Eakins to Edmonton confirmed

[mr grieves]

Of course Carlyle getting the Leafs into the playoffs makes it damn near impossible to fire him (though to hear some people on here talk, we only got in because of incredible luck that was SURE to have run out if the season had only been a few games longer, so maybe Carlyle had nothing to do with getting us into the playoffs).

I somehow suspect the parenthetical, along with those caps, is meant to dismiss this view as silly. I don't know. Here are the teams that've managed a higher-than-11% shooting percentage in the last seven seasons:


Team   Year   SH%
Buffalo 2006-7 12.3
Nashville 2006-7 11.8
Wash. 2009-10 11.6
Toronto 2012-13 11.5
Calgary 2006-7 11.4
Pittsburgh 2006-7 11.3
Pittsburgh 2012-13 11.3
Tampa B 2012-13 11.1

I count eight teams. That's eight times in 210 chances that an over 11% shooting percentage has been maintained. 4% of teams have done it. If the Leafs had their 28th-in-league shots on goal and a more average 9% SH%, which chances are they WILL next season, that's 32 fewer goals. From a +12 to a -20. Teams like that don't make the playoffs -- by a lot.

So, if RC's defense-before-all-else system and grit-over-puck-movement-ability line-up choices had anything to do with the team being in the basement for shots on goal, I do think he was lucky to get the team into the playoffs.

Would that luck -- the abnormally high shooting percentage -- have run out had this season gone to 82 games? Well, there's about a 1 in 20 chance it wouldn't, so... it's distantly possible that they could've kept it going. But, if you didn't see that luck start to turn in the last three weeks of the season, I don't think you were watching the games or even reading the box scores.

If the team doesn't find a way to get more shots on goal next season, they won't be in the playoffs.

Anyhow, if I misread the meaning of your post, apologies. But even if I did, it's worth looking at the numbers and realizing just how lucky the team was this year.

 

[Jimmified]

Do the Leafs get anything in return?

 

[Bullfrog]

No.

 

[Redleaf]

Do the Leafs get anything in return?

Not from the Oilers, but they now probably hire the next best up and coming coach in the game. Anyone care to guess who that may be?

 

[Kin]

Ah well. He seemed like a good AHL coach. Now they go and hire another good AHL coach.

 

[Champ Kind]

As the twitters said:

"Every team with vacancy interested in Eakins but Leafs stick with the guy who thought Bozak > Grabbo, Holzer > Gardiner, McLaren > MacArthur"

I don't think I like whoever said this.

 

[Champ Kind]

It seems to me that those people complaining about Eakins leaving and Carlyle staying are the same ones who think the Leafs should trade Jake Gardiner for the # 7 (or whatever) overall pick.

 

[Zee]

It seems to me that those people complaining about Eakins leaving and Carlyle staying are the same ones who think the Leafs should trade Jake Gardiner for the # 7 (or whatever) overall pick.

I think you're painting with a broad brush here.  I hate to be losing Eakins because I think he'll be a great NHL coach, but I also don't want to trade Gardiner for some unknown quantity in a draft pick.  Carlyle got the Leafs to the playoffs and generally had them playing well, but many of his personnel decisions were questionable to say the least. 

 

[Champ Kind]

It seems to me that those people complaining about Eakins leaving and Carlyle staying are the same ones who think the Leafs should trade Jake Gardiner for the # 7 (or whatever) overall pick.

I think you're painting with a broad brush here.  I hate to be losing Eakins because I think he'll be a great NHL coach, but I also don't want to trade Gardiner for some unknown quantity in a draft pick.  Carlyle got the Leafs to the playoffs and generally had them playing well, but many of his personnel decisions were questionable to say the least.

My point is that I think it's fair to say that Carlyle has demonstrated consistent success at the NHL level, while Eakins has not.  Now I'll give you that coaching skills might be more easily transferrable bewteen the AHL and NHL than playing, but to assume that he'll enjoy immediate success or that somehow it's a given that he'll enjoy better results than Carlyle is dubious, I think.

 

[mr grieves]

It seems to me that those people complaining about Eakins leaving and Carlyle staying are the same ones who think the Leafs should trade Jake Gardiner for the # 7 (or whatever) overall pick.

I think you're painting with a broad brush here.  I hate to be losing Eakins because I think he'll be a great NHL coach, but I also don't want to trade Gardiner for some unknown quantity in a draft pick.  Carlyle got the Leafs to the playoffs and generally had them playing well, but many of his personnel decisions were questionable to say the least.

