Thursday, November 23, 2006

Hitchcock vs. Murray


Obviously the decision has been made by Columbus GM Doug MacLean: Hitch is back. Personally though, if I was in charge I would have gone with Andy Murray. I really like a lot of things Andy Murray has done - two Gold Medals for Team Canada at the World Championships. He really was a very good coach in LA and I think that if it wasn't for a constant flow of injuries to key personnel he would have had a lot more success. I also believe Murray has proven his touch with younger as well as older players. In general the teams that Canada sends over to Europe for those IIHF tournaments have a lot of younger developing stars along with one or two older-established stars for leadership.

Sound familiar?

Columbus is loaded with great young talent like Nash, Zherdev, Brule, Leclaire etc. but they also have the established stars like Adam Foote and Sergei Federov. Hell, Andy Murray even managed the impossible: Getting a worthwhile effort from Anson Carter! In that 2003 tournament, it was Carter who scored the OT winner in the gold medal game. Maybe Murray could have even gotten Carter going in Columbus.

Hitchcock has more of a reputation for taking established stars and getting them on a new and more focused gameplan. He really has no particular reputation regarding young players.

That isn't to say I think Columbus will flop under Hitchcock. I think Hitch will get the ship righted and I stand by my earlier opinion that Columbus has the on ice personnel to be a contender. I just would have chosen Andy Murray to right the ship instead.

Road Trip! Going to Edmonton friday night to see the Oilers take on the Chicago Blackhawks. Pics and story to be posted Saturday or Sunday.

No comments: