Coaching Records Since The Lockout – Let The Reader Use Discernment

Renney

With the news coming out today that the Oilers are going to interview Tom Renney (shown above, demonstrating his easy going manner and rapport with his players), I thought it might be of interest to take a look at the records of NHL coaches post-lockout.

What follows is such a list, featuring every bench boss with more than fifty games coached since the NHL lockout. The number in brackets on the right is a coach’s points percentage – what percent of available points his teams have taken. Coaches listed in bold are currently available for hire, and those listed in italics are NHL G.M.s who either stepped behind the bench temporarily or have since been elevated to the top hockey job.

Some caveats apply; obviously coaches with bad teams are going to be grouped near the bottom (hey look, it’s Scott Gordon!) regardless of their personal level of ability, and the reverse is true also (hello, Michel Therrien). Also, while I got all of my information from hockey-reference.com, it’s only as accurate as my math skills; so while I checked the numbers twice, if there’s a suspicious one please double-check.

Coaching Records, Post-Lockout

 

Todd McLellan – San Jose: 53-18-11 (.713)
Mike Babcock – Detroit: 213-77-38 (.707)
Lou Lamoriello – New Jersey: 34-14-5 (.689)
Bruce Boudreau – Washington: 87-41-15 (.661)
Daryl Sutter – Calgary: 46-25-11 (.628)
Claude Julien – BOS/NJ/MTL: 160-88-36 (.627)
Brent Sutter – New Jersey: 97-56-11 (.625)
Randy Carlyle – Anaheim: 180-107-41 (.611)
John Paddock – Ottawa: 36-22-6 (.609)
Dave Tippett – Dallas: 184-113-31 (.608)
Barry Trotz – Nashville: 181-114-33 (.602)
Ron Wilson – SJ/TOR: 178-111-39 (.602)
Peter Laviolette – Carolina: 157-100-24 (.601)
Alain Vigneault – Vancouver: 133-86-27 (.596)
Guy Carbonneau – Montreal: 124-83-23 (.589)
Tom Renney – New York Rangers: 159-106-42 (.586)
Mike Keenan – Calgary: 88-60-16 (.585)
Jim Playfair – Calgary: 43-29-10 (.585)
Lindy Ruff – Buffalo: 185-129-34 (.580)
Bob Gainey – Montreal: 29-21-7 (.570)
Jacques Lemaire – Minnesota: 170-125-35 (.568)
Peter DeBoer – Florida: 41-30-11 (.567)
Joel Quenneville – COL/CHI: 176-114-34 (.560)
Michel Therrien – Pittsburgh: 135-105-32 (.555)
Paul Maurice – TOR/CAR: 109-85-27 (.554)
Bob Hartley – Atlanta: 84-67-19 (.550)
Pat Quinn – Toronto: 41-33-8 (.549)
Andy Murray – STL/LA: 138-113-37 (.543)
Ken Hitchcock – CBJ/PHI: 149-128-39 (.533)
John Tortorella – TB/NYR: 130-115-22 (.528)
Jacques Martin – Florida: 110-100-36 (.520)
John Stevens – Philadelphia: 107-98-33 (.519)
Ted Nolan – New York Islanders: 74-68-21 (.518)
Craig MacTavish – Edmonton: 152-141-35 (.517)
Don Waddell – Atlanta: 34-34-8 (.500)
Denis Savard – Chicago: 65-66-16 (.497)
Terry Murray – Los Angeles: 34-37-11 (.482)
Wayne Gretzky – Phoenix: 143-161-24 (.473)
Marc Crawford – LA/VAN: 101-116-29 (.470)
John Anderson – Atlanta: 35-41-6 (.463)
Dave Lewis – Boston: 35-41-6 (.463)
Mike Sullivan – Boston: 29-37-16 (.451)
Gerard Gallant – Columbus: 40-52-5 (.438)
Tony Granato – Colorado: 32-45-5 (.421)
Glen Hanlon – Washington: 63-95-27 (.414)
Rick Tocchet – Tampa Bay: 19-33-14 (.394)
Trent Yawney – Chicago: 33-55-15 (.393)
Scott Gordon – New York Islanders: 26-47-9 (.372)
Mike Kitchen – St. Louis: 28-63-19 (.341)