My point is that I think it's fair to say that Carlyle has demonstrated consistent success at the NHL level, while Eakins has not.  Now I'll give you that coaching skills might be more easily transferrable bewteen the AHL and NHL than playing, but to assume that he'll enjoy immediate success or that somehow it's a given that he'll enjoy better results than Carlyle is dubious, I think.

I'm not one of those who think Eakins should've been promoted and Carlyle dumped. Apart from how impossible that is -- coach of team during its most successful year in nearly a decade doesn't get replaced in the off-season -- I wouldn't trust Eakins with an NHL squad at this point.

But I wouldn't overstate Carlyle's consistent record of NHL success as it relates to this team. Coaches are supposed to identify what strengths they've got on the roster and assemble the line-up and game plan that maximizes their success. Maybe a year of beating defense first into their head is good for the long-term growth of the team, but, if the indifference to the team's speed and mobility continues, I doubt whether we'll be saying he deployed his talent well and devised a plan that maximized their potential. To me, he looks stubborn and narrow-minded on his insistence that teams he coaches play something called "Randy Carlyle hockey."

 

[Redleaf]

Eakins heading to EDM is a little upsetting, but this would make me downright mad....

Dreger-

Oilers remain keenly interested in D-man Paul Ranger. Ranger loved playing for Dallas Eakins and Eakins is a huge fan of Ranger....

 

[oakl0008]

I'm not ripping Carlyle or saying that he should be fired (or that Eakins is a great white savior for that matter), but from what Eakins has done with Kadri alone, he did have a small but significant hand in this team making the playoffs along with Carlyle. This was a young team and look at how well he's prepared many of their players. Sure, the writing may have been on the wall for his departure to NHL level coach, but it wouldn't have hurt the Leafs to make the attempt to offer him an assistant position. Maybe they did, but I would think that would have been reported just like every single other thing the Leafs do. What's done is done and I wish Eakins success. The Leafs know that the stakes will be much high next season so I hope they're prepared.

And FYI, not that it matters, but I think Gardiner is the last player the Leafs should trade. I don't even know why he of all players would involved in any sort of rumors or speculation but I suppose that's how it goes.

 

[Corn Flake]

And FYI, not that it matters, but I think Gardiner is the last player the Leafs should trade. I don't even know why he of all players would involved in any sort of rumors or speculation but I suppose that's how it goes.

I suggested he be dealt at one point... and then I saw him in the playoffs... mind changed fast.

 

[Corn Flake]

Eakins heading to EDM is a little upsetting, but this would make me downright mad....

Dreger-

Oilers remain keenly interested in D-man Paul Ranger. Ranger loved playing for Dallas Eakins and Eakins is a huge fan of Ranger....

TAMPERING! CALL GILLIS!

 

[Bender]

Eakins heading to EDM is a little upsetting, but this would make me downright mad....

Dreger-

Oilers remain keenly interested in D-man Paul Ranger. Ranger loved playing for Dallas Eakins and Eakins is a huge fan of Ranger....

Ranger might be a career AHLer for personal reasons AFAIK.

 

[caver]

It was reported last year that Ranger wanted the location of Toronto and the lack of spotlight of the AHL if he was going to play again. Unless that has changed he won't be following Eakins out west.

 

[drummond]

You never know with Edmonton... When they hired Quinn, another players coach, I followed them a little bit as I always liked him and I was curious how he does with the team. We all know how quickly it ended...

 

[Corn Flake]

You never know with Edmonton... When they hired Quinn, another players coach, I followed them a little bit as I always liked him and I was curious how he does with the team. We all know how quickly it ended...

I think the bottom line there is that Tambellini (and Lowe pulling strings) was a complete disaster. 

We will see how McTavish does with Lowe still pulling the strings and Niles Crane as his assistant.

 

[Kin]

The thing that strikes me as a little odd about this hire is that the primary reason, I think, that Eakins has developed the reputation that he has is the credit he's getting for the Marlies developing players over the last few years and rightfully so but the problems in Edmonton haven't been that their young players aren't developing or working hard. The problem is that they haven't been able to put together a decent defense and their highly paid vets aren't contributing the way they should.

Can Eakins help them in those areas? Maybe, but I don't think anything he's done to date would necessarily say one way or the other.

 

[Deebo]

If the Oilers pick up some quality defensemen in the off-season and they make the playoffs, Eakins will get all the credit.