Colorado Mammoth Message Board

What happened to the Mammoth offense this year? It looked like the new coach put a leash on the guys. There was a lot of 20 yard shots that the Junior Mammoth goalies could have probably stopped when the other teams were cutting and diving all over the place taking (and making) higher percentage shots.

Ouch! Nice first post.

Steve,

To tag along with TommyThomason's question, I'd also like to know your thoughts on our transition game.

It seemed to be much more prominent in 2007 then it did this year, even though we had the same players. Is this just a different in philosophyÂ’s between the two head coaches or was there something else that led to this? The lack of transition game seemed to lead to a slower paced offense which in my eyes led to less quality shots and more shot clock violations than in years past.

In my very unbiased opinion (yeah right) I think we have amazing transition talent that no other team can match. Sure other teams have 1 or 2 great/good transition guys, but nobody has anything that can match up with Sims, Carlson, and Gajic. ArenÂ’t we wasting these guyÂ’s talents by not utilizing the transition game?

On a side note, IÂ’d also like to thank you for being a key component in preventing the loss of this season. While IÂ’m disappointed in how things turned out, all I thought of on the long drive home on Saturday night was that at least we had 9 exciting home games this year, which is a whole lot better than zero.

I hate to pile on here but I noticed much of the same that the other posters did, lackluster offense with the same stars that made this an explosive offense in previous years. It almost looked like McMahon did put a leash on our team or at least did not have them prepared for games. There was a lot less movement on the offensive end & when the offense isn't moving, isn't setting picks, isn't looking for a give and go... then it becomes pretty easy to defend.

I was throughly unimpressed with McMahon's game management & I felt that it suffered even more when we lost the assistant coach to Edmonton (who's name I am blanking). I personally was hoping for a coaching change this year, however I am now hoping that McMahon is on a very short leash. I would like to see Reese come to the bench.

Lets face it holding the ball on the outside for 25 seconds and launching a long shot isnt a sound offensive plan. My question would be the same, what happened to the offense and the transition game???

Reese works with me, great coach for the Outlaws, good offense, good defense working there, and he has NLL expirience. That and bringin Walt Christianson in as an assistant coach.

Do you seriously think Reese coming here is a possibility while he is both the coach and GM of the Outlaws? I know the MLL allows players to play in both leagues, but I doubt that's the case with other personnel.

P.S. I'm still not giving up on McMahon.

I'll see how things go closer to the season but I'm starting to loose hope in him. Last year at least he had the excuse of not having enough time to pick up some players he wanted, or make roster changes, but now...

Thank you for your first post, hopefully some more in depth analysis can shed some light on the question.

I can assure you that there was no leash put on any of the players. The offense, with assistant coach Russ Heard, was afforded the same latitude as in the past years. While I agree that our team shooting percentage and shot selection was not of the high quality that we should expect, it was not dictated by the Head Coach to change the style of play from our offense.

Cutting the middle is not a unique approach, all coaches in both indoor and outdoor, in youth, high school, college and professional lacrosse, encourage and expect their players to cut the middle. This particular aspect of the game is about effort and "want to", players play the game not coaches.

I can assure you, our players were prepared, the game plans and game management are sound. The players like and respect Bob McMahon and his coaching style, Hamley's departure was felt but didn't affect the team significantly, the last time Hammer scored a goal it was on one hip and we were all wearing spandex in the Aud in Buffalo.

I also believe that we have a very sound transition game, Sims, Gajic and Carlson are among the best in the League, output from these three is vitally important to our success, we need more of that in 2009. Perhaps the only change in philosophy from previous seasons is a dedication to defense and allowing fewer goals against. Tranny players were asked to secure our own goal first before leaving our own end and risking higher percentage shots against. That being said, all the other defensive players were strongly encouraged to be part of the transition game in an effort to move the ball more quickly to the other end.

The results of this dedication to TEAM defense is the fewest goals against in the League at 167 in 2008, we also allowed the fewest shots against in the League and caused the most shot clock violations for opposing offenses. Previously our goals against in the last 5 years were 167, 179, 177,182 respectively. The goal differential this past season was +17, not entirely much different from the previous 3 years, 2007 was +30, the championship season in 2006 was +11.

Here are some items that might be overlooked. Injuries played a significant impact on the last half of the 2008 campaign, I know fans don't care about that but it has an effect. Dan Carey missed 5 games at the end plus one playoff game, his output in 2007 was 32 goals in 16 games, he had 22 goals in the 11 games he played in 2008, without him we miss more 10 goals in our offense. Without him as a dynamic playmaker and passer, we probably miss out on 20 more good scoring opportunities from other players, he clearly makes players around him better.

Josh Sims played 10 games, and scored 5 goals, in 2007 he had 19 goals, 12 goals less in his case hurts the transition and overall offense. Most of his missed games were towards the end of the season as was Dan Carey.

