Paul Maurice Q&A, Part 2: One on One Battles Will Be Key This Training Camp
This is part 2 of Wednesday's interview I had with Carolina Hurricanes Head Coach Paul Maurice. In this segment, there was at least one thing the coach made very certain: This season's training camp will not be the country club it was last year.
"We believe that the young players coming into camp to compete for jobs will see our emphasis on their compete level. We'll have drills, like having two players go for a puck. The guy who comes up with the puck is the guy we want."
Buckle up boys, it's going to be a bumpy ride this training camp. The rest of the interview is after the jump.
You have a much younger team now than you did last season. Is there a different coaching philosophy you use when you lead a younger team versus one that's full of older veterans?
You get more involved with a younger team. Not just with their on ice performance, but you watch them closer to see how they are navigating through their first year in the National Hockey League. There is so much more to what goes into this besides just putting the equipment on. It's diet, it's friendships in the locker room. It's where do you go when your game is not good? Which coach do you talk to? When players become NHL'ers, it's like anything else. They're going to get a lot of advice from a lot of people, friends, agents, family members. So you need to make sure you put in place the right map for them as to how to handle things when things go wrong. The easiest thing for them sometimes, is when they step on the ice. They know what to do then. But all the other things they have to deal with is new. So as head coach, there is some of it that you can control, like making sure they have good communication lines through the coaching staff, but you also need to rely on the Staals of the world. The older players who are running that room. Their ability to pick a young player up who is struggling a little bit, and then push the right button. Whether he needs a kick in the pants or a hug, whatever it is. Get him back in the fold. When you have a crusty old veteran who the coach has been chewing into and he's grumbling for two days, you don't worry about it. You know he's dealing with it. But with the younger players, you need to watch them more closely.
When do you decide to put your system into place and how do you decide what system is best for the team?
Day one. And then we make adjustments as we go. But our systems are almost secondary in some ways. Everybody has them. We all run systems. But for us, the thing we are talking about from day one is our compete level. We're going to have those kind of drills and that kind of training camp. We believe that the young players coming into camp to compete for jobs will see our emphasis on their compete level. We'll have drills like having two players go for a puck. The guy who comes up with the puck is the guy we want. We can't afford to sit back so we have to be going forward, but we have to be smart. We have to find a way to be smart, but at a very high energy level. What kind of team will we have? We are setting that from day one. We will compete our butts off every single night. These new guys have not defined themselves as players yet. So they are not coming in here saying that for the last 12 years I've been a perimeter guy moving the puck around, whatever it is, and that's my game and the game I'll play. So we're going to take a big chunk of these guys and help define their game for them. That's our big challenge, but that is also our big opportunity. Can we get our hockey team to compete at a level that any adversity or excuses that people may want to use are taken away? Just go out and compete as hard as you can.
Several vets who were a big part of the locker room are gone. Are you concerned at all about a lack of veteran presence in the room?
Not concerned at all, no. You discover new personalities that come out in these situations. Chad LaRose obviously is a great character in the room and he'll probably get a little more floor time. (chuckles) Then some new guys will emerge. There are characters in there we don't even know about. For instance Sutter has a pretty good sense of humor. He keeps it quiet, but he's got a good one. You're going to see guys emerge in that group and I'm not worried about that at all. But "Staaler" is the big boy in that locker room and when he needs to say something, everybody listens. Timmy Gleason has a snarl and everybody listens to him. So we have enough leaders and I do think we have enough character. And I'm looking forward to getting to know some of these guys that I don't know because every hockey team has it's group of guys and that's the fun part.
You have a couple more offensive minded defensemen than you had last season. Do you give them a green light to go whenever they feel they can go or are there certain times you want them to jump up into a play and certain times they should not?
We want them going all the time. We want them moving up the ice and attacking at every opportunity. But what we want to be careful about is how much risk do you want to build into it, along with what they are comfortable doing? You know, Jay Harrison is going to move the puck as fast as he can. Tim Gleason as well. But you want a player like Jamie McBain to cut the back of the net and bring it up the middle of the ice. And Joni Pitkanen, for me, has developed offensively. He picks his spots very, very well. He gets caught every once in awhile, but we're not closing that down. We're not going to take the four or five good opportunities away from him, because of the one that comes back against him. So we are going to be very open-minded with our back end about how aggressive they can be offensively. And it's also important as to how they function as a group. How much risk do you want to put in your game, as a group? So if you have one or two guys who are going all the time, you're not grabbing that third or fourth defenseman and saying, you have to start stepping in more. We'll manage it as a group and be as offensive minded as we can be.
