they lost some of their top-liners. That said, with more talent, he wouldn't have had to rely as completely on a system, which may have allowed him to play more to his strengths (he came in saying he wanted more offense).
If there were a couple more scorers, and they get into the playoffs under Richards, yeah, I think he keeps the job. But I didn't see much more than a month or two during those two seasons that convinced me that he was taking this team anywhere it couldn't go under most anyone else.
If you are looking for center help I urge you to sign Brad Richards. If for no reason other than the suddenly cash-rich Sabres are looking to spend for the sake up spending this off season. I am terrified.
The Wild are always looking for center help, but yet somehow are always up against the cap. This is not a good combination if one is looking to improve the team.
I am very interested to see what the Sabres do this season with the new ownership. That storyline will probably be buried under the Winnipeg coverage, but I hope they are able to spend smartly whilst they open their checkbook a bit.