Vladimir Tarasenko No Goal: Play was Offside

The call on the ice was a good goal scored by St. Louis Blues forward Vladimir Tarasenko. Dallas Stars head coach Lindy Ruff challenged the play, saying the play was offsides at the blue line.

After further review, the play was offsides. This is a perfect example why I like the coaches challenge. Hockey is a fast game and the refs are human and miss penalties and the offsides. In this instance, the on-ice officials got the call right.

And another NHL Coach bites the Dust... with a pondering (RW77)

New York Rangers logo (used 1935–48) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ok, this is just a musing type post so I'll put it down and see what develops in the comment section.

Today marked the end of Tortorella's coaching tenure with the New York Rangers.  It was marked with ups (like his record 171-144 in the regular season) and downs (holy crap bad offense and terrible power play).  He was a tough cookie both on his players and to the media.

I am no fan of the Rangers.  But I got to thinking:  What makes a good pro head coach?

A few months ago I was listening to a Vikings postgame show where they lost and callers were ranting on how the Vikings needed a coach who was "in your face" and "showed more emotion on the sidelines."  Here in Nebraska, after every Husker game, fans (and detractors alike) rant on how Head Coach Bo Pelini is a hot head and needs to butt out of his players' and media's faces (aside for the typical if the Huskers win, Bo rules.  If they lose, fire his backside).  Here's the same issue.  You have previous head coach Renney barely at .500 over his tenure (something like 164-163 as a head coach) and he's drummed out.  To me, he seemed like a tacit kind of coach.  And here's the abrasive Tortorella getting shown the door after being the exact opposite and finishing with a better overall record.

I'm not going to debate whether or not the dismissal was the right or wrong answer.  Like I said, I don't give a rip about the Rangers.  But I do wonder what makes a good coach a good coach?

Nowadays, more and more players (especially in basketball and football) are immature, hot-headed egotists that cannot handle criticism and tough love.  But when they are listened to by owners and GMs, giving the player a "player friendly" coach, it doesn't always mean positive results either.  So what makes a great head coach?

I want to be careful about this not turning into a Hakstol Hate Festival (like every time Brad says his name in an article on his own blog's comment section), so I'm not really interested in college-centric thought.  I do believe that a college head coach and a pro head coach are very different.

So I'm curious what are the intangibles of a great coach, in your eyes?  How do you judge a coach's effectiveness?  Which coach (of any sport) do you think more coaches should model themselves after?

I have a lot of favorite coaches, but my opinion is you can never go wrong with Scotty Bowman.  His attitude and the way he coached was simply top notch.

Thoughts?

P.S.  Dave Tippett is rumored to be among the coaches the Rangers are considering.  I bet, however, they go with Alain Vignault if they don't go with Mark Messier. (others mentioned are Lindy Ruff and Paul Maurice)

Buffalo Pylon John Scott works Shawn Thornton

The Sabres John Scott is 6'8" and 270 and plays about 3:30 minutes a hockey game and has no other value other than he's a goon, some might refer to him as an insurance policy.

On the other hand, Boston Bruins forward Shawn Thornton is a role player that sticks up for his teammates and is also known to chip in goals. Thornton definitely took one for the team here.

For comparison sake, Thornton has scored (31g-43a—74pts) in 456 games, while John Scott has scored (1g-4a—5pts) in a 152 games.

Lucic will not be suspended.

Image via WikipediaObviously the Buffalo Sabres aren't going to be happy with this decision, Lindy Ruff let it be know that he isn't happy with his goaltender getting run. [click to listen] Ruff claims by not suspending Lucic the league is basically saying that you can run a goalie over when he is out of the net playing the puck.

 "If [Lucic] isn't suspended, it just means teams will be able to do exactly what Lucic did," Ruff said. "Their goaltender can play the puck, we can run him over. We can hurt him and all you get is a two-minute minor penalty. That's essentially what that means. You can concuss the other team's goaltender. You can run him going at whatever speed he was going. He made no attempt to get out of the way. It means it's fair game on goaltenders."

 I don't hink we have gone down the slippery slope, at least not yet. I also don't think we are going to see more NHL goaltenders getting run over. I don't blame the Sabres for being mad, I think the Sabres have a right to be upset. That being said, if I was a Sabres fan I would be upset that no one on my team challenged Lucic for that hit. I also don't think that it's now open season on goaltenders either. I also don't think that this hit by Lucic was worthy of a suspension, like I told a friend of mine, not every questionable hit or penalty is worthy of a suspension. 

TORONTO -- Shanahan held a hearing with Lucic via conference call because he had specific questions he wanted to ask before making a determination on potential supplemental discipline.

"I had the hearing because I did make an initial assessment of the play as I do with all plays, but I did have some questions for Milan and I wanted to hear directly from him," Shanahan told NHL.com. "They were regarding his intent; at what point did he know there was going to be a collision; and whether or not he felt he had the time to avoid the collision. I was satisfied with his answers."

Shanahan said the minor penalty for charging was the proper call in this case because it follows Rule 42.1, which reads "a goalkeeper is not fair game just because he is outside the goal crease area."

"The minor penalty called on the ice was the correct call," Shanahan said. "And, while it's unfortunate that Miller was hurt I saw nothing egregious about this hit that would elevate it to supplemental discipline."

The fans that hate the Boston Bruins are now going to say that there is a conspiracy and that the league loves the Boston Bruins and that the Bruins will always get way with bush league hits and that by not suspending Lucic only confirms what most of the Bruins haters thought last spring when Chara didn't get suspended for his hit on Max Pacioretty. Until one of the Boston Bruins gets the book thrown at him by the NHL front office the tin foil hat crowd is going to be out in full force.Notice a lot of the howling and complaining coming from the fans in Montreal.What do you think of this ruling by Shanahan?