Mo Must Win: November 7 - December 3

by curiouscanesfan on Nov 7, 2011 10:53 AM EST

AD pointed out that this is not a year to finish in the middle of the pack when the top of the 2012 draft is going to be great. In the same post, AD said that there is no downside to sticking with Mo for the rest of the season. I agree with the first point but not the second.

There is more than one downside to sticking with Mo if he doesn't turn things around resoundingly and fast. My list of downsides includes:
* Having to watch the team play the way it's playing for another 60+ games, with frequent noncompetitive efforts
* Canes' management turning off fans by sitting idly by while the Canes are often appalling to watch or even talking about having the best coaches in the league while the team's play on home ice often says otherwise
* Inculcating a culture of mediocrity, nonaccountability and helplessness in the face of adversity
* Still not knowing before the 2012-2013 draft whether the Canes' current prospects can hack it in the NHL
* Not knowing whether another coach can get more out of Eric Staal
* Likelihood of not falling to the cellar but finishing 9th - 11th in the East and missing out on a top 10 draft pick as well as the playoffs

We are at the point of needing a big winning streak either under Mo or anybody assigned the role of cleaning up Mo's mess. Whoever the coach is, the rational course is to demand winning big immediately. Otherwise, the Canes should start the fire sale to accumulate future assets, including higher picks in next season's draft.

It's easy to envision a replay of what we saw late last season, with a rally that does nothing but make the Canes' draft position worse. However, last season the Canes had a slightly better record on November 7, with 14 points in 14 games instead of 13 points. The year before that, the Canes had a measly 7 points on November 7.

You have to go back to 2008 to find the Canes in much better shape on November 7.

That gives us an interesting, objective reference point for judging Mo. More after the jump.

November 7, 2008 under Lavi

8 - 4 - 2 18 pts after 14 games, on pace for 105 points

December 3, 2008 under Lavi

12 - 11 - 2 26 pts after 25 games, in trouble but still more than a pt per game, on pace for 85 pts that season

November 7, 2011 under Mo V2

5 - 6 - 3 13 pts after 14 games, on pace for 76 pts

December 3s under Mo V2

2009 5- 17 - 5 15 pts after 27 games, on pace for 46 pts

2010 11 - 11 - 3 25 pts after 25 games, on pace for 82 pts

The Canes have not started any season as well in the 3 years of Mo V2 as they did under Lavi in the season that got Lavi fired. In fact, the Canes need 16 pts in the 14 games through December 3 just to bring Mo up to the standard that cost Lavi his job. I'd rather see Mo held to something higher than the standard for firing another man. Lavi got to keep his job after having 33 pts in 28 games on December 3, 2007. He got to keep his job after having the same 33 pts after 28 games on December 3, 2006. He got to keep his job after having 34 pts after 26 games on December 3, 2005. Mo was fired in 2004 with 26 points after 30 games (8 - 12 - 8 - 2). Poor starts have been the norm with Mo for quite some time.

I'm not arguing that the Canes should bring Lavi back or even that the Canes were obligated to keep Lavi as head coach just because Lavi won. I am saying the Canes should hold Mo accountable for the actual performance of the teams he coaches and make decisions that will strengthen the team for 2012-2013. The standard of accountability for Mo should be the same as for any other NHL coach. The standard of accountability for Canes' management is to do what's best to strengthen the team going forward. Those are not novel concepts in pro sports. They do not suggest a vicious personally motivated campaign against Mo, JR or PK. It is not unreasonable to ask PK and JR to judge Mo by the same standards that apply to any coach in pro sports and to consider the welfare of the franchise and its fans over the job security of a friend.

I wish Mo the best, including a good next job. But if he doesn't turn things around in a big way by December 3, the Canes should turn to somebody else.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

New coach must come from outside the organization so current thinking is not in the mix!

by max creek on Nov 7, 2011 11:14 AM EST reply actions

If we keep Mo

The we ought to change the team’s name to reflect our new reality:

Carolina Tropical Depression.

Meant purposefully in only semi jest as a troll type comment and not as constructive argument.

by Squeaky83 on Nov 7, 2011 11:44 AM EST reply actions

In the vein of coaching changes . . .

Interesting correlation to the Blues situation:
Ken Hitchcock joins the Blues

Most notably, about midway through the article was this tidbit:

As for the Blues, they couldn’t handle Andy Murray’s drill sergeant routine, so the team flipped him for players’ coach Payne and handed the keys to the locker room over to a young generation of talent with no adult supervision. Said TJ Oshie to FanHouse in Sept. 2010: “I think we’re more relaxed with Payne. He’s a younger guy, maybe a bit of a players’ coach. He lets us play our own game.”

That lasted one season. In came Jason Arnott(notes) and Jamie Langenbrunner(notes) for veteran leadership, and out went Payne for Hitchcock, a coach very much in the disciplinarian mold. (Langenbrunner played for Hitch in Dallas, incidentally.)

Hitchcock is, frankly, exactly what this team needs after meandering with a players’ coach for parts of two years. Structure. Discipline. Consistency. Improved special teams. OK, it’s going to be boring. Hitchcock’s teams usually are. But you know what boring gets you? Strong performances from perennial underachievers, and teams that make the playoffs more often than once in six seasons.

I bring this up only in so much as I’ve heard Maurice described as being a player’s coach, and the sentence that read, “Structure. Discipline. Consistency. Improved special teams.” is a familiar rallying cry on CanesCountry.

