A Reaction to Lou Lamoriello's Comments on Jacques Lemaire's Future in New Jersey
The offseason has officially begun after an awful Game 5 performance that saw the New Jersey Devils eliminated by the Philadelphia Flyers. As a result, Lou Lamoriello - among other Devils - have been subject many questions from the media today. I agree that it's getting old that these questions are being asked in late April instead of, say, mid-May; but it is what it is. Lou held a conference call prior to additional interviews with the media and so Lou's quotes are pretty much the story of today. The transcript was both reported by Rich Chere and Tom Gulitti this afternoon. Please take the time to read them if you haven't already.
Were a Devils fan to take Lou's words at value, they probably wouldn't be very happy with his responses. Especially about Jacques Lemaire, where Lou seemed to be pretty clear about his future as a Devil. Here's what Tom Gulitti reported from the transcript with respect to Jacques Lemaire returning as head coach:
"There’s no question that he will be back unless you know something I don’t know," Lamoriello said this afternoon on a conference call. "Those type of even questions and topics are asked all the time. It is what it is. We haven’t even discussed any of this, but there’s no question in my mind (Lemaire will be back) unless there is something I don’t know."
However, before you angrily type angry comments on blogs and message boards about how terrible it is and how Lou hasn't made any immediate changes, take a step back and read the quote a little more closely. I don't think it is as definitive as it looks on it's face. Possible, sure. But I'd like to offer my reaction after the jump.
Today, Lou answered nearly all of the questions in the conference call in a very diplomatic fashion. The repeated theme in most answers was that Lou has a lot of questions and a lot to evaluate before making any decisions. To that end, Lou was conciliatory as possible with respect to the coaching issue, which I want to focus on since in most sports a common response to when
Personally, I think not saying much more than "Right now, he's the guy." is the right move. Making wholesale changes for the team immediately after a horrible loss to a rival in the first round of the playoffs for the second time in three years is going to be based out of emotion more than proper evaluation. If the decision is to keep him, then not much has to be done. If the decision is to fire him, there's more than enough time to consider if it's a necessary move and then find an appropriate replacement. A case can be made and explained for his termination.
Before jumping into Lou's response, let me bring up this quote, taken from Gulitti's post about the conference call, first. It's not only the most direct thing Lou said today:
"We did not get it done in the playoffs and that’s what we have to look at. Does this team have the playoff-built? There’s no question in my mind that it did and does. It didn’t get it done. You can look at different areas. You can start with specialty teams. One team capitalized and one team didn’t. Why. We can go to another area. You cannot put any blame on goaltending. We had good goaltending. So, in saying all of that, you go down and you pull out, evaluate, you look at films, you look at games, you look at turning points, you look at situations and you try to come up with the best decision to make some personnel decisions."
"You just don’t just do things for the sake of doing them. There has to be a reason for it."
It's also the most important thing to keep in mind throughout the offseason.
I want to highlight something in Lou's quote. Here's what Tom Gulitti reported from Lou with respect to Jacques Lemaire returning as head coach (emphasis mine):
"There’s no question that he will be back unless you know something I don’t know," Lamoriello said this afternoon on a conference call. "Those type of even questions and topics are asked all the time. It is what it is. We haven’t even discussed any of this, but there’s no question in my mind (Lemaire will be back) unless there is something I don’t know."
I've bolded the most important thing to keep in mind with respect to the coaching situation. The tell here is that he doesn't have all the information yet. Basically, given what Lou knows, he'd keep Lemaire around. However, since he hasn't had the discussions with Lemaire and management about his future, this is where the evaluation comes into play. When Lou and his staff sits down, reviews the games, examines the film, and considers the take from both the players and the coaches, then Lou will realize the information he doesn't currently know. Then, he could have questions in his mind about whether Lemaire has to be the man going forward.