Sergei Samsonov is a very skilled player who had ups and downs last season and played on several different lines, including the fourth line. Where do you see Samsonov fitting in this season and do you have a vision of your fourth line yet?
I would prefer Sammy play on our first two lines because he has that kind of offensive talent. One advantage he has is that he can play with anybody, at anytime and that's why he gets moved as much as he does. As far as the fourth line, I really don't know. We have to leave that open for camp. Patty Dwyer played some third line center for us last year and we won a bunch of games with him there. So we have to give him that opportunity on our third line. We have Bowman, Boychuk, and Tlusty who all saw time here. Then we have Nash and Skinner, and Dalpe and some other guys. And Jerome Samson had a great year last year in the minors. I almost hate to throw out names because there are a number of players coming in who are going to get a chance. I'm not sure how that fourth line sorts itself out and in fact, it might be more veteran players there again if the younger players are producing more.
You're losing one of the top face off guys in the league. Who do you see being the go-to guy in the face off circle this year?
That's an excellent question. When I look at things that we've lost, I'm not worried about a lot of things, but I am worried about that. Eric Staal has not broken that 50% mark yet and he has to. Clearly that is something that Sutter will have to do, and do well. With our three returning centers in Staal, Sutter, and Dwyer, two of them are not over the 50% mark. It affects your penalty kill, it really affects all aspects of your game. It's one of the things we have to work on in training camp. We'll be dropping a lot of pucks because we have to get them better.
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is amazing. I’ve never read a coach speak so openly and clearly about this kind of stuff. Thank you!
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Sep 10, 2010 7:24 AM EDT reply actions
I’m pretty surprised about his response on the loss to Faceoff wins. Nice to hear honesty like that instead of another cliche about working hard and getting better as a team. I agree completely, Staal has to get up around 50% to compete with other 1st line Center in the NHL. I’m really hoping that is a big focus in training camp, maybe if can be Rod’s full time job.
Bob, Great Work
I found this comment by Paul Mauriceto be extremely, extremely telling; and to me it helps explain part of what went wrong at the start of the 2009-2010 season:
“These new guys have not defined themselves as players yet. So they are not coming in here saying that for the last 12 years I’ve been a perimeter guy moving the puck around, whatever it is, and that’s my game and the game I’ll play. So we’re going to take a big chunk of these guys and help define their game for them. That’s our big challenge, but that is also our big opportunity.”
I thought the Hurricanes struggled for the first twenty or so games with their team identity. The coaches wanted players to get to the net and too many of the veteran forwards did try to play a beautiful, elegant perimeter game that featured skill over battles in the corners and in front of the net. I thought the arrival of the young prospects helped change the team for the better, including speed and a shift by shift commitment to win each puck battle.
I really am glad to read Maurice’s take. As HMof@2 points out above, it is a very candid assessment. The comments about the third line and fourth line are interesting as well. I continue to think Boychuk, Dalpe, and Tlusty will find spots on the roster at the season’s start. Dwyer does seem to have something of an inside track at center; but I really prefer to have Dwyer at a wing.
Cool info. I know that this has been guessed upon alot here, but mentioning Chad, Gleason, and Sutter in the ‘lack of veteran presence’ question you would think it is almost certain one of them is going to get the “A” It also sounds like Dwyer has the leg up, at least prior to camp, on that 3rd line center spot.
Is it October yet?
Definitely
Gleason comes up so much in these interviews (especially in the “veteran presence” conversations), I can’t imagine him not getting the A.
by Raccoon Fink on Sep 10, 2010 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Great stuff Bob. Absolutely fantastic. It’s nice to have Mo be so up front about everything; I doubt you get this kind of frankness in a mid-season interview.
"What Carolina really has going for them is Brandon Sutter. When that kid first showed up, he looked like a skinny little thing that wouldn’t last two weeks. But he’s turned into a real star."
Bravo !!
And i too will be woefully disappointed if Timmy doesn’t get the “A” And like all here thus far, this fan too is very apprciaitive of Mo openess and honesty in that interviews…Thanks Bob…too bad we here aint a zillion bucks…we’d give ya healthy raise!!!
And if it Aint Hockey,It Aint Nothin !!
That Checkers 3rd Sweater ROCKS !!!
