In a move everyone saw coming for weeks now, the Boston Bruins have relieved Jim Montgomery from his coaching duties.  He has been replaced on an interim basis by assistant coach Joe Sacco.  Let’s take a look at why it came to this and where the Bruins go from here.

As I have been pointing out since the season started, Monty was set up to fail this season and fail he did.  After the Bruins loss to Columbus, it’s 3^rd in a row, their record stands at 8-9-3.  They are currently outside of the playoff.  The team is second to last in goals per game and 27^th in goals against per game.  Their power play is ranked dead last and their penalty kill is 25^th overall while they have the most penalty minutes in the league.  For a team with playoff aspirations, these numbers will, and probably should, get your coach fired.     

However, as bad as those numbers are, I feel that the reason Monty was finally let go is because he had clearly lost the locker room.  The team has played pretty flat, uninspired hockey all season long.  He tried multiple things to try to get the team going but none of it worked.  The line shuffling did not work at all.  Neither did the line up changes.  He tried yelling at them on the bench.  That didn’t work.  He tried calling out the Captain, Brad Marchand, during the game.  That did not work.  He tried calling the team and even individual players out in the media.  That, you guessed it, did not work.  When everything a coach says and does falls on deaf ears and at best has no affect on the team and at worst, has the opposite effect, it’s time to move on.  Losing the locker room is the one thing a coach can not do.  If, for what ever reason, a team is tuning out their coach, in any sport, the coach needs to be replaced.  It had become obvious that this was happening with the Bruins thus Monty needed to be relieved of his duties. 

That’s how Montgomery failed.  Now let’s talk about why he failed.  As I mentioned coming into this season Monty was set up to fail in multiple ways.  The first was in his lame duck status.  I have talked about this before so all I am going to say is that lame duck coaches never work.  It just makes it too easy for teams to tune him out and turn on him.  They know they have long term contracts and he’s on his way out the door.  When things go bad it’s very hard to rally around someone you know the organization has no faith in and is looking to dump.  Now, you can talk about players being professionals and that they should just go out there and do their jobs but this is the real world and these are the things that happen in the real world.  With Monty coaching for his job, he coached very impatiently and very, shall I say, forcefully.  That seemed to turn the players off and instead of maybe rallying around their coach in spite of the front office’s view on him, they felt slighted and insulted and turned on Monty. 

The question is, why didn’t they give him an extension?  Why have him go in as a lame duck coach?  If you do not like your coach enough to give him an extension, then just fire him in the offseason and get a coach you have faith in.  If you are willing to fire him 20 games into the season then why aren’t you willing to fire him before the season?  All they had to do was give him a 2-year extension and all of this would have been put to bed.  He would have had the confidence to know he had time to figure out how to get the most out of this team.  He would have had time to let the team’s persona develop.  The players would have known he is here for the immediate future and the organization believes in him.  And why wouldn’t you believe in a guy with a 120-41-23 record?  Sure, his post season record wasn’t great but that was never going to be fixed in the regular season.  They could be undefeated right now and you would still have no idea how he or the team is going to do in the playoffs.  If that is the issue then fire him after last season and find someone you think will do better in the playoffs.  To me this all just feels like they took the lazy approach.  They didn’t have the guts to fire him after last season but they didn’t want to commit to him either so they screwed up this whole season by half assing it.  And of course, all the blame falls on Monty.        

As I have been writing this the Bruins held their presser announcing the change in coach.  There really wasn’t much said that you would not expect.  However, Sweeney did say that extension talks with Monty failed and that was one of the reasons he was let go.   If you have gotten this far you know I blame the team for not signing him to an extension.  Sweeney says they tried.  I would love to know what the issue was with the negotiations.  I find it hard to believe Monty was looking for some outrageous number or years.  But then, to be fair, he did coach the team to the best record ever, so maybe he was.  Even if it was Monty who was being unreasonable, the team should have then cut ties before the season started.  I would hope the negotiations start well ahead of training camp.  And if they didn’t, well, that’s on the team as well.  This is something the team had to figure out before training camp.  Either there was going to be an extension signed or they were going to move in another direction.  No matter what the reason was that they could not work out the extension. 