Some fun points from this list:

  • Mike Keenan and Jim Playfair have posted identical points percentages with the Calgary Flames. I wonder what that means, exactly.
  • I was shocked to see that of available ex-NHL coaches, John Paddock has the best record, post-lockout.
  • I wonder what the problem is with Claude Julien; he sees nothing but success and he’s been fired twice since the lockout.
  • Bob Gainey’s record as an interim coach looked good at first, but then I realized that it was significantly further down the list than the two men he replaced.
  • I remain a strong supporter of Craig MacTavish’s ability to coach at the NHL level, but it is somewhat interesting that he’s just behind Ted Nolan in terms of winning percentage. Nolan may be all kinds of difficult, but it seems to me that the man can coach.
  • Hippy

    I don't get the whole " why would Brent want to go work for his big bro" argument. These people that say this must have some pretty shittttty brothers. Why would't you want to make it a family affair/family business; have some damn pride in your family. Don't you think that makes more sense where the Sutter's are concerned?

    The only thing I'll say is after Darryl, Playfair & Keenan, perhaps the Flames need a different type of message sender. The Flames seem to be in the opposite situation of the Oil. The Oilers need a hard asss & the Flames may need a tactician (not that Brent isn't, he just may be too similar in hard-asss-ness).

    If Mike Keenan is out, and Brent Sutter is not the next coach in Calgary, and Darryl himself doesn't step back down, the name I'd like to see the Flames take a look at is Tom Renney. IMO he's not a good fit in eTown, but mite be a gr8 fit in Calgary. I hope neither team hires Crawford because I don't want to have to listen to him on a daily basis. I still think Brent will be in Calgary though.

  • Hippy

    Jonathan Willis wrote:

    I’m not on the Crawford bandwagon because I’ve got unpleasant suspicions about his character, but he’s a far better coach than he is a colour commentator.

    I'm not on the Crawford bandwagon because I've hated him has a divisonal rival for 10 years and as a commentator on the CBC for the last few…

  • Hippy

    RossCreek wrote:

    I don’t get the whole ” why would Brent want to go work for his big bro” argument. These people that say this must have some pretty shittttty brothers. Why would’t you want to make it a family affair/family business; have some damn pride in your family. Don’t you think that makes more sense where the Sutter’s are concerned?

    I dont know if you've ever mixed money and family, but it doesnt turn out well most of the time. Someone is always going to get burned. And this isnt a hardware store or a restaurant, its a Hockey club. Coaches and GMs get fired frequently. Someone is asking to get their feelings hurt. And dont say these are big boys who understand the business. It doesnt matter. I'm sure part of Brent Sutter thinks its a good idea, but another wonders if his relationship with Darryl could implode under the right circumstances. Maybe given the 2 choices (Edmonton v Calgary) Brent would sooner avoid possible problems and take Edmonton. Not that I think Brent Sutter is coming to Edmonton.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    I dont know if you’ve ever mixed money and family, but it doesnt turn out well most of the time.

    I think this is different. It's not as though Darryl owns the team and its his money. The way I see it, Darryl's in a position that he has to have the trust in the new guy so much so that he'd put his own job on the line. I've said it time and time again, this could be his last hire (if he has 2 more hires, that would suggest the 1st one wasn't a good hire, which would suggest his own job could/should be up for grabs). I guess it's a wait & see for us, but I just don't buy the "why would he work for his bro" angle.

  • Hippy

    @ Archaeologuy:
    And I see your point… if I was working for my uncle for 19 bux an hour as a carpenter while he told me what to do all day and I showed up hungover on occasion wanting to tell him to go Fffff his hat.

