LINCICOME: Last nail for Avs' Mr. Fix-It is the one in his coffin

By Bernie Lincicome, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Friday, May 9, 2008

The news arrives, half-heard, something about Avs coach Joel Quenneville. What could it be? A raise? An extended contract? Had he been named coach of the year?

In a hockey season with enough man-hours lost to injury to overcrowd an outpatient ward, Quenneville was Mr. Fix-It, armed with spackle and spit, keeping a competitive team on the ice and, somehow, a reinterested Jose Theodore in goal.

It was one of the great coaching jobs of any year, and for that, Quenneville gets the door.

The Avs would have us believe that it was a mutual decision, like the whole table deciding to skip dessert or the family choosing the zoo over the aquarium.

A difference in philosophy is the official explanation, typically vague, much as NHL injuries are, not dishonest as much as cagey. In hockey, truth is a balloon, flexible and full of air.

And it was not always clear that the Avs had any philosophy to differ about. Were they young and eager and building for tomorrow, or cranky and lame and relying on the past?

According to general manager Francois Giguere, the Avs are a puck-possession, upbeat, high-tempo, high-energy, attacking skill team, and apparently, Quenneville thought they should be something else.

Well, they were something else, and no fault of Quenneville's. They lost to the Red Wings because they skated so slowly it looked as if they were only using one foot, they did not play a lick of defense and the goalies had the reactions of fire hydrants.

The Detroit finish was humiliating and it was revealing. For this Avs team to get as far as it did, someone sold either his soul or his firstborn.

One assumes that had to be Quenneville because the Avalanche organization is as entirely clueless about Quenneville's value as it was about Peter Forsberg's health.

So, when Giguere says that the two of them had agreed mutually to go their separate ways, only one of them is actually going anywhere. And on to a better job, surely, to a place where vision and a quick mind are respected, possibly home to Toronto.

Quenneville took on a team that was aging and in a rut, the fumes of past glory the basic fuel, made more obvious this spring with the re-signing of Forsberg and Adam Foote, the obvious aging of Joe Sakic and the undependability of Theodore.

It would be no surprise, considering how eager the Avs are to keep in touch with the past, if Patrick Roy is not the next coach.

Two important figures would seem to play a part in this, Forsberg and Theodore, the first plainly dishonest about the extent of his injury when he returned to the Avs, leaving Quenne- ville and the rest of the Avs dangling daily on how he felt.

The Avs ought to have kept Quenne- ville around just for the variety of ways he came up with to excuse Forsberg.

Not to blame Forsberg for wanting to regain what he once was and in the place where it mattered most, but Quenneville admitted he and the Avs knew how seriously unwell Forsberg was when they brought him back.

This admission cannot have gone down well with Giguere, for it sounds a bit like blame, as if the coach were given damaged goods over his objections.

Or, if it was the other way around, that Quenneville argued for a gimpy Forsberg being better than most fully healthy players, all he got for his faith was let down.

Theodore was even more harmful, turning, in the end, into a turnstile, but Quenneville's patience and faith in Theodore during the time they were together is at the root of Theodore's recovery.

It was that faith by Quenneville that kept Theodore in goal against the Red Wings when, in truth, it did not matter. If Theodore was ill before the first game, clearly, he should not have been in goal, and once he started flinching again, Theodore should have been dismissed immediately.

The coach has to take the blame for that, just as he should get the credit for bringing Theodore back.

In three seasons, Quenneville got the Avs to the second round of the Stanley Cup playoffs twice and just missed the playoffs the other time by a point.

He should have been told thanks, rather than goodbye.

• May 10, 2008

  10:26 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Finn writes:

  Another horrible article by the worst columnist in the USA. Not so much the opinion, mind you, just the way it is presented as if the author thinks he has some kind of inside information or more hockey knowledge than the Avs organization. I was unsure about the coaching decision until I read this column. Now I am completely convinced that it was the best decision that could possibly be made.

  To the RMN: Why do you keep employing this columnist? You have such an excellent example of a top rate columninst in Dave Krieger, and then you allow it to be brought down. Sure, having a pot-stirring egomaniac writer probably helps a paper's readership, but this guy is not even good at that. He is just completely ridiculous and ruins your credibility. It is sad.

• May 10, 2008

  12:36 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  milehighfive writes:

  This article is awful. Quinneville isn't a scapegoat, is the reason why so many things went wrong. I give him credit for getting through the injuries like he did, but that is it. How can a team with so much talent have such a horrible PP? How can a team play defense all the time and expect to win? Dump and chase doesn't work all game long, bouncing the puck off the boards all game long turns into turn overs. He was playing players who should have been benched at times, Sauer and Arnason to be specific. As for Forsberg, every time he played he made a difference, he should have never played 20 minutes his first few games back, and that falls on the coach. I get so tired of the Forsberg and Foote remarks. We went 8-1-0 with Forsberg in the lineup during the regular season, in his last four games, he was +8 with 11 points . He might not be the same player, but he is still one of the best.

  Quineville made excuses for why the team lost, hardly ever said oh we just got out played. It was always "the bounces went their way" even when the score was 7 to 1. I like coach Q, but he isn't a fit on this team, we need someone who will think offense, who will think that maybe hitting and getting players off the puck is a good thing. It is time "for a line change".

• May 10, 2008

  8:18 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  mareksvatos writes:

  Every time I read Lincicome's articles I find myself struggling through his choppy, long-winded prose. I've learned to mostly skip him, but I just couldn't resist reading more about Q. My mistake... I guess I'll never learn.

  It's like he's writing in Spanish where they mix up nouns, verbs and adjectives. Have you ever watched Metalacolypse? Listen to Swissgard Swigelf talk and you'll understand what I'm sprayin'.

• May 10, 2008

  9:32 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  derek writes:

  Damn bernie do you even have a clue? really dude the rocky mnt news needs to tell you goodbye, rather than thanks. (iam done reading you as of right now.

• May 10, 2008

  9:42 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  derek writes:

  1. Fill in the blank _______ -Stastny-Hedjuk
  a) Forsberg
  b) Wolski
  c) Hensick
  d) May

  2. You have a 5-on-3, you instruct your team to shoot the puck, True or False?

  3. Patrice Brisebois is a deft penalty killler, True or False?

  4. Gun is to Holster as Wyatt Smith is to ______
  a) Starting Line Up
  b) Press Box
  c) AHL
  d) ECHL
  e) Back in Thief River emptying septic tanks

  5. When would you make a goaltending change?
  a) For the second game of a back-to-back
  b) Against a weaker opponent to rest your starter
  c) When the starter is suffering from the flu
  d) Until he falls apart and then not again until the other guy does the same

  6. Identify the following: (insert picture of tyler arnason)

  a) Tyler Arnason
  b) Edmonton Killer
  c) 3rd center
  d) Gentleman's Club patron
  e) Largest source of sale tax for Glendale, CO
  f) Gretzky come back to life

  7. Your team has a bad record in shout outs:
  a) I change the line up to find players who excel at it and emphasise it in practice
  b) Who Cares?!

  8. solve the following problem*: (insert redwings emblem)

  (No need to show your work, footnote or cite examples. Just solve it.)

• May 11, 2008

  12:52 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  GravityEyelids writes:

  This article gave me syphilis.

• May 11, 2008

  8:35 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Finn writes:

  As you can tell, Yella, I'm not exactly in the minority. I'd apply for his job but I'm not a professional writer. Doesn't mean I can't spot bad writing. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

• May 11, 2008

  10:12 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Zuropaman writes:

  Linicome knows as much about hockey as Bill Clinton does about monogamy and sobriety.

• May 11, 2008

  5:52 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  johnsl14 writes:

  This article is just terribly written. It is almost imposible to read Lincicome because he just rambles. What is he talking about, "Forsberg was dishonest about his injury," and "the Avs knew how badly he was hurt?" How can it be both? Either he was dishonest and the Avs didn't know, or he was truthful and the Avs did know. Just another go nowhere, say nothing, but say it with grand pomposity article from Lincicome.