The whole “one-on-one” thing is going to be big for Samson, IMO. He’s proven he can possess the puck for extended periods, but I think he needs to show he can win the puck in the corners, not just confirm he can hold on to it once he has it.
Samson and the Puck Battles
Cory, I guess nobody knows how a young player will respond to those one on one battles; and some players like Sutter always seem to end up with the puck for whatever reason. I still don’t see Samson as having any major hurdles to winning puck battles. He is intense, fast, and has good eye-hand coordination. If in fact the question for Samson is whether he can excel at winning the puck battles, he will be in good shape for the Hurricanes. I would venture that if the Hurricanes paired Samsonov against Samson to conduct the win the puck drills, Samson would do quite well. I totally agree with you that Samson has to prove to the coaches he is one of the best at winning the pucks in the corner to gain a roster spot.
It is shaping up to be an exciting training camp for the players, coaches, and fans.
Well, yeah … but he needs to win battles against bigger guys, esp. tough d-men.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Winning Puck Battles Against Big Defensemen
Cory, it’s a great point. Don’t you think over all an important litmus test for the Hurricanes forwards is how they deal with puck battles against bigger defense men? One approach is for the Canes forwards to use their speed to get to the puck and the possession before the D-men can get to them. Unless Osala or J. Staal get brought up, the Hurricanes forwards will be significantly out-sized by the D-men. Samson does have an advantage in that he has great balance and strength on his skates, so he can’t easily be pushed to the ice. Samson is listed at 6’ 190 lbs, so he is not under-sized. Now if you tell Samson and Bowman they can make the team if they win the puck battles in drills, and pair them off together, it will look like a war on the ice.
I agree on that … but winning those battles isn’t always about size and strength. I always found Whitney to be good at getting in the corner, chopping at the puck and chasing it to gain possession.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Ryan Johansen Signs w/ Columbus
- Overall pick in this year’s Draft Ryan Johansen signs an entry-level deal with Columbus. He makes the max $900k, however with his possible performance bonuses added (which dictates Cap) he can make a maximum of $1,975,000.
Interesting because this is much lower than other recent examples… Such as #4 Overall Pick last year Evander Kane who can make a maximum of $3.1 million with performance bonuses added. Or Brayden Schenn, the #7 Overall pick from last year who also makes $3.1 million maximum.
Jeff Skinner has to be signed to play any regular season try-out games with the Canes. So how much does Skinner sign for? For the Canes, obviously the lower the better. I’m guessing he gets $1.5-2 million.
Taylor Hall signed for $3.75M in max bonuses in early July, thereby setting the top end.
Good data point with the Johansen signing. I had been conservatively slotting $2M for Skinner up to this point and his agent will argue that they’re comparable.
Still, more than $2M is now probably off the table.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Skinner
Well, what this tells us is that barring a phenomenal first couple of weeks, Skinner will be going back to juniors. No money for anything else, unless we are tearing up the league.
Unless you hear what Rutherford is quoted as saying to the Kitchener press, who led their article with “Goodbye Jeff Skinner”.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Sep 10, 2010 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with HMof2
With Jim Rutherford’s comments, I think Skinner is set to be on the Canes as a wing.
…laughing…I love how you take some casual GM-speak to an interviewer and immediately jump to “set” and what was it elsewhere? Oh yes, “presumptive roster member”.
Cancel training camp guys. We’re done.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I don’t think Rutherford would build up expectations so consistently if he thought Skinner was a long shot. The fact that he said this to Skinner’s home town press makes it more than hyperbole, IMHO. But of course, Skinner’s gonna have to win those one-on-one’s Mo’s talking about against some pretty hardened pros, so nothing is a given.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Sep 10, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Skinner and Jim Rutherford's Effusive Praise
HMof2, my reaction is the same as yours about the depth of Jim Rutherford’s praise for Skinner. Jim Rutherford is always uses positive reinforcement and usually is under-stated so not as to build up too much expectations for a young player. To me he seems to be signaling quite clearly that he believes Skinner is expected to make the team in some capacity; but subject to showing he can battle for the pucks against some very motivated veterans who know their career is on the line.
It is about money
I don’t doubt that JR thinks that Skinner is good enough to make the team. I bet they would like to have him on the team. I bet he’s talented enough to make the jump… but we are already over the old self-imposed cap. Where will the $2.000.000+ come from?
Unless you believe in past seasons. Sutter last year, Rodney and Sutter the year before, both would have to “play themselves of the team” according to Rutherford. Both were sent back down to Albany, or the juniors. Skinner could get the same. There is a crowd competing for avilable slots this year.