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    RossCreek wrote:

    I don’t get the whole ” why would Brent want to go work for his big bro” argument. These people that say this must have some pretty shittttty brothers. Why would’t you want to make it a family affair/family business; have some damn pride in your family. Don’t you think that makes more sense where the Sutter’s are concerned?
    I dont know if you’ve ever mixed money and family, but it doesnt turn out well most of the time. Someone is always going to get burned. And this isnt a hardware store or a restaurant, its a Hockey club. Coaches and GMs get fired frequently. Someone is asking to get their feelings hurt. And dont say these are big boys who understand the business. It doesnt matter. I’m sure part of Brent Sutter thinks its a good idea, but another wonders if his relationship with Darryl could implode under the right circumstances. Maybe given the 2 choices (Edmonton v Calgary) Brent would sooner avoid possible problems and take Edmonton. Not that I think Brent Sutter is coming to Edmonton.

    There is even more to it than that. Brent is a bit of a dark sheep in that family. I don't mean that to have the usual connotations, I just mean that he is different.

    Everybody's opinion on the matter are based on what they would do, but none of us have any idea what he will do. Some people think that he didn't go to Calgary before because they hatched a secret plan to have him go elsewhere first, regardless of the public support for him being hired last time. This is essentially the opinion of Flames fans who want Brent in Calgary and wish he came last time.

    There are other who believe that the 2 brothers probably talked about it and decided to go a different route. This is what I believe mostly because of things that are commonly known about the dynamics between them and because this is what I have been told by some people who know the Sutters. This still does not mean he won't end up in Calgary because they could just as easily decide that this time they want to go through with it.

    I cannot decide what I think will happen with him. I would like him in Edmonton but there is a fair chance he ends up in Calgary or out of the NHL altogether. I do know that a guy like Brent is definitely not a lock to coach somewhere because his brothers work there, in fact that could just as easily be the reason he chooses not to coach in Calgary.

  • Hippy

    Harlie wrote:

    Crawford was .596 in Colorado

    And he was way less than .596 elsewhere, which is exactly why coaching records don't mean all that much compared to player personnel. Although after listening to him do colour for CBC, I'm suspicious that he may have developed brain damage somewhere between Colorado and LA.

  • Hippy

    MattL wrote:

    Harlie wrote:
    Crawford was .596 in Colorado
    And he was way less than .596 elsewhere, which is exactly why coaching records don’t mean all that much compared to player personnel. Although after listening to him do colour for CBC, I’m suspicious that he may have developed brain damage somewhere between Colorado and LA.

    I seem to recall that Colorado had a pretty good netminder too…

  • Hippy

    Flames fans, Oil fans, lets all join together to ensure that Crawford doesn't end up in Alberta. I couldn't take listening to him on a daily basis. After that, we can go back to our respective sides and carry on.

    Marc, WE DON'T WANT YOU IN OUR PROVINCE…EEEEEEEEVER!

  • Hippy

    Mike Keenan and Jim Playfair have posted identical points percentages with the Calgary Flames. I wonder what that means, exactly.

    This means that the rot in Calgary goes deeper than just the coaching. And if I'm Brent Sutter I stay away from this star-crossed team.

    I remember Playfair's tenure very clearly and he was roasted for problems that were present under Darryl Sutter and are present with Keenan too. And I suspect that as Calgary's excellent ownership approaches the off-season and does their organisation review, we might be surprised by the moves they make.

    I personally think the bloom is off the Darryl Sutter rose, since he is the architect of this perennial one and done team, especially this year with the arm-twisting to get Jokinen (boy did that work out!). I don't necessarily think he will be gone after this season, but I think next year is his last chance. But I do think there needs to be a change in the way the Flames are made-up.

    Anyways, to summarise, I think Playfair got a bum rap for being a decent coach of a heartless team, Brent Sutter will not choose to go there and that the Flames will continue their pattern of regular season up and down with another first round exit next year.

