Montreal Canadiens

Carbonneau firing: the blame game

After a month of ignominious on ice performance (not to mention questionable off ice behaviour) in which the Canadiens, at one point compiled a 3 win 12 loss record, Bob Gainey took action, by firing Guy Carbonneau. The media immediately went into over drive, trying to determine whether Gainey was simply trying to deflect blame from himself for the teams recent ineptitude, or whether he was forced into the decision by owner George Gillette. The hyper active, sensationalist Montreal media predominately took two perspectives on the Carbo termination. One perspective: Gainey used Carbonneau as a scapegoat for his own incompetency as a general manager. The second perspective: pressure from ownership to ensure that the Habs make the playoffs, and secure valuable, lucrative playoff revenue. To that end, Gainey acquiesed to ownership and sacraficed his long time friend to create the impression that he was doing all he could to ensure a playoff seeding for the Habs. These two theories, have displaced all perspective on analyzing the move for what it is: Carbonneau was fired because the Habs were underacheiving in relation to the talent level of the team.

In less than one year, the Canadiens had gone from a first place conference finish, featuring the number one ranked powerplay, an emerging youth core that had considerable upside potential, and a team that lead the league in scoring to a team that was struggling to make the playoffs. In the off season, Gainey fortified the team with the additions of Tanguay, Lang and Laraque. Yet, after a blistering 8-1-1 start, the team has been mired in mediocrity, playing essentially at a 500 level over the past 56 games. In Carbonneau’s defense, injuries have taken a toll on the team this season. Nonetheless, it does not absolve Carbonneau of the various deficiencies in his coaching methods and strategies, that substantially contributed to the backward slide of the team.

The most alarming aspect to Carbonneau, was his lack of progression as a coach. Despite upgrades in personnel, the same on ice problems persisted. Horrendous defensive zone coverage, lazy inexcusable penalties, reflecting a lack of on ice discipline. An inconsistent forechecking system. Continual problems in gap control between the defense and the forwards. An overall, lack of structure in the Habs play in all three zones on the ice. During the teams horrific west coast trip, it would be impossible for any analyst watching the Canadiens to come away with the impression that they were a well coached team. Puck support on breakouts was non existent. Coaching requires continual evolution in strategies and tactics. The Canadiens powerplay went from a number one rating, to twentieth in the league. Teams recognized how the Canadiens set up their powerplay, and countered to negate its effectiveness. Carbo did virtually nothing to adapt to those strategies. All season long, the powerplay remained static, there was little or no innovation to improve its effectiveness.

Under Carboneau’s tutelage, the majority of the Canadiens youth core (the clubs biggest asset) regressed. There appeared to be no effective teaching in terms of refining the skills of the younger players. Basic mistakes in terms of reading and reacting to a developing play were made over and over by players such as Komisarek. In many respects, this disturbing development on to its own would be just cause for Carbo’s dismissal.

As a coach, communication is an absolute requirement to success. Players need to know their roles and responsibilities and what is expected of them. Somewhere along the line, Carbonneau shirked this responsiblity. Time and again, role players to star players intimated that there was virtually no communication from the coach.

The hallmark of Carbonneau’s coaching tenure in Montreal was his incessant line juggling, and his steadfast insistence to roll four lines through out a game. Players quickly became alienated from Carbonneau, due to his changing of line combinations at the first sign of adversity. Chemistry on forward combinations often takes months to evolve. Patience is required, and often the wait is worth the eventual payoff. Putting line combinations into a blender every other game is not a receipe for success.

In the end, Carbooneau was an incongruous fit for the Canadiens. Gainey had designed a team that emphasized speed, puck possession, opportunism, and a fluid free flowing offensive attack. Last season, Carbo allowed offensive creativity, as long as it did not detract from defensive responsibility. This season, too many Hab players tried to take short cuts in terms of play away from the puck. To that end, they deserve some of the blame for the failing s of Carbonneau. Nonetheless, it is a coach’s responsibility for the players to adhere and to execute a system of play. Carbonneau undermined his own credibility by not having the Habs play to their strengths, by delegating almost as much ice time to the teams grinders as he did to the more talented offensive players.

Conspiracy theorists may hypothesize that Gainey faced undue pressure from management to do something radical to jump start the team and ensure a post season appearance. On the surface, that perception may have some merit. It was only a few weeks ago that Gainey stated his best move during his tenure as gm was to hire Carbonneau as the coach.Some critics, point out that a radical turnaround from a patient conservative individual is not in character for Gainey. The reality, was the Habs were badly floundering, playing way below their capabilities. The on ice performance indicated, fairly or unfairly, Carbo had lost the locker room. The business, and sport can be brutal. Carbonneau was a casuality of inflated expectations , based on the teams past seasons performance. The team regressed this season, and to some extent, that was on Carbonneau.

Gainey may be soft spoken, and understated in his demeanour, but that should not be mistaken for weakness. As a player, Gainey gave no quarter, and did whatever it took to win games. As a general manager Gainey has shown to be ruthless and calculating in his evaluation of personnel, with the one underlying agenda, to win. He accurately spotted a weak link in the chain, and made the move to rectify it. Carbonneau simply had not evolved into the coach with the necessary abilities at present to elevate the Canadiens. A change, was necessary.