Besides, given how much this playoff loss was like the 2008 playoff loss, it'd be entirely consistent and defensible for the coach to be given another shot. Brent Sutter changed his lines as much as Lemaire if not moreso throughout 2007-08, the Devils couldn't "get up" for a playoff series against Our Hated Rivals, the Devils lost in 5 games in the first round, and Sutter got another year. Mind you, Sutter didn't have the additional challenge of dealing with a season where he had the team succeed in spite of several injuries to important players.
Moreover, you may have read this quote by Lemaire - originally reported by Gulitti after Game 5 - and think that Lemaire lost the players:
"We had before the game a certain way to do when we get the puck at the blue line and we had quite a few power plays and we did it once," Lemaire said. "At a time, I asked a player, ‘Why are we not doing it?’ and there was no answer."
I look at this and wonder who that player was. Especially if they are a veteran of the team. In that case, the player would've been coached by several different people now and after multiple coaching changes, a reference like this says a lot more about the player than the coach. It tells me that the problem lies with the player and yet another a coaching change isn't likely to fix that. It speaks to the root problem of the Devils' failure in this postseason: the mindset and attitude wasn't confident enough and didn't lead to positive, smart hockey. To that end, a changing the head coach wouldn't necessarily change much with the team.
Of course, that's one way to look at it and a rather positive way to look at it. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Lou decides that a coaching change must be made. After all, one normally doesn't throw things at a coaching staff and then turn around and think there's no real problem. Lou could easily look at the tapes and conclude that the Devils were thoroughly outcoached and so a change must be made. I can't imagine that Lou is necessarily pleased with Lemaire and the assistants if he went as far as to throw a jar of jelly at them in a tirade. In my recap of Game 5, I listed several ways where the coaches were outdone by the Flyers both in that game and in the series as a whole. I'm sure many will complain about Lemaire's constant line changes; which I think is a bit of a red herring as if it was that big of a problem, why wasn't Lou throwing substances at his staff back in, say, January? Yet, there's plenty to criticize the coach about regardless of the 48-27-7 record he compiled. An argument can be made that ,and to that end, the search for the right man for the job should continue.
Speaking of the staff, perhaps that's where Lou's initial attention will lie. What, pray tell, did Mario Tremblay do this season? What were the roles for Tommy Albelin and Scott Stevens? I don't know, I wish I knew, but I couldn't tell you what those three were responsible for and whether or not what they were responsible for was a success or not. If you can tell me, I and a lot of Devils fans would appreciate it. Perhaps instead of replacing Lemaire, a different assistant with a specific specialty - like, say, a power play coach who has had success with other teams - could make a larger difference in the team's performance.
We shall see in coming weeks. My whole point is that Devils shouldn't see this quote or much of what Lou said in the conference call and assume that Jacques Lemaire is definitely good to go for 2010-11 and that everything is going to be the same with a few tweaks. Lou made especially sure not to throw anyone under the bus so soon after the playoff defeat because he may ultimately decide that the coach or a player or an aspect of the team is important for future success. If anything, read the transcript very closely if you're looking for any tells about what the offseason will hold. Like this one, per Gulitti's report (again, emphasis mine):
So, in addition to trying to re-sign the players you want to keep, should we expect other changes this summer via trade, signing, etc.?
"I don’t have the answer to that question. There’s too much evaluation that has to go on, but I would be very surprised if there were not some changes."
Who knows, Lou may have very well be referring to the coach as well as a player. Let me know what you think about Jacques Lemaire's future in the comments, as well as what you think about Lou's statements.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I maintain that Lou plans on keeping Lemaire around for a couple years until MacLean is ready to move up.
Lou isn’t getting any younger, and I expect that he plans on leaving the team with as many long-term pieces in place as possible before he retires. Jacques certainly isn’t that, being almost 70.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain (?)
64 is almost 70 when you’re talking about a thousand years, but in reality, there’s a huge difference in the two.
