Mr. Wilson goes from Washington

Gone from D.C., but not forgotten as a coaching candidate

Ron Wilson may have coached the U.S. to a gold medal at the 1996 World Cup, but a ninth-place finish in the nation's capital resulted in his firing on Friday. CNNSI.com caught up with Sports Illustrated senior writer Kostya Kennedy, who spoke of Wilson's shelf life behind the bench and explained why the coach will be behind another one soon enough.

CNNSI.com: When the Capitals acquired Jaromir Jagr, we talked about how Ron Wilson was an adaptable guy, capable of handling and accommodating star players. Is this an issue of failed chemistry between the coach and the team's most priciest player?

Kennedy: I don't think so. Although you have to be wary of Jagr -- particularly now, given his history -- wary of what you're going to get week to week, day to day and shift to shift, we shouldn't lay this at the feet of bad chemistry. Jagr hasn't always had great coaching relationships. Herb Brooks wanted no part of it. Jagr handpicked Ivan Hlinka, and we saw what happened there. Insofar as Jagr can be up and down, this season didn't work out for him, but I don't think the Wilson-Jagr chemistry had to do with Jagr's year.

Now, that doesn't mean Jagr won't come back to play lights out, but I don't think that's dependent upon the coach. That's about how Jagr's feeling at the time.

CNNSI.com: Is it more of a situation where the coach's act wore thin? Is Wilson a short-term coach?

Kennedy: That's the rap on Ronnie. But it's the same with about 90 percent of NHL coaches. The vast majority you figure you're hiring for three-to-five years. Wilson has his schtick and he gets people to buy into it. Is he a short-term coach? No more than Pat Burns or Ken Hitchcock are. I don't think Wilson's unique in that regard.

The relationship between Adam Oates and Wilson might have been indicative of that, but most of the players were sympathetic to Wilson. He built a system around Oates; that might not happen again in his career and we're probably not going to see production like that from him in the future. Players went along with Wilson's system and liked it. In last year's playoffs, when Oates was unhappy, like I said, the players were sympathetic to Wilson. The core players on that team, Olaf Kolzig, Brendan Witt and the junkyard dogs were Wilson guys and played hard for him.

CNNSI.com: So can we just chalk this move up to the ninth-place finish?

Kennedy: It's a result of not making the playoffs. I think Ted Leonsis had a lot to do with this decision. George McPhee believes in stability and believes in Ron Wilson. This is a move he made with some reluctance. And it might partly have been influenced by wanting to enter the process before some other teams, like the Rangers, get too deep. And if there's an effort among the higher-ups to make Jagr happy, I think that's false thinking that won't get them anywhere.

But the team does have to answer for the Carolina Hurricanes. I spent most of the season picking the Capitals to win that division, and I was proven wrong. Carolina is a deeper team. They don't have the big-name playmakers, but they're a scrappy team right now. Unless Kolzig is a Vezina candidate, the Caps are going to have a tough time next year winning the Southeast.

CNNSI.com: Depth is hard to come by in the course of one summer, no?

Kennedy: Yeah, it is hard. But they need to establish other scoring options. They have to diversify the offense. To me, that is the biggest thing.

CNNSI.com: Seems odd that we'd be talking about scoring woes on a team with Jagr and Peter Bondra, doesn't it?

Kennedy: I think the pressing need is to diversify the wing. In some ways there's no excuse for having trouble scoring goals. But they didn't get enough from Jeff Halpern or a number of other sources. And maybe that means getting a guy who can move the puck on the back line.

CNNSI.com: Wouldn't a good season out of Olaf Kolzig, who has battled ankle injuries, have kept Wilson around another year or two?

Kennedy: Kolzig had the "ankle injury" all year and he's had leg problems in the past. There's no question that a healthy Kolzig would have made a huge difference. He wasn't the showstopper Washington needed this season. We're used to him having a streak where you can't get anything by him for a few weeks. He didn't play as aggressively this year. If he's healthy, he's still the X factor. When he's good, he's one of the five best. If they get something out of him, it changes the whole perspective.

CNNSI.com: What is it about Wilson that grates on players' nerves?

Kennedy: He's incredibly detail-oriented. Scotty Bowman gets on nerves, too. Wilson nit-picks; he doesn't tolerate people breaking his system. And he pulls a whole bunch of stunts -- locker room challenges, shaving his head, showing movies -- that people can roll their eyes at, especially veterans. But I like a guy who can keep a locker room loose.

The other thing is that he likes the sound of his own voice and the sight of his name. Now, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. As a head coach in the NHL, you want to be the one who's in front of everything. On balance, I think it's a good thing.

And there's no question, none at all, that he'll get another job. I'm not throwing Wilson's name onto the Rangers' shortlist, but he'll be coaching again soon, that is, as long as some teams don't get into the habit of thinking he's a short-term guy. Anaheim was a political problem; the Ducks were better off with him than without him, and he had a decent run with the Capitals. I don't think he should have been fired.

CNNSI.com: Does he become the proverbial best coach available?

Kennedy: No, I wouldn't rate him above Hitchcock, but the only reason you don't hire him is if as a GM you want to be in total control. But Wilson is with right there with Burns, Pat Quinn, Joel Quenneville and some of the other coaches who have established a reputation. There are a lot of teams he can help and he'll help somebody.

CNNSI.com: Who might be a good fit for the Caps?

Kennedy: They're going to be really careful, as Glen Sather's doing so publicly in New York. You can rule out Herb Brooks, you can rule out Ted Nolan and you can rule out Larry Robinson. But I could see Dave Tippett getting a chance. McPhee wants someone for a while, and Pat Burns might not be the right fit. It's not unlikely that we'll get someone off the radar screen, either. Tippett's ready for this job and is the same kind of hockey person in terms of style and philosophy that McPhee is. It's an emphasis on responsibility and the lack of a star hierarchy. Plus, he's someone who has seen a number of different systems. A great part of the success of the Kings is attributable to Tippett. He's also just a quieter man who's not going to rant and rave.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Kostya Kennedy covers the NHL and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com.

 

Related information

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video