Jack Adams nominees

[Tobias Funke]

Mike Babcock, Todd McLellan and John Tortorella

@FriedgeHNIC: RT @reporterchris: Jack Adams nominees: Mike Babcock, Todd McLellan and John Tortorella.

m.twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC

[PrairieDog]

Wow that's a tough one - it'll go to Babcock though.

For me it's between Babcock and Mclellan, toss a coin.

[Axeman33]

Who knows on this one but my money's on Torts.

[plug]

I'd go torts.

[pmorrow]

Wouldn't be shocked by any of the three, but I'd say Torts and Babcock probably finished top 2.

[JagrBomb]

1 - Torts
2 - Babcock

[ericdaoust]

Torts will win.

[Mr. Guru]

Babcock should win

[Rylant]

Not that Babcock didn't do a great job, but I think he is the least deserving of the 3 of them. I think Torts deserves it, but he is so widely disliked, I think that works against him. Also, I think McLellan gets some votes based on how horrible the Oil have been for so long.

Just out of curiousity, the Jack Adams trophy is supposed to go to the coach judged to have contributed the most to his team's success. How exactly is that decided? How do they measure what exactly a coach brings to his team? It seems a little arbitrary to me. A lot of times, I see it going to the team which is most-improved over the previous season or seasons. Is that necessarily the coach's contribution?

Rylant

[pmorrow]

Not that Babcock didn't do a great job, but I think he is the least deserving of the 3 of them. I think Torts deserves it, but he is so widely disliked, I think that works against him. Also, I think McLellan gets some votes based on how horrible the Oil have been for so long.

Just out of curiousity, the Jack Adams trophy is supposed to go to the coach judged to have contributed the most to his team's success. How exactly is that decided? How do they measure what exactly a coach brings to his team? It seems a little arbitrary to me. A lot of times, I see it going to the team which is most-improved over the previous season or seasons. Is that necessarily the coach's contribution?

Rylant

Here's my thoughts on it:

Torts: That team always looked good on paper to me until they got rid of Johansen. They seemed to find their way nonetheless with Dubinsky and Wennberg and other contributors. But still, a healthy Bobrovsky was the big difference. They always had good defencemen in Jones, Murray and Savard, and Werenski was a gigantic addition. Their forward depth was always great but they got breakout/surprise performances from Atkinson and Gagner. Overall I think this was always a good team that just was junk last year and people expected them to suck again because most people don't like Torts as a coach.

Babs: I don't think anyone expected this year from the Leafs. The Jack Adams seems to be about who was surprisingly good this year. A starting goalie and a huge crop of rookies supported by some Burke/Nonis era holdovers carried this team to the playoffs. A good year, a surprising year, but they barely got in nonetheless. I think the surprise factor may push him over the finish line first.

McLellan: This one might be the hardest to vote for because McDavid is so good that it's hard to see any other reason why they made the playoffs. Which is probably unfair to McLellan who took this team from the basement of the NHL to inches from a Pacific Division Championship.

I think it's down to Babs and Torts but I think Babs will win because the surprise factor seems to win over voters.

[Sulla]

A good case can be made for all three... One thing is for sure - whoever loses this has still done a fine job as a coach

[blayze]

Babcock will and should win.

From last to the playoffs with a bunch of rag tag rookies. Nuff said.

[Pengwin7]

Torts for me.
I actually had the Leafs predicted to make the playoffs in the East - though Babcock definitely deserves a nod.
I did not have the BJs as a playoff team, they came out of nowhere, IMO.
Torts got the most out of that PP by fusing-in Werenski and Sam effin Gagner and Alex Wennberg. Whoda thunk - those guys were part of the magical five.
And the green light he gave to Cam Atkinson certainly paid off.
Overall - the team was very balanced, the worst +/- among their regulars was a -4 (Calvert, Foligno).
108pts from THIS roster... I mean... damn... that is one impressive year from a skater-group that I would only call "average" among NHL teams by talent.
I think Babcock's disposition as a more modest/calm individual will get him some 1st place votes... but Torts, here, deserves it by a landslide.

[Kofax]

Torts for me.
I actually had the Leafs predicted to make the playoffs in the East - though Babcock definitely deserves a nod.
I did not have the BJs as a playoff team, they came out of nowhere, IMO.
Torts got the most out of that PP by fusing-in Werenski and Sam effin Gagner and Alex Wennberg. Whoda thunk - those guys were part of the magical five.
And the green light he gave to Cam Atkinson certainly paid off.
Overall - the team was very balanced, the worst +/- among their regulars was a -4 (Calvert, Foligno).
108pts from THIS roster... I mean... damn... that is one impressive year from a skater-group that I would only call "average" among NHL teams by talent.
I think Babcock's disposition as a more modest/calm individual will get him some 1st place votes... but Torts, here, deserves it by a landslide.

I see it the other way personally. I always felt Columbus had the talent in place, but due to significant injuries last year they underachieved. Bobrovsky was bound to be better this season and to me, it was easy to see this coming and a return to the playoffs should have been expected. Yes, the 108 points was a surprise but is due to that 16 game run they had, which in part is due to luck. Take that away and you're likely looking at a 92-98 point team which is exactly where I would have expected them. The comment regarding Werenski, Gagner and Atkinson is fair (Wennberg would have been a no-brainer there, he finished very strong last season). So Torts is deserving yes, but I feel like everything was in place for this to happen regardless of who the coach ended up being.

Babcock on the other hand was dealing with a team of rookies, who typically require a significant amount of coaching to adjust to the NHL. Not only that, but their defense core is not one envied by many if any. They struggled early with playing defense and holding down leads, but once Babcock managed to get them to understand the system and the defense fell in line, they were able to will their way into the palyoffs. Combine that with the scoring balance across the entire lineup, and to me it's no question that Babcock is the one who deserves it by a landslide. I don't think another coach would have been able to pull this off with the same group.

[ericdaoust]

Columbus rising the way they did reminds me of Colorado in some ways. This time it's Bobrovsky winning a Jack Adams for his coach.