Go Jets
Go Devils
The big key for me is Lou saying “unless there is something I don’t know,” at the end of his statement about Lemaire’s status. I agree with the assessment that he doesn’t want to make a coaching change until he hears Lemaire’s side of the story. If he can reasonably conclude that Lemaire’s game plans and adjustments were correct, but the players simply failed to execute, I think Lemaire will be back. If he concludes that Lemaire wasn’t on top of the situations, or that the team had tuned him out by end of the season and playoffs, then Lemaire will likely be gone.
I’m honestly a bit torn about how I feel about a coaching change. I’ve maintained over and over that simply changing coaches probably won’t fix what is clearly a deeper problem. But on the other hand, Lemaire clearly wasn’t able to push the right buttons to light a fire under this team, and even though that’s not entirely on Lemaire, I don’t think it would necessarily be a bad idea if Lou could bring in someone who would bring a little more intensity.
How do we know it was Lemaire?
“We had before the game a certain way to do when we get the puck at the blue line and we had quite a few power plays and we did it once,” Lemaire said. “At a time, I asked a player, ‘Why are we not doing it?’ and there was no answer.”
That player had to be Jamie, because his actions over the last few games and the playoffs fall within the the behavorial criteria of this type of response. (or lack thereof)
But shouldn’t a coach already know what’s going on? Sure it maeks since to ask the players about a problem that he team is having in order to get the players perspective but a coach should be able to see where the problem lies and adjust accordingly. I have no problem with Lemaire’s return next year. This playoff series loss is the result of more than just the player’s performance on the ice and coaching decision. Lord knows that if you read the comments that i have posted in the past you have no doubt about what I am saying. give him another year to make things right and redeem himself. We can give him that much.
Creed: (Play well-Win=Praise) (Play Well-Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy-Win=Criticism) (Play lousy-Lose/Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)
Any violation of this creed is BLASPHEMY!
by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 23, 2010 8:17 PM EDT reply actions
Also, Lemaire's demeanor isn't necessarily a reflection of his coaching style.
It is possible to maintain a media face, a coach face and a family man face. Isn’t it?
Creed: (Play well-Win=Praise) (Play Well-Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy-Win=Criticism) (Play lousy-Lose/Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)
Any violation of this creed is BLASPHEMY!
by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 23, 2010 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions
If that’s Jamie, then I’m going to be totally beside myself.
He’s been around through Burns, Robinson, Lou, Julien, Lou again, Sutter, and now Lemaire.
I repeat: after so many changes, it’s not the coach, it’s the player.
I did maintain that the Devils lost in this series just like they did in 2008 and Sutter was able to get a second year going. I wonder if Lemaire will follow that path.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Apr 23, 2010 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I was actually just thinking about that myself. I thought that Sutter’s second year, overall, was a better year than his first. I think it’s only fair to properly assess a coach once he has at least two years under his belt with the team. That at least gives the coach time to implement and execute his system, and for the players to learn that system with an adequate amount of time. Looking back ,I would have liked to have seen Sutter actually stay for that third year. I think the team was heading in a great direction with Sutter and we saw noticeable improvements by the second year. I would venture to say that Lemaire’s coaching style and gameplan is just a little bit different than Sutters’, although I seem to recall back during last year’s offseason that Lemaire only wanted to make “minor improvements” to the Devil’s playing style.
"We aim above the mark to hit the mark." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Let's be realistic here
Lemaire IS a GOOD coach. No matter how good a coach is, he can’t MAKE the players perform. If they’re off, they’re off. Sure, a coach can rant and rave and throw chairs and stuff, but if the players aren’t getting the job done, there’s no guarantee the coach can really make a difference. The topic of heart came up a lot lately. That’s on the players. Either you have it or you don’t, regardless of who the coach is.
I’d have no problem if Lemaire comes back. Changes are required, for sure. But would a coaching change be one of those requirements, I don’t believe so. A heart transplant is required. That starts at the top of the player heap. If Jamie no longer has it, and I was never a great fan of his, but I will admit he did have the right drive and attitude in the past, but he seems to have lost it. If he no longer has it, someone else should be captain. If it turns out it was an injury or something in his personal life, I’m willing to give him a pass based on past results. But if not, we need a new captain.
