John Ahlers Previews Our 2010-11 Ducks

Posted: 09/30/2010 by bc in Uncategorized

Ahlers is amusing. He’s the only play by play announcer I’ve ever heard who openly disagrees with his sidekick color commentator.  Not that Brian Hayward, after 11 years in the NHL and NBC’s first choice for color man or ESPN’s pick to interview a sitting U.S. President deserves…

any respect or benefit of the doubt. Everybody’s an expert so long as they have an opinion right?

In this “Ducks Preview” John Ahlers says Randy “Elmer Fudd” Carlyle has identified four areas where our Ducks need improvement. Ahlers gets it half right, which makes it a worthwhile read. ‘Elmer’ is definitely working on the PK and the defense.

The most common problem with deductive reasoning and educated guesses is that such exercises produce good results only when the underlying assumptions are accurate.

Ahlers has it in his head that two of  ‘Elmer’s’ four problem areas are the October and Division records. These aren’t things a coach can impact directly.

Two areas that Coach is working on is finding secondary scoring and chemistry throughout the lineup.

John Ahlers strikes me as a nice guy. Usually, play by play guys stick to who’s got the puck and what’s he doing with it. Then there’s the MC duties, where they do their best Ryan Seacrest. Which is to say keep the program moving and get the heck out of the way.

I’m not sure this expanded job description of occasional hockey expert really works for John Ahlers.

A good executive producer, like a good coach, might man up and say, “Ducks don’t always put Ahlers in situations where he can succeed.”

  1. czhokej says:

    We will be watching RC’s coaching very closely this season. So far there is very little indication that Carlyle has learned too much from previous failures. I know, it’s too early to tell, but if the problems continue, we should go head-hunting. John Ahlers in his analysis did not touch any specific problems, any details. He stated some obvious facts
    (was it a fear of conflicting situation?). Basically he stayed on the surface of the deep crisis, which I believe has quite a few interesting and odd facets.

  2. bilverado says:

    Re: “Ahlers has it in his head that two of ‘Elmer’s’ four problem areas are the October and Division records. These aren’t things a coach can impact directly.”

    I kind of think a coach can directly impact these. These two don’t derive directly from X’s and O’s like the PK and defense, but I think they do result directly from whether or not a coach is doing a good job — assuming they have the tools or players to get the job done.

    For the October record, it’s the coach’s job to get them ready for the season, to ensure they are prepared and properly motivated to play their best. If the players aren’t prepared or motivated or, worse yet, have already tuned out the coach in the first 20 games and drop behind the pack early, it seems to me the coach isn’t doing his job.

    As far as the Division record, when a coach fails to change or disguise his “system” — and the team does the same thing night after night and game after game with the same results — it makes a team throughly predicatable against the teams they play the most. And, more often than not, when you become predictable, you are beatable.

  3. BackCheck says:

    Welcome to the blog bilverado,that’s about as nice I get 😉

    I hear ya and in context you’re right. Is there a broader context worth considering?

    My disagreement with John Ahlers is that the Division record and getting off to a good start are results of good coaching. Not something the coach sets as one of his four priorities. If he does, those priorities are misplaced.

    The coach/player relationship or dynamic is very close to the parent/child. Those who’ve been both parent/child know, heart of hearts, children pay for the mistakes of the parents. I think the same is true with the coach/player.

    Keep it system simple. Stay consistent.

    Coach Carlyle is anything but simple and consistent. Like Elmer Fudd, RC’s a tinkerer and anal retentive planner. He’ll twick those cwazy wabbits.

    As opposed to say a Lindy Ruff or Tom Reney, who’s teams always seem to either outperform or meet expectations.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s