    And, as an Oil fan, I can only hope for that level of success next year. *Grits teeth in resigned frustration*

  • Hippy

    With regards to the possibility of Brent Sutter coaching in Edmonton, it may be meaningless but there hase never been Sutter employed by the Edmonton Oilers at any level. This puts Edmonton in a very small number of teams that have never had a Sutter in their system.

  • Hippy

    Jonathan Willis wrote:

    "And as a side point, if you don’t like statisitcs I’d strongly suggest skipping over a good portion of my work because I think they add value."

    But remember that Scotty Bowman was quoted as saying "Statistics are for losers"

    And mark Twain quipped:
    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"

  • Hippy

    I just read Willis' blog on yahoo! sports, the eulogy to the flames.. Solid gold. The picture of Dion Phaneuf shows what it truly takes to become an NHL star. The difference between the Flames and a training bra? A training bra has two cups… NICE!

  • Hippy

    Ref wrote:

    Jonathan Willis wrote:
    “And as a side point, if you don’t like statisitcs I’d strongly suggest skipping over a good portion of my work because I think they add value.”
    But remember that Scotty Bowman was quoted as saying “Statistics are for losers”
    And mark Twain quipped:
    “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics”

    What is your point? Didn't he just say to skip it if you don't like it?

    I once quipped:
    If you cannot come up with an original thought, and instead express yourself entirely with quotations, then maybe you shouldn't bother speaking at all.

  • Hippy

    So let me understand this Mact's record is 152 win 141 losses and 35 overtimes losses. That means he coached 328 games and won 152 times for a winning percentage of 463. Just be ause the losses occurred in overtime does not mean they don't exist! A loss is a loss regardless of whether it occurred in three periods or three periods and a five minutes!!!!

  • Hippy

    @ Big Deal:
    I have always contended that the way hockey formulates its "winning percentage" is whacky. Shouldnt it be a stat that displays how often a team/coach/goalie wins the games they play in? Instead, it shows how often they do not lose in regulation time, which isnt the same at all.

    But people get their feathers ruffled when you suggest that the way things are done dont make sense.

  • Hippy

    @ Archaeologuy:

    Yeah, I find it weird too. Like people say the Oilers finished the season 3 games over .500, despite the fact that they won 38 games and lost 44.

  • Hippy

    Ref wrote:

    But remember that Scotty Bowman was quoted as saying “Statistics are for losers”

    I've never heard that, but if he really made that statement he was being a complete hypocrite. His nickname in Pittsburgh was "Rainman" because of his incredible grasp of statistics.

    If you think statistics are useless, you don't have an ally in Scotty Bowman.

  • Hippy

    Further on that, from a Sports Illustrated article about Scotty Bowman:

    "He is comfortable with numbers, more comfortable with numbers than he is with people."

  • Hippy

    I used points percentage here because that's the most important number for teams looking at a playoff spot.

    If I ruled the world, there wouldn't be OT points; just a straight win-loss count.

  • Hippy

    Jonathan Willis wrote:

    If I ruled the world, there wouldn’t be OT points; just a straight win-loss count

    That's the only way that makes sense now that there are no ties. People are tossing out ideas like 3 points for regulation wins 2 points for OT wins blah blah blah. Why? There is a system in place that allows for the categories to be simplified to either Wins or Losses, so why hire a Mathematologist to figure out who makes the playoffs?

  • Hippy

    Archaeologuy wrote:

    If I ruled the world,

    Also, if I ruled the world, there would only be 24 teams in the NHL and none of them would be located in the southern US. Dallas, your on notice.

    The instigator rule would be abandoned and hitting to the head would be encouraged, but the plastic armour they call pads would be changed to softer material.

    Anyone who suggests increasing the size of nets or changing to a 4 on 4 format would be exiled to Antarctica and they would be erased from history. Not even a birth certificate.

    Thus concludes Day One of Archaeologuy's reign.