Go Jets
Go Devils
I agree with FrankG. Lemaire is a good coach and I think the best play here is to keep him for at least one more year.
There is a very good chance next year might turn out to be the rebuild year. The year I thought this year was….or they may win the Atlantic again. Either one would not surprise me. Having an experienced coach like Lemaire I think is a huge benefit.
If Langenbrunner is the problem. As a fan I have no problems with a demotion or find a way to move him. Honestly he has never been one of my favorites and his response to the scratch a few weeks ago kinda annoyed me.
You know, I thought Langenbrunner played a lot better under Sutter than he did this year with Lemaire. I actually really liked Jamie last year. I thought his game dropped signifcantly in comparison to last year. At least he was a scoring threat under Sutter. Then again, he was also playing with Zajac and Parise just about every night under Sutter, so I guess it would make sense that he had marked improvements in his offensive skill.
"We aim above the mark to hit the mark." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
I think it depends on which half of the season
Langenbrunner’s stats in the first half of the year, I am pretty sure, were actually very solid. He was an assist machine for a while, it seemed to me he was getting assists every game.
I think his pace after the first half would have led to a better season. He hugely dropped off in the 2nd half.
Honestly I also wonder if the olympics actually took something out of both he and Parise, especially him. It had to take alot of emotional energy in that series.
by Devilssection21fan on Apr 23, 2010 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I am glad you mentioned the olympics
Because that when i noticed the change in his play. He just seemed to be burned out.
Creed: (Play well-Win=Praise) (Play Well-Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy-Win=Criticism) (Play lousy-Lose/Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)
Any violation of this creed is BLASPHEMY!
by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 23, 2010 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions
You know, I think you’re right Devilssection21fan. I seem to remember him playing better during the beginning of the year as well. I guess the 2nd half performance has just left a bad taste in my mouth.
"We aim above the mark to hit the mark." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Thing is, he was only 8 points off of matching his career point totals from last year (08-09 29-40-69, 09-10 19-42-61). The obvious difference was the goal to assist ratio.
Conveniently, I did a couple projection threads throughout the season, and in the final one I recapped the early projections (after 13 games) and mid-seasonish (after 38), and his numbers were actually pretty consistent.
Jamie Langenbrunner – Started out with an early projection of 13-44-57, due to his 2-7-9 start. Mid-season projected 19-49-68. He finished 19-42-61…no one thought he’d finish with so many more assists than goals, and not break 20 goals… but here we are.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain (?)
Langenbrunner's numbers....are weird.
Langenbrunner’s pre-Olympic numbers: 61 GP, 15 G, 37 A, 52 Pts, 182 SOG, 8.2 S%
Langenbrunner’s post-Olympic numbers: 20 GP, 4 G, 5 A, 13 Pts. 46 SOG, 8.7%
13 points in 20 games isn’t terrible; but only one point – an empty net game winning PPG in the Buffalo game – in his last 5 says he was slumping going into the playoffs. So, 12 pts. in 15 isn’t a huge drop off.
In terms of halves, well, he was close to a point per game pace after the first two months of 2010: January (13 in 15 GP) and February (7 in 7 GP). Compared to them, the point production rate started dropping in March before cratering in April.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Apr 23, 2010 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Don't 4 goals and 5 assists = 9 points?
Unless I’m getting something wrong.
by Doctor Smack on Apr 23, 2010 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I thought it was 13 points first for some…reason. I made a mistake. I could delete my whole comment and repost it, but that’d be pointless.
4 G, 5 A, 9 Pts.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Apr 23, 2010 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure what to think
It was a systemic failure on all levels. Devils got thoroughly out coached and out played both. The coaches didn’t have an answer for Philly’s super aggressive forecheck or know how to handle their D corps. The players just gave up.