The second reason Montgomery was set up to fail is that this team just isn’t that good.  I can’t stress enough that they have no goal scorers on the team outside of Pastrnak.  It’s not that the players are bad, it’s that they are average.  They are what we would call in the NBA, role players.  You cannot have a team full of role players.  Look at the Celtics, as great and deep as they are, how good would the team be without Tatum and Brown?  A playoff team?  Probably.  Championship contenders?  Nope.  The best team in the league (as they are now)?  Not even close.  You have to remember this too, role players play their best when they are playing with star players, not when they are all out there together.  Let’s keep looking at basketball.  When the bench comes in and plays with some starters on the court, they play well.  At the end of a blow out when the coach puts all bench guys in, the other team usually takes advantage.  Role players play better when there are good players to play off of.   With the Bruins, whenever Pastrnak isn’t out there, it’s all role players.  They need a couple of more “starters” in their line up so that the role players can have complimentary roles and not be forced into having to play above their level for the team to succeed.  The way this team is constructed, Scotty Bowman couldn’t make them contenders.  With that said, they should be better than they have been. 

Look, don’t get me wrong, with where the team is at right now, and the way things were headed, firing Monty was the right move.  I am just saying, it’s not all his fault that they have reached this point. 

So, Monty is gone and they replaced him with assistant coach Joe Sacco.  I’ll be honest, I don’t know if Sacco is going to be a good coach or not.  He was not a good coach in Colorado 15 years ago.  But that doesn’t mean he will not be a good one now.  Here is my problem with him taking over.  In any sport and any team, I do not understand firing the head coach and making an assistant the new head coach.  So, what you are telling me is that the assistant knows how to fix all the team’s problem but he just wasn’t telling anyone?  He either has to be a D-bag for keeping it all to himself until the head coach got fired, or he has no idea how to fix things either.  Specifically talking about Sacco, I could be wrong (I tried to find it but couldn’t) but isn’t Sacco the guy who was in charge of the team’s power play?  You know, the last ranked power play in the league.  What makes anyone think he can fix things?  Maybe Sacco has a different coaching style that the players will respond to.  He is said to be very liked and respected in the room.  Maybe he kept telling Monty how to fix things and Monty kept telling him to STFU.  I don’t know, I wasn’t in the locker room or the coach’s office or even at the practices.  I hope Sacco does a great job.  And maybe the shake up is just what the team needs to start playing to the best of their abilities.  All I am saying is firing the head coach and replacing him with an assistant never feels to me like the best idea anyone has ever had.

And one other thing about Sacco.  They made him the interim coach.  Which means…you guessed it…he’s a lame duck coach.  They say he is going to get his chance to earn the job but as with Monty, what kind of confidence does that show in him?  Are the players going to rally around him if they know he could be gone at any point as well?  Or are they going to treat him like a substitute teacher and pay him no mind?  You would think the Bruins front office would learn from their mistakes but apparently that’s not happening here.    

Speaking of shaking things up, for about a week now all the talk around the Bruins has been that they are looking to make a “shake up” trade.  There have been a bunch of scouts at their recent games (I can’t imagine they liked what they have seen) and all the reports are the Bruins are looking to make something happen.  Even after firing Monty.  Here’s my problem with this.  One of my favorite movie lines to quote comes from “A Few Good Men”.  Nope, not the line you are thinking of.  The line I love is “why the two orders?”.  Lt. Kaffee uses this line when Col. Jessup suggest he did two contradictory things, ordering Santiago not to be toughed and ordering Santiago off the base for his protection.  People do this kind of thing all the time and I always think of that quote.  So, my question to Don Sweeney would be, why the two orders?  If Monty was the problem and you fired him, then why do you need to make a shake up trade?  If you need to make a shake up trade, then why blame the coach?  Why the two orders?  