All this said, I believe the Hurricanes problems are cumulative. One could argue that there are perceived differences in coaching styles amongst coach & assistants, differences in coaching approach vs. player composition (grind vs skill) between coach & management, differences in opinion on who to play and how much, differences in opinion on who to add to the team (grind vs skill) between GM, player development, scouting, and coach.

It really seems like there’s an overall lack of a coordinated and consistent effort to field a winning team between coach, assistant coaches, players, GM’s, player development, and owner. So, how do you fix that? Maybe replacing the coach is a good first step. Seems that’s what the Blues are betting on, anyway.

by Curt Rask on Nov 7, 2011 12:34 PM EST reply actions

I would love to read an article on grind vs. skill in the Canes organization. JR has been drafting skill and Mo talks about nothing but grind and seems to disregard skill—almost to hold it in contempt. If Mo is saying the team doesn’t have enough skill to compete on skill, he’s indicting his boss.

by curiouscanesfan on Nov 7, 2011 2:03 PM EST up reply actions

opinion

…or he’s covering for his lack of knowledge of what to do to bring out and use the skill available. Hence skilled prospects on the 4th line getting 5 minutes. Hence PP tactics that emphasize point shots from the defense instead of skilled movement and passing from forwards.

by Squeaky83 on Nov 7, 2011 2:46 PM EST up reply actions

I hope that’s not what he’s doing but I don’t have another explanation except a view that grinding is all hockey is or should be.

by curiouscanesfan on Nov 7, 2011 3:16 PM EST up reply actions

Lavi Firing Circumstances

Laviolette was not fired because of his record.

He obviously gets under managements’ skins. Look at the Islanders. When he coached them for 2 years, he got them to the playoffs both years. Granted, they were early exits in the 1st round both years, but at the time the Islanders hadn’t been to the playoffs in about a decade. They’ve been back once since.

In 3 full seasons, Laviolette had 3 winning seasons, only one of which they went to the playoffs. In his entire career he hasn’t had a full losing season.

Maurice on the other hand has had 5 full seasons where he has lost more games than won. All of which came with the Canes/Whalers.

Lavi obviously pisses off the wrong people. If he doesn’t get the results expected, he’s canned. Maurice does not piss off these people. He can scoot under .500 for entire seasons and not be fired.

He is obviously well-like for reasons outside of hockey within the Hurricanes organization.

It’s, unfortunately, as simple as that.

by Buglermcd on Nov 7, 2011 4:20 PM EST reply actions

Clearly winning doesn’t guarantee Lavi a job. I still find that harder to accept than the way losing seems to guarantee Mo a job. When you put their records next to each other, the differences are stark. If you didn’t know the history, you would have no doubt which coach got fired more often. You would also question why Mo has Hall of Fame job security.

25. Paul Maurice, Carolina
Maurice is ranked the lowest out of all the veteran head coaches. One main reason why is that his teams have only made the playoffs in four of 12-plus seasons. I like the guy, but when you look at his track record it makes you wonder why he keeps getting chances as an NHL head coach.

by curiouscanesfan on Nov 7, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions

So, the Canes run in 2009 doesn’t count?

Harrumph

by ivyleager on Nov 7, 2011 5:45 PM EST up reply actions

Not really a reply to your post, but your post raises an interesting point

Mo has made the playoffs 5 times, I think in 14 seasons, though it’s tricky to count because of partial seasons. I think the author’s point was that Mo makes the playoffs a lot less often than most long-tenured coaches. Once in the playoffs, Mo has lost in the first round 3 times in 5 trips.

Mo won one conference championship when the Canes made it to the Cup finals in 2002 after squeaking into the playoffs with 91 points, fewer than 14 of the 15 other playoff teams. They ultimately lost in the Cup finals 4 games to 1. Mo made it to the conference finals a second time in 2009 before being swept by the Pens. It is fair to say that Mo normally misses the playoffs or gets knocked out in the 1st round. He has done that in all but two of his 14 or 15 seasons.

Besides having strong winning records in each of his 3 full seasons as Canes’ head coach, Lavi has made the playoffs 5 times in 7 full seasons as an NHL head coach. Lavi missed the playoffs twice with the Canes, once despite posting 92 points (more than they had under Mo when the Canes made the Cup finals) and once with 88 points, which in my book counts as a near miss. That’s right – in 7 full seasons as an NHL head coach, Mo has made the playoffs or come close 7 times with 3 franchises. Once in the playoffs, Lavi has gotten past the first round 3 times in 5 tries, won one conference championship and one Stanley Cup.

I’d take Lavi any day of the weak because I’d like the Canes to be as competitive as possible, but I don’t have to work with Lavi day in and day out. I’d take just about any coach over Mo based on results, but I miss the pleasure of Mo’s company around the office and in the locker room. A lot of people still take the trouble to say they’re glad Lavi was run out of town because he had “lost the locker room.” Mo has an army of tireless, aggressive defenders. Nothing is Mo’s fault. It’s the players, it’s the owner, it’s the GM. Mo is immaculate.

It’s hard to say whether the bigger story here is Mo’s awful coaching record and wonderful personality or Lavi’s awful personality and wonderful coaching record.

by curiouscanesfan on Nov 7, 2011 7:43 PM EST up reply actions