Is Montgomery A Better Coach Than Berube?

[TBone]

There's no question Berube was a dynamic leader of men, but as an Xs and Os coach is Monty better?

The way he's bring along the youngsters and getting the buy-in with players like Kyrou to play a 200 foot game is impressive.

I'll always love the Chief, but I think we're on the precipice of a multi-year run at the Cup with the exact right coach at the wheel.

[ZouMiz2424]

I don’t know if better is the right word. There’s no doubt in my mind that Monty is a better X’s and O’s guy. They are pretty different.

If Monty took over in 2019 I don’t think the Blues make the playoffs , let alone the Cup. Berube’s style and leadership made that possible

Just like this current team wouldn’t be thriving under Berube as it is with Monty. I love them both.

[Tony Palazzolo]

There is no doubt they are two of the better coaches in the league. I think they share many of the same strengths. Both of them utilize all four lines. This may be one of the more important aspects that gets overlooked. Players want to play regardless of skill level. When that bottom six is playing they are all contributing and leads to buy in to the coaches message.

Both of them have excellent communication styles. They know how to reach their players and let them know were they stand and what is expected of them.

As to X's and O's. Berube was under rated when it came to this, but I think Monty may be better. The way that the defense activates on a regular basis makes them harder to defend.

[Boomac]

Not to dismiss anything Berube has done but I enjoy watching Monty's "layers" and 5 man units. I feel Van Ryn had too much input on the Xo's and O's and that man to man system costs the Blues a lot of points.

The amount of puck support and suffocating the opposition is amazing.

[Bluesfan1978]

Both great coaches. Need to give Montgomery a couple years to see how everything works out. Although I do think he has an energy to him and is able to be demanding yet positive. I think that’s what Bannister was missing.
Also Kyrou and Thomas keep improving and Montgomery has more tools like speed to work with. Berube had a more patch job team the last couple years he was in St Louis. Either way it’s good to have either coach. I’m think Montgomery will have a longer lasting coaching career with the Blues compared to Berube.

[callitwhatyouwant]

Not to dismiss anything Berube has done but I enjoy watching Monty's "layers" and 5 man units. I feel Van Ryn had too much input on the Xo's and O's and that man to man system costs the Blues a lot of points.

The amount of puck support and suffocating the opposition is amazing.

I think this is a good point, but to add to what others have said and coaching in general. At their level I don't think there is a "better" just different. Both have proven over the last 10 years to be excellent coaches. Berube had his run with the Blues, and now he is getting Toronto to play good hockey. I mean Toronto was winning without Matthews going nuclear like he did last year.

Berube is probably a better fit for a team like Toronto, who needs to figure out how to play more aggressive and they already have the skill. It's hard to really know Berube's real X's and O's because all he ever really talked about was getting pucks to the net and playing direct. He basically preached that you shouldn't be looking to pass, you should be looking to play forward as fast as possible. That being said, Chief seemed very much to trust his assistants like you said. When Monty was here, we played the same style of offense we are now. It was noticeable the difference. At the time, shot numbers went down, high danger chances went way up, and scoring went up.

Monty has proven that all of his teams win. Denver, Dallas, Bruins, Blues. Everyone wins. He has a very fast system and it seems it starts with the defense. They shell up a little differently than we have seen in the past, and then break out and everyone blitzes the other side. It's like 5 defenders turn into 5 offense. It's definitely an entertaining brand of hockey, and I'm not sure if it would have worked if we weren't so fast. Army has been trying to get faster since the Avs bounced us in covid round. He saw Makars on defense and tried to emulate that. Well now we have one of the fastest groups in the league, and all of the sudden we are lighting the net up.

So both are good coaches, and if you are to ask anyone around the league, it appears both are near top 5 coaches. Berube was picked up immediately by the premier hockey franchise. That speaks volumes. And Monty got a guy fired mid season when they were .500 because of how valuable he is. That speaks volumes.

[Hooking]

Two of the best coaches the Blues have had in the past few decades. Probably since Coach Q.

I know people will burn me at the steak for not saying Hitch was a good coach - sorry - I never liked Hitch.
Andy Murray, Davis Payne... a bunch of other forgettable coaches.

Berube was the right guy at the right time for the right team.

Montgomery is doing the same in performing sorcery in raising the dead. New voices sometimes do better than old "same ol same ol" which is why the NHL has a lot of turnover in coaches I think. Is one better than the other? I have no idea. Berube and Monty are two of my favorite NHL coaches though. I do think Monty should get some Jack Adams consideration this year too.

[TBone]

It's definitely an entertaining brand of hockey, and I'm not sure if it would have worked if we weren't so fast. Army has been trying to get faster since the Avs bounced us in covid round. He saw Makars on defense and tried to emulate that. Well now we have one of the fastest groups in the league, and all of the sudden we are lighting the net up.

Good point on the speed. It was really noticeable last night.

Combined with the physicality, Montreal was thoroughly pizzed off by the end of the night.

[callitwhatyouwant]

Two of the best coaches the Blues have had in the past few decades. Probably since Coach Q.

I know people will burn me at the steak for not saying Hitch was a good coach - sorry - I never liked Hitch.
Andy Murray, Davis Payne... a bunch of other forgettable coaches.

Berube was the right guy at the right time for the right team.

Montgomery is doing the same in performing sorcery in raising the dead. New voices sometimes do better than old "same ol same ol" which is why the NHL has a lot of turnover in coaches I think. Is one better than the other? I have no idea. Berube and Monty are two of my favorite NHL coaches though. I do think Monty should get some Jack Adams consideration this year too.