In any case, I’d just be concerned that Lemaire simply either can’t control the players or that he doesn’t know how to change up the play to counter teams that have studied and adapted to the Devil’s style.
I Think Its The Latter
Consider this:
The Devils have been known as a defense-first team since Jacques Lemaire’s first tenure… Lemaire gave the Devils their defensive mantra when he implemented a system commonly called the neutral zone trap. This system is designed to force teams to turn over the puck in the neutral zone leading to a counterattack. This style of play… Nevertheless, the Devils were successful using this style of play…
As you may already know, the Devils are not the only team who use this style:
Larry Robinson asserted that the Montreal Canadiens…used a form of the trap, though it did not have a name
Philly played a similar style in this year’s playoff series nad played it better thatn the Devils. Last year:
Under Brent Sutter, the team adopted less of a trap and more of a transitional, aggressive… forechecking style of play which also emphasized puck possession and instilled the cycle to start This led to many high scoring games early in the 07–08 season for New Jersey.
And now:
…with the return of Jacques Lemaire as head coach, the Devils have resumed a more defense-oriented playing style…
Source of Info Wikipedia
This team has had to transition from one style to another over the past serveral years. Some of the styles were easy to adjust to and others were not. Some teams play a similar style and have played it much better then the Devils for a variety of reasons. Some players like one style and hate others which could account for Jamie’s perceived lack of interest. The problem can be anything but Lemaire’s strategy has pretty much been the same for many of the years that he has been coaching. he has had success. Not sure if any of you see a point in all of this, but maybe I can use some of you as a sounding board by presenting the info above and hopefully we can clear more of the confusion and see if Lemaire is the biggest part of the problem.
Creed: (Play well-Win=Praise) (Play Well-Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy-Win=Criticism) (Play lousy-Lose/Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)
Any violation of this creed is BLASPHEMY!
by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 23, 2010 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Let me start by saying I’d have no problem seeing Lemaire go into retirement, or consulting, or whatever you wish to call it when old coaches call it a career and take off for the golf course, fishing hole, bar, etc., etc., etc. That being said, there are a couple of issues that I think forestall this move, at least for a while.
1. I believe Jacques Lemaire is one of those coaches that Lou will allow to depart on his own terms, when he (Jacques) is ready to go, and not before — unless it is a mid-season change. If Lamorello wants to make a change this summer, he’ll hint to Jacques that it is time to move on, take a consulting role, etc., but I don’t think he’ll fire him unless he’s given no choice in the matter.
2. I don’t think there is a ready-made successor to take over. Johnny Mac might be the coach of the future…. and then again, he might not. I don’t think we can read enough out of one season at Lowell to decide if it is safe to put matters into his hands. Given this is still a “win now” team, and probably will be for the duration of Brodeur’s career, the team won’t be turned over to a neophyte coach.
3. Put this one under scuttlebutt…. but I hear rumors through various middlemen (some of whom are more reliable than others) that there’s a little bit of friction between Lou and the minority owners, to the point that some of the latter (not Vanderbeek) have tried to get Lou fired recently. While I doubt Lamorello is going anywhere anytime soon, the continued shuffling of coaches and playoff failures probably do not help his case any. Given how many times Devils ownership has changed in the last fifteen years or so, it wouldn’t be surprising that there are new voices who wish to impose their will, and Lou might not sit high in their regard. Lou might not have the cachet to keep changing coaches without putting himself at risk.
To be honest, I can live with Lemaire coming back…. if some substantial changes are made to the roster (more youth, more heart)…. and if Lemaire bends some. There’s certainly offensive talent on this team, starting with the talented Mr. Parise, but with the defense not what it was in years past, and Marty no longer what he was at his peak, the scorers have to be let loose to use their creativity and put the puck in the net more. More importantly, the constant shuffling of lines has to stop…. if lines are changed every other game (or more often), there’s no chance for anyone to generate any chemistry, which hinders the offense more than it already is. Players who know each other’s tendencies and preferences play better together, and instinctively put themselves in better positions to create chances and goals. Players who have new linemates every time they step on the ice don’t have that same luxury.
