Friedman: Islanders Need To Strongly Consider Firing Jack Capuano This Summer
By Daniel Friedman
» More Columns
Over the course of this everlasting coaching debate, a common defense of Jack Capuano has been that it's the players who've made the mistakes and lost the games.
After all, Capuano wasn't the one who coughed up the puck right in front of his own net late in the third period, nor was he the one who took that idiotic hooking penalty that led to a power-play goal against in overtime. It wasn't Capuano who failed to make that routine save midway through the second period, and he wasn't the one skating like molasses, lacking any energy or drive to start the hockey game.
In fairness, the players definitely bear responsibility and this is not to excuse them. However, they're not the only ones.
Then comes the inevitable "you can't fire 20 players, so you fire the coach" supporting argument. In summary: The coach can do no wrong, and really, it's the players who are entirely at fault. This theory also basically suggests that the coach serves little to no purpose whatsoever, which is also utter nonsense.
If you think coaching doesn't play an integral role in a team's success, just look at what Scotty Bowman did over his career behind the bench. Look back upon the history of this organization and what Al Arbour was able to accomplish. Was his presence irrelevant?
Not recent enough for you? How about what Mike Babcock's done in Detroit?
Coaching is extremely important, in the sense that it establishes a proper mindset and winning culture, pays close attention to details and fixes things that need to be resolved. If you're a franchise that's trying to become elite – especially if you're still pretty young and inexperienced – you cannot do it without good coaching.
But don't just take my word for it – consider the following:
The LA Kings lost in the first round two years in a row under Terry Murray, and then brought in Darryl Sutter. They've won two Stanley Cups in three years.
The young-but-promising Chicago Blackhawks fired Denis Savard just four games into the 2008-09 season, replacing him with Joel Quenneville. Chicago failed to qualify for the playoffs for two seasons under Savard, while the Quenneville era has gone significantly better for the 'Hawks.. They, too, have won a pair of Stanley Cups.
The St. Louis Blues, ripe with youth and talent, eventually brought in Ken Hitchcock. And after failing to qualify for the playoffs the previous two seasons, they won the division and went to the Western Conference semis in his very first year.
The Rangers were right on the cusp of becoming a great team, but they realized Tom Renney wasn't going to be the guy to get them there. So they brought in John Tortorella, who got them within two wins of a Stanley Cup Final appearance. Then, they replaced him with Alain Vigneault, who helped them get into the Final.
Even the Pittsburgh Penguins, who went to the Final under Michel Therrien in 2008, ousted him and brought in Dan Bylsma -- a move I still don't think was an upgrade. But perhaps it was a wake-up call and, in any event, the Pens won a Stanley Cup the year he arrived.
Want more proof? The Washington Capitals were ready to take the next step in 2007-08, but it wasn't going to happen under Glen Hanlon. The Caps decided to do something about it, firing Hanlon and bringing in Bruce Boudreau.
The response? Washington's first playoff appearance since 2003, and their first division title since 2001.
After underperforming in the playoffs, then missing the postseason altogether under Boudreau and other stopgap options, the Caps went all-in. They hired a no-nonsense veteran bench boss named Barry Trotz (you may have heard of him before). As a result, they've become a more responsible team in their own zone -- a more disciplined team -- and they're going back to the playoffs.
There are other recent examples: Jon Cooper in Tampa Bay, Dave Tippett in Arizona (with the exception of this season, which is the first time the Coyotes have ever had a losing record on his watch), Paul Maurice in Winnipeg and Bob Hartley in Calgary, among others.
Patrick Roy in Colorado also works, even though the Avs are going to miss the playoffs this year. He's still had a noticeable positive effect on the way that young team has performed.
If I wanted to expand this to previous decades I could go on, but I think you get the point. It's crystal clear that bringing in a new coach to take the next step is not only a good idea, but a common occurrence.
Now you might say that just because everyone else is doing it, that doesn't mean the Islanders should. However, the "if everyone else jumped off of a building" argument doesn't really work here, because virtually everyone else who has done this (and done so correctly) has benefited immensely from it.
Barring a deep playoff run (and even then, I think it should still be considered), it is time for the Islanders to go in a different direction with their head coach.
This is not about irrational panic or frustration, it's not about simply losing hockey games and it's not about rooting for someone to lose his job. It's about reality.
This is about the fact that there are generally two types of coaches in this league. There are those who are better at working with younger, developing teams or projects.
And then there are those who know how to take those younger players and help them make the big leap. They know how to manage veterans and navigate the rougher seas of March, April, May and June. Rarely do you find a coach who can do both.
Capuano is the former, and by no means would I say he isn't an NHL-caliber coach, because he is. I think there are quite a few teams he would fit with very nicely.
He's just not the right coach for the Islanders anymore.
They're growing up, and now they need someone who personifies the latter, who has been through the battles and knows what it takes to get to that next level.
You can tell by the way he coaches that he's still in project mode. He continues to mishandle his younger players. He tweaks and tinkers with his lineup to no end, even though he's at a point in the season when he should have at least some sense of consistency in this regard – even with injuries.
You get a real sense that there are crucial areas and situations where this team just doesn't quite "get it" yet, whether it's protecting third-period leads, getting bodies in front of the net, playing for 60 minutes or having clearer communication between defensive partners. You get a sense that this is still an unfinished product at a juncture where it should be more fully featured.
The Islanders are still somewhat of a project, but they're at phase four, while Capuano's still stuck at phase two or three.
Unfortunately, there aren't any "can't miss" candidates to choose from. I say "unfortunately," because the Isles opted not to take advantage of the plethora of coaching geniuses that were available last summer.
Still, there are quality names that could be available. Guy Boucher, Guy Carbonneau (I can't understand how he hasn't found work by now), Marc Crawford and, yes, even Ron Wilson are all viable options that I think would be solid hires. If Arizona lets go of Tippett, that would be an ideal choice.
The only way Babcock will coach in Brooklyn is if his team's playing the Islanders on the road. Personally, I don't think he's leaving Detroit, but should he decide to I don't see him coming here.
It is time for the Islanders to reach their full potential, and in order to do that they need a more seasoned, more experienced head coach. Just like the Blackhawks, Kings and Blues did, and like many others have done before them.
This is not about ranting and raving. On the contrary, this is about being rational and collected. It's about common sense and logic.
You want to become an elite contender? Go out and get a proven coach. Capuano's done lots of good things with this club, but this is about as far as he can take them.
No, you can't fire 20 players. The good news is that you don't have to.
Follow Daniel Friedman on Twitter @DFriedmanOnNYI.