Look, two things can be true at the same time.  Monty could have been the problem and the team could need a trade.  However, why wouldn’t you let Monty have a chance to turn things around after you make the shake up trade?  I keep pointing out that it’s a “shake up” trade because that’s how it has been described in the press.  I make this distinction because as someone who believes this team doesn’t have enough talent on it, I am all for making a trade to increase that talent no matter who the coach is.  However, that’s not what a shake up trade is.  A shake up trade is more of a lateral move talent wise that is designed to change the feel and atmosphere of the locker room and to send a message to the players that none of them are safe if they don’t start playing better.  If the idea is to give the team a kick in the ass to get them going, then Monty should have been allowed to reap those benefits.  But when you have no confidence in your coach, you don’t give him that opportunity. 

What I am saying is that now that they moved on from Monty, the Bruin should NOT be looking to make a shake up trade.  If they can make a trade that improves the talent level on the team, I am all for it.  But who is going to give you an upgrade in talent for Charlie Coyle (who should have been traded in the offseason) and/or Morgan Geekie?   No one is going to say “give me those two guys and I’ll give you our 35-goal scorer”.  The best they can do is trade them for draft picks or prospects (who will not be top prospects), none of which will help them this season.  Now, I could understand if they did that and then called up guys from Providence and went young but the fact that they sent Poitras down to the AHL makes me believe they are not willing to go the youth movement route.  What the Bruins need to do now is sit back and see what effect the coaching change has on the team.  Give it 10 games or so and see how the team responds.  If at that point everything looks the same, then you can try a shake up trade, though it may be too late to save the season at that point.  You have made your shake up move in changing coaches.  Let’s see how things shake out. 

Now that the team changed coaches, it’s all on the players.  They have no excuse now.  They got their coach fired.  The second coach in what 3 years?  Now it’s on them.  They need to step up as a team and as individuals.  They need to start playing up to their abilities.  They need to start playing hard every night from the first puck drop till the final horn sounds.  They simply have no excuses left.  And if they do not step up, that’s when shake up trades need to start happening.  Mind you, I am not looking for them to become contenders now or go on some 20-game winning streak or anything like that.  I just expect them to start playing up to their abilities.  It’s one thing to not be good enough to win the Stanley Cup, it’s another thing to not play hard and to play well below your actual expectations. There needs to be a lot more effort on the ice in the coming games than there was in the first 20.  

There is one last thing I have to talk about before I end this novel.  That is the apparent Jeremy Swayman issue inside the locker room.  We all know Swayman missed training camp holding out for a new contract.  The reports coming out of Bruins land are that the rest of the players apparently hold this against Swayman and it is affecting their play in front of him.  Swayman has even talked about him losing the group due to his holdout.  It seems from watching the games that once Swayman gives up a goal or two the team deflates in front of him and the flood gates open.  Obviously, this is a big issue.  You would think if it is just the holdout that is the problem, Swayman playing up to his usual level, something he has not come close to doing yet, would be enough to rectify the situation.  I can understand guys being upset that he wasn’t in camp. Hockey is a very “all for the team” sport.  You have a room full of guys who got new contracts without holding out.  I can see why they would be upset.  But if Jeremy starts playing well and is apologetic for not being in camp, one would think that would smooth things over.  If it isn’t just the hold out that turn the team against him, that’s a bigger problem.  I have no idea what it could be and even less idea on how to fix it.  A disconnect between your starting goal tender and the rest of the team is something that can derail a season when everything else is going well.  Never mind in a season like this.  This is something Sacco and the front office need to fix as soon as possible if they are going to have any chance of turning this season around.       

Last season Jim Montgomery got the most out of the Bruins roster.  Including career years out of Coyle, Geekie, and Zacha (the 3 guys supposedly on the trading block).  This year he was unable to get the team to play up to a respectable level.  Letting him go was probably the right move at this time.  The hope now is that this change is the kick in the pants the players need to get their act together and start playing up to their standards.  Hopefully Joe Sacco is the right guy to push them to the limits of their abilities and turn this season around.