The issue with the turnover in the NHL is definitely a maturity issue. There are reason's why in other sports, guys can have long term sustainable success like a Tomlin or Reid. The NHL should be able to do the same, but the turnover happens in my opinion because a lot of the front office are a little too fragile to take the hit, and the players come from a little bit different of a background, dare I say a bit more privileged. I do think that will change a bit as the money gets a bit bigger in the sport. Right now there's not enough separation from the elite to the bottom like there are the NFL or NBA. If you have a superstar on your team that is in agreeance with the coach, he's going to back the coach and the locker room will follow. In hockey, I think we see the young guys get the bag early, and they aren't the most mature guys or have the best work ethics, and they get the coach fired all the time, even tho they are a good coach. The coaches don't have as much leverage as the other sports. Even tho in those sports the athletes are making crazy more than they are as well.

[DawgDad]

This is a fair question for a blog thread debate but my reaction is "what does it matter"? Where do you draw the line, Hitch? Joel? Bowman? Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches, through good times and bad.

[Hazelwood72]

This is a fair question for a blog thread debate but my reaction is "what does it matter"? Where do you draw the line, Hitch? Joel? Bowman? Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches, through good times and bad.

At the risk of jumping this thread off the tracks, your comment that the “Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches” got me to thinking.

As a Blues fan since early 1968 (yeah, I’m old) here is my list of the best Blues coaches:

Scotty Bowman
Honorable mention to Al Arbour, but he wasn’t given a fair shake by Sid the Third
Red Berenson
Jacques Demers (yeah, his W-L record is only 0.500, but he coached during the dark days of almost losing the team, skipping the draft, and running on a shoestring. Demers always seemed to get way more from the team than you’d expect from their talent level)
Joel Quenneville
Craig Berube
Possibly Jim Montgomery (but we have to wait for more data)

In the next tier are:
Brian Sutter
Ken Hitchcock

The rest were forgettable.

Bob Plager did a great job with the Peoria farm club. But being an NHL head coach wasn’t his bag.

[blues2112]

I know people will burn me at the steak for not saying Hitch was a good coach - sorry - I never liked Hitch.
Andy Murray, Davis Payne... a bunch of other forgettable coaches.

Better build a second pyre for me as I agree.

Effective to a point, but the whole north-to-south-to-east-to net (FUNNEL!) was painfully boring.

[netboy65]

This is a fair question for a blog thread debate but my reaction is "what does it matter"? Where do you draw the line, Hitch? Joel? Bowman? Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches, through good times and bad.

At the risk of jumping this thread off the tracks, your comment that the “Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches” got me to thinking.

As a Blues fan since early 1968 (yeah, I’m old) here is my list of the best Blues coaches:

Scotty Bowman
Honorable mention to Al Arbour, but he wasn’t given a fair shake by Sid the Third
Red Berenson
Jacques Demers (yeah, his W-L record is only 0.500, but he coached during the dark days of almost losing the team, skipping the draft, and running on a shoestring. Demers always seemed to get way more from the team than you’d expect from their talent level)
Joel Quenneville
Craig Berube
Possibly Jim Montgomery (but we have to wait for more data)

In the next tier are:
Brian Sutter
Ken Hitchcock

The rest were forgettable.

Bob Plager did a great job with the Peoria farm club. But being an NHL head coach wasn’t his bag.

A couple quick comments. Yes on Demers, no WAY that ‘86 team should have taken the conf finals to 7 games.
Brian Sutter, loved him as a player, not at all a fan as a coach. He tried molding the team to his style of play as a player and it cost us Brind’Amour, not to mention the Butcher trade.
Hitch was a better coach than most gave him credit for.

[LewisL]

Andy Murray!

Just kidding......as for Hitch, I feel he didn't really let his players play. Too conservative, tight leash.

On Berube vs. Monty, I'm withholding judgement until special teams get more of a tweak.

[Hazelwood72]

This is a fair question for a blog thread debate but my reaction is "what does it matter"? Where do you draw the line, Hitch? Joel? Bowman? Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches, through good times and bad.

At the risk of jumping this thread off the tracks, your comment that the “Blues have had a lot of top-notch coaches” got me to thinking.

As a Blues fan since early 1968 (yeah, I’m old) here is my list of the best Blues coaches:

Scotty Bowman
Honorable mention to Al Arbour, but he wasn’t given a fair shake by Sid the Third
Red Berenson
Jacques Demers (yeah, his W-L record is only 0.500, but he coached during the dark days of almost losing the team, skipping the draft, and running on a shoestring. Demers always seemed to get way more from the team than you’d expect from their talent level)
Joel Quenneville
Craig Berube
Possibly Jim Montgomery (but we have to wait for more data)

In the next tier are:
Brian Sutter
Ken Hitchcock

The rest were forgettable.

Bob Plager did a great job with the Peoria farm club. But being an NHL head coach wasn’t his bag.

A couple quick comments. Yes on Demers, no WAY that ‘86 team should have taken the conf finals to 7 games.
Brian Sutter, loved him as a player, not at all a fan as a coach. He tried molding the team to his style of play as a player and it cost us Brind’Amour, not to mention the Butcher trade.
Hitch was a better coach than most gave him credit for.

Good point on Sutter. Hadn’t thought of it in that perspective. I may be looking back at his tenure with rose-colored glasses. He’s definitely a product of the old (Chuck) Norris Division tough guy style of play.

[dhsux]

I believe Montgomery and Chief both possess a great similar quality in getting players to play how they want them to play. I mean literally.

No messing around, no cow towing......but it's their way or the high way with the key being WITHOUT PLAYER DISSENSION AND TEAM DISRUPTION.

Players seem truly happy under their leadership.

I view Monty as the more technician yet at the same time he runs a far more emotional coaching style in relating to his players. I think it really enhances their motivation.