To be fair Skinner is much, much better than Rodney or Sutter were at those points. He provides an offensive component that doesn’t even exist on our team currently. Skinner is the best prospect the Canes have had coming to Camp since Eric Staal. The situation is a little different than Rodney or Sutter’s was.
I’m not pointing at just your comments, JJ, but i see a theme (everywhere) of “The Overhyping of Jeff Skinner.” There’s no denying his skill — that can be said of every first-round pick — but it seems everyone forgot that Skinner wasn’t on anyone’s radar when it came to the Canes heading into the draft (myself included). He’s had a nice summer, but most of what he’s done hasn’t been a huge accompishment. Ladd, Sutter and Boychuk were on par with him, IMO. It’s just that everyone gets caught up in the fact that his biggest skill is scoring. There’s a lot to learn beyond that to succeed in the NHL.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s not to discount what he’s capable of, b/c I think he was a very clever selection. But he’s not like Kovalchuk or Ovechkin … I would see him more on a path like Zach Parise, if he is to attain big success.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Zach being 21 when he hit the AHL, after two years at University of North Dakota and a year at Albany (stats).
Here we are now...entertain us.
I don’t mean age, but rather his progression … he had two rather pedestrian pro seasons (one AHL, one NHL) before breaking out as a 30-goal guy.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ve been a big fan of Jeff Skinner since I watched the Kitchener/Windsor Playoff series last year (for Hall and Fowler, not Skinner). In my opinion he outplayed everyone on the ice. Leading up to the Draft I said I would much rather have Connolly or Skinner as they had future 1st line Winger potential. You would be hard pressed to find one person from the Canes, Kitchener Rangers, the OHL, anyone really that says Skinner won’t be a very good player on the Canes for years to come.
Obviously the Canes are extremely excited about him also, I’m not the only one.
Also I don’t think Skinner is anywhere near good enough to put up a Rookie season like Ovechkin/Crosby. My guess, if he made the roster, is he would probably put up 20-30 goals and 45-60 points.
Also, taking your top-end point total (60), that would rank him third based on last year — ahead of what Whitney did. Also third in 2008-09, ahead of Ruutu who had a very good season.
I’m not saying it’s not possible, but I think it’s further adding to the overhyping.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Why would they say otherwise? I just think expecting 20-30 goals is a bit much two straight-out-of-juniors-in-draft-year did it last year (Duchene, Tavares with 24 each), one the year before (Stamkos, 23), one in 2007-08 (Kane, 21).
That is elite-level goal scoring for a rookie to say 20-30.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
it should read…
… is a bit much. Two straight-out-of-juniors-in-draft-year …
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
30 goals is an insane expectation for the kid. See John Tavares, Matt Duchene, etc. Let’s say, if perchance the Canes find the money to keep him up, 15g, 25a, and we’ll call that a terrific first year. Hell, I’d be happy if he hits double-digits in both.
Skinner is a pure offensive player, he isn’t contributing much towards shutting down the opponent but he is scoring points. I knew saying top-end was 30 goals and 60 points would stir the pot, but that is absolute best case scenario. Just as likely he could score 15-20 goals and 40 points, which is probably the minimum I’d like to see from him to be considered worth keeping out of Juniors another year.
Scoring single digits in either would be a failure on the org’s part. That would obviously indicate he was not ready. He would obviously be heavily used on the PP where his real talent would shine and this would result in more points than Rookies normally see. He also has a lot more talent around him than Tavares did.
I’d agree with you both that I am probably over estimating and possibly over-hyping Skinner… But I think you both may be underestimating him also. It is clear JR and the Canes are very excited to see what he can do, I’m honestly excited to see myself.
Oh, I think he’s the real deal, all right.
Heck, I feel like we won the lottery and got the #1 pick. I wouldn’t trade it for any other pick made in the 20.10 draft.
But, haste makes waste.
I don’t want to mess up this asset’s development by having it experience anything but success. Remember, there’s no AHL sanctuary option and no 20th birthday lurking in February like what got Sutter there when he was leveled early in his rookie season.
I want a nice glimpse of our pretty this preseason, but then prefer that we put it back in its box and let it go raise hell in the CHL.
Now bring him back next season with skills sharpened, mind and body a year older, and brimming with confidence from a season of first line and special team duty to take his place as Staal’s right hand man.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I don’t necessarily want him back in the CHL … but I do want him to prove himself among men rather than teens. There’s no reason to get ahead of ourselves with Skinner.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions
To me, there’s plenty of time for him to prove himself against men when he’s 19 years old.
