Nonis Gets An Interview - Joel Quenneville Available
May 10th, 2008 by SteveStrike while it’s hot. The Leafs need to speed their search up a tad on the GM front if they have any hope of landing what is one of the best available coaching candidates in Joel Quenneville. Quenneville is a former Leaf draft pick, and also came up through their minor league coaching ranks alongside Marc Crawford before moving on to Colorado as Crawford’s assistant. He then coached St. Louis through many solid seasons, and returned to Colorado to lead them to a number of winning seasons also. The knock on Joel is his failure to take a team past the 3rd round of the playoffs. Luckily Richard Peddie didn’t make any statements regarding the COACH having to have won a Stanley Cup.
On the note of potential GM’s Dave Nonis is going to be interviewed in the near future (next week apparently) and while he represents a warm body, he’s definitely NOT a championship winner. He did make the Luongo deal, and he stuck to the program rather than selling the farm for Brad Richards, both of which look good from where I sit. The latter was also the reason ownership in Vancouver ditched him, so who knows where this will go.
Getting back to the coaching vacancy for a second, Damien Cox is playing revisionist historian again. To wit:
“Now, with the coaching job open, a Star poll tells us the top choice for Leaf head coach is. . .ta da!. . . Pat Burns, with 29 per cent of respondents saying Burns is the man for the job.
No. 3 on the list? Pat Quinn, with 14 per cent.
Failure, it’s fair to say, never taints anyone with the Leafs. It seems to make them more attractive over time.
It’s not just Star readers. Bob McCown of the Fan 590, a former colleague and a pal, went public this week with his choice for Leaf coach, and it was also Burns.
Now I like Bob. Smart guy. Understands the city and knows the teams. Wrote a book on hockey and everything.
But another person who thinks turning back the page to an era when winning didn’t happen is going to make it happen now.”
These statements basically prove that Damien is about as capable of recognizing skill as he is writing a decent article of hockey analysis. Pat Burns led the Montreal Canadiens to the Stanley Cup Finals in 1988-89. He then led the Leafs to the conference finals in consecutive seasons in 92-93, and 93-94 with current GM Cliff Fletcher manning the controls. When the team took a nosedive, due to a youth movement that Fletcher objected to, Burns took the fall for an uncompetitive season in 95-96. He then moved on to Boston, whom he led into the playoffs in both of his first 2 seasons, before ending up in New Jersey and leading them to a Stanley Cup victory.
Pat Burns is NOT a bad coach. In fact he’s an excellent coach. He’s been recognized as such on multiple occasions, winning the NHL coach of the year award 3 times, with 3 separate teams. But like Ken Hitchcock or Mike Keenan, he has a very short shelf life. His hard nosed style wears thin with players after 2 or 3 seasons. To argue that he is a poor selection for coach is basically equivalent to arguing that Jim Leyland is a crappy baseball manager… it’s idiotic in the extreme.
Similarly, arguing that Pat Quinn is a bad selection is again, amazingly silly. Since taking over the Vancouver Canucks in 1990, Pat Quinn’s teams have missed the playoffs ONCE. He’s made the Stanley Cup Finals once, and the Conference Finals another 2 times. He did not have a single losing season as head coach of the Maple Leafs. In fact, the main reason for his departure was political. The power struggle at the top of MLSE required his ouster. He has yet to coach a team since the lock out, and arguing that he is incapable of doing so might have some legs. Unfortunately, this makes no real sense. Every other coach that was good before the lockout seems to be a perfectly decent coach after the lockout. Why Pat Quinn would be the ONE coach that everything has “past by” is beyond me, and I have yet to hear a single explanation from the media as to why they think this would be the case. Oh, and he too has won the Jack Adams award as NHL coach of the year, TWICE.
Basically the Toronto media dread the idea of dealing with something they’ve dealt with in the past. They wouldn’t be able to invent new “problems”, so much as have to regurgitate the same old “problems” they complained about in the past.
Perhaps one day Damien’s revisions of history will translate to a solid future for the Leafs, but I sincerely doubt they’ll have anything approaching the impact of Pat Quinn or Pat Burns. Oh and just in case Damien was wondering, they’ve both won more Stanley Cups than he has. Maybe the fans in Toronto deserve more credit than the media seem to give them. The irony here is, the Toronto media constantly hold themselves up as defenders of the Leafs fan, protecting their interests against the evil money grubbing MLSE. Meanwhile, they happily fight over ad revenue, secured by the rumour mongering, creative journalism, and outright fantasy they peddle on a daily basis. Who should you really bother to listen to? Probably not Damien Cox.
Posted in Uncategorized
7 Responses to “Nonis Gets An Interview - Joel Quenneville Available”
By LeaferSutherland
on May 10, 2008
The problem with both Quinn and Burns, is that they are both known to be a “vets” coach. Of the two, I believe Quinn would be the biggest disaster. Part of the problem we have today, is that the MLSE gave Quinn tons of autonomy (despite having the reputation of never doing so) and the power given to Quinn began the ball rolling for the dysfunction we’ve all seen at the top.
Nevertheless, all the talk of Burns, Quinn, DeBoers and now Quenneville is a wasted exercise until the day a new GM is named. Unless of course we would like this franchise to continue on with it’s dysfunctional ways by naming a coach before naming his boss.
By Jason C
on May 10, 2008
The jury’s still out on Nonis. It’s unfair to criticize him for not being a championship winner. All in all, he did a fine job in Vancouver. He had his shortcomings, but who doesn’t?
Perhaps a guy like Nonis, who holds his cards tightly, is a GM the Leafs need - a guy who isn’t going to sacrifice a good chunk of the future for instant gratification. The Leafs need stability, and Nonis can provide just that.
By LeaferSutherland
on May 11, 2008
Nonis’ strengths are on the financial side of things. He is the reason Vancouver needed to go out and get a capologist to go along with Gillis.
The Luongo deal does show that he can pull the trigger on a sizeable trade if need be, but if the Leafs do choose Nonis, it will not be due to having a history with Burke, but because his stellar number crunching skills would prevent the type of mess JFJ put us in with all those ridiculous contracts he drew up.
By eyebleaf
on May 11, 2008
Cox is an idiot. That column or blog or whatever it was he wrote was ridiculous.
I don’t see Quinn coming back.
Burns, while I would agree that he is a “vet’s coach”…is still what I think the Leafs need. He brings accountability and passion and defence oriented hockey. We need that back. He over-achieved with the teams we had in Toronto when he was behind the bench and I think that’s because he has the ability to get the most out of his players. I would love, just love, to see him back in Toronto.
By Alec
on May 11, 2008
My problem with Quenneville is that he’s a vets coach.
He frequently benched Wolski and demoted Richardson in favour of veteran, 4th line muckers and grinders.
I like the hard-ass approach he brings to the table, however there are more boisterous options in that area such as Pat Burns, who also has several rings to his name. Quenneville, as a head coach, has only once passed the 2nd round.
I wouldn’t object to his hiring though.
By LeaferSutherland
on May 11, 2008
I like Burns as much as the next guy, but let us not forget one thing.
He was on the Leaf bench for a losing streak far greater than the tandem of Maurice/JFJ ever endured.
All in all, it is rather pointless to nominate our next coach until we figure out who our GM will be.