With all due respect, I’d like to keep the scuttlebutt to a minimum. The last thing I want ILWT to be is a place of rumors and all that.
But the other two points are very valid, especially the second. John MacLean ran the power play in recent seasons when he was an assistant and, to be fair, you couldn’t say that they were great power play units in those seasons. That he helped coach Lowell to a playoff spot is great. But he needs more time, I do agree.
I just hope that should Lemaire get a second year he doesn’t fully follow Sutter’s blueprint of keeping lines together at all times regardless of effectiveness and slipping into serious line matching despite the situation (which helped dig the grave against Carolina, but that’s another story).
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Apr 23, 2010 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I brought up the scuttlebutt because it is an example of unseen forces that may have a say in the decision, if there is one to be made. In the same mode as Lou saying “something I don’t know”, there may be things we don’t know (and may never know) and other influences beyond the obvious.
Fair enough. I think Lou’s “something I don’t know” or similar commentary is basically “I don’t have the answer because this requires more than 24-48 hours to truly determine what the problems and potential solutions are.”
Sure, it’s easy for us, the media, other outside people to sit here and say player X should be forced to waive his NTC and be sent off and coach Y needs to go and the Devils have to play like team Z, etc. We don’t have to live with the results of those decisions.
I’m sure there will be changes. But again, now is the worst time to make them. There’s, unfortunately, time to make proper evaluations.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Apr 23, 2010 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Jamie just went through a rough patch just like Zach and Travis did in the middle of the year. Langs has never been a goal scorer and I think last year made people forget that.
There isn’t much I liked about what Lemaire did with the team this year. I really don’t feel like getting in depth about it right now so maybe a fanpost soon. I think Lemaire may have misused a lot of the players though. Maybe thats why they seemed so uninspired.
lou lamoriello
i have no idea if lou himself has even decided what changes he will make with regards to both the coaching staff and the players, but even if he has, or even has a strong idea what changes he is going to make, he sure isn’t going to share those thoughts and ideas with the fans and the media at this stage; all that would do would be to make it all the more difficult to implement those changes…we will just have to sit back, wait and watch, IMHO, anyway…
by don in central jersey on Apr 23, 2010 11:25 PM EDT reply actions
It's Time
For for some personnel changes. I feel that some of the veterans on this team have tuned Lemaire out and that one comment:
“At a time, I asked a player, ‘Why are we not doing it?’ and there was no answer.”
This speaks volumes to me, the coach is asking a player to do something and the player is not willing to do it. I am sure Lemaire will convey that to Lou when the time comes. I do believe that personnel changes will be made because of it. Whoever that player was it will probably mean the end for him in Jersey.
In his parting words Chico mentioned it is three years in a row that the team failed miserably to meet expectations in the playoffs. He felt strongly that the team feeling in the dressing room was that this would be the last time they would all be together. I think that is a safe bet now. You can’t continue to go with something that obviously is not working, you find out what particular part is failing and remove and replace it. Was it Jamie Langenbrunner’s leadership? Was there some lack of character in the locker room? Was it purely a lack of personnel that prevented Lemaire’s plan from being carried out on the ice? Is there enough skill on the backend to compliment the forwards on this team?
Broduer probably has a year or two of effective hockey left in him. Time has been kind to him but it will catch up him eventually. It happens to all the greats whether they like it or not. Which brings up another question. What goalie will replace him? Jeff Frazee is good and he answered a lot of questions about his character this year but he is largely unproven.
All questions that will be answered this offseason. I know it is difficult to effect change in a salary cap environment and even more so since a lot of players have NTC’s in their contracts. The Devils are no different but clearly something has to be done to get the Devils over the one and done playoff hump.
You're Next!

by 

