He’ll still be a teenager. In fact, he just turned 18 back in mid-May.
Heck, there’s even talk now of not drafting NHL talent until they’re 19 years of age.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I think that POV is as off as those who are penciling him in. Let’s see what he can do. That’s where I’m at.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 11, 2010 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
+10
to seeing what he can do. With Skinner, there are some extra factors to watch.
Skinner has what I think is an unusual asset for a player his age, above and beyond hockey skills. It’s that self-confident yet happy-go-lucky smile.
The guy seems so upbeat. You look at him and get the impression if you’ve got him, you’ve got a chance. You certainly don’t get the sense that Skinner is anxious and riddled with self-doubt. He may be able to play at a higher level sooner because he thinks he can and won’t accept any other outcome.
If he’s not ready, he’s not. But if it’s close, the Canes could do worse than adding a really talented guy with scoring ability and contagious enthusiasm.
by curiouscanesfan on Sep 11, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think Skinner would come in and score 30 goals his rookie year, but I think mid 20s is a real possibility if he plays the entire season. One thing Skinner would have that Duchene and Tarvares didn’t is an elite scorer already on the team. The focus of opposing teams would be on Staal, which would open up opportunities for Skinner.
Triple Gold Juice - It's Potent and Guaranteed to Help You Score!
by PackPride17 on Sep 11, 2010 10:29 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
One week from today.
Assuming Skinner comes to camp, I can’t wait to see he and Staal on the ice together. They’ll be skating in 2 groups the first day (and for the first several days). It’ll be interesting to see how the divide the players up.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Sep 11, 2010 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Cory, do you think Jim Rutherford is usually this effusive in his praise of the team’s first round draft picks or do you think his comments are being taken out of context or perhaps given too much weight?
He’s usually positive about the new guys. Don’t get me wrong, Skinner has a better shot than Paradis had last year, but JR also kept Boychuk at the beginning of his draft year even tho he was unable to play all rpeseason with the wrist issues.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 10, 2010 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
…but JR also kept Boychuk at the beginning of his draft year even tho he was unable to play all rpeseason with the wrist issues.
Because of that wrist injury, incurred during his junior team’s playoff games his draft year, the org did keep him around for an eventual two NHL games before returning him to his junior team.
But, that was mostly because they hadn’t been able to get a good look at him during preseason and training camp due to the injury not being healed, not because they realistically thought he had a chance to make the team.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Skinner and Radar
As far as I know Luke DeCock was the only Canes commentator who was projecting Skinner as the Hurricanes pick. I certainly knew of Skinner but thought the Canes would go for more size at center. He does seem like an excellent choice. I think there is a difference between projecting Skinner as Rookie of the Year and believing Skinner will make the team out of training camp. I have no idea how quickly Skinner will adjust to the NHL; but at some point in his career, I do think he is going to be a very special player for the Hurricanes.
Boychuk and Sutter Versus Skinner
Boychuk came close to making the team out of training camp; and I think if he hadn’t been coming off of wrist problems, he would have. Again, that isn’t to say Skinner is a guaranteed NHL all-star in 2010-2011.
BTW
Excellent interview Bob, I am really impressed. This is head and shoulders above what the MSM usually produces.
Why not have a faceoff camp?
This team has 3 of the best faceoff guys in the league – Francis, Brind’Amour, and Jeff O’Neill (look at the 2002 league leaders). This is the scariest thing about Brind’Amour leaving. Our arch-nemesis (Devils) now has Adam Oates on the staff (ex of Tampa) – they will be good in the circle – Oates taught RBA how to take faceoffs.
Great interview, Bob. Thanks – Mo – I agree with the comments about Maurice being frank
Stranger things have happened, but one would presume this will be an area of focus for Mr. Brind’Amour in his new role. At least we’re acknowledging that it’s an issue (first step, right?).
Phoblographer and Finn Aficionado
SISU
by Jamie Kellner on Sep 11, 2010 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
You know, ironically it was always rumored that Brind’Amour disdained practicing faceoffs in non-game situations, saying it took the edge off having to perform in actual games.
Still, he has much to teach. Francis and he both had tons of ways to, shall we say, “gain the advantage” whenever you really needed to win one.
Here we are now...entertain us.




