Add the goals from both of those players missing games at the end of the season and the playoffs and we conceivably miss out on 20-25 additional goals for, add that to the 184 goals that we had in 2008 and we are at 204-209 goals for and second only to Philly, and our goal differential is +37 to +42, the best in team history.

Yes, injuries hurt this team, we also felt that our team shooting percentage was a factor. Poor shot selection may have been the case, but simply putting the ball in the net on shots is a key factor to better offense. For example, one player who has consistently shot 21% or better, shot 14.6% in 2008, when that player takes more shots than all but one other player on the team, that results in 11 fewer goals in the season than we have come to expect. This is not a coaching "game management" issue, this is a player issue.

Bottom line, all this is speculation and doesn't mean much. The reality of the situation is that we limped into the playoffs and underperformed when we got there. This team is far too talented and our fans are far too deserving for us to lose in the first round of the playoffs in 4 of the last 5 seasons.

We are re-evaluating every aspect of our franchise and the team operations, and making some very difficult decisions about the future of the team. We are committed to providing a championship product every year and a winning tradition to each of our dedicated, ticket-buying fans.

We cannot expect different results if we continue to do the same things over and over, I believe someone called that the definition of insanity. Good enough is not good enough, getting to the playoffs is not our goal, winning there is.

There will not be a coaching change any time soon, we are committed to Coach McMahon and believe in his approach, philosophy and execution. We are currently deciding on which players want to be with us and believe in the same goals and which players are along for the ride. This may be an unpopular process, unfortunately a necessary one.

Hope this addresses the concerns of this thread.

SG

Excellent answers as always, Steve. As simply a fan, I share many of the frustrations as my fellow fans with our offense, what appeared to be a weak transition game, and yes, Coach McMahon.

But, in the end, regardless of the results, I'd just like to have a coach to stick around for more than 2 years so there is stability. So, to that end, McMahon needs to stay.

You mentioned in the other thread that you can't really comment at this time about what the team is doing. This isn't a surprise. But perhaps later this year, just before the season starts, you might be willing to elaborate about what the goals were and what you felt was accomplished during the off-season?

honestly, i cant thank you enough for being a part of the fans life as well as your own. and taking the time to read and answer as many of these Q's as you can. your answers are allways great and usually give us more then we were asking for. its great that you do this for us. keep it up. even if we (_as fans_) dont understand or agree with what you are saying i think that all the fans, or atleast me, feel more respected and feel like we matter more just because you answer the questions in the first place. so again, thank you very much.

Thanks Steve for your response - you truly are unique because I can't imagine a GM in any other sport even considering being a part of these types of forums.

With that said I'm not sure if anyone has ever disagreed/argued one of your points before, but if not I guess I will be the first.



I have to disagree with this point just by looking at the results. We were 5-0 prior to Hamley leaving and after that we were 4-7. I know injuries played a part of our failures but every team has injuries. Carey and Sims each played in 5 games after Hamley left and they both played together in 4 of those games. In those 4 games we were 1-3. Overall we were 1-4 when Carey played and 2-3 when Sims played.

Another point you hinted at several times was players wanting to be here. I'd assume that when we were 5-0 everyone was happy throughout the organization because everyone was on the same page and it showed on the field. Once the losses started to add up is when I'm assuming there was some frustration from the players and lead you to say..."We are currently deciding on which players want to be with us and believe in the same goals and which players are along for the ride." Couldn't Hamley's departure have played a role in some of the players outlook and morale? I guess what I'm saying is that based on the results and some of your comments unless the timing was pure coicidence, then Hamley's departure did affect the team more than you are suggesting.

Ok now on to the second point...



If Sims, Carlson, Gajic were all asked to secure our own goal first before leaving our own end doesn't this represent a change in philosphy by Mr. McMahon and his staff that greatly under utilizes these three players talents? I can remember numerous times in 2007 when Sims was on the break and had one defender barring down on him and he just lowered his shoulder and actually attacked the defender before scoring a goal. This did not happen in 2008 and this has to be because of the coaching philosophy. He average over a goal a game in 2007 and in the 10 games in 2008 he was at 1/2 a goal a game.

I think a more concentrated effort on the defensive end of the floor is a definitely a good thing, but something has to give when that approach is taken and to me that was the transition game. Sims, Carlson, and Gajic were never able to get those one on one scoring chances because they were staying back on the defensive end and by the time they started to run up the floor the other team already had 2-3 defenders on the floor to stop the transition.

I think this played a major role in the lack of offense. I know you mentioned that we forced the most shot clock violations of anyone in the league, but we also had to be up there in having the most shot clock violations. Because our transition guys were back at the defensive end of the floor and not getting the offense going quickly by the time our offense got set we had 4-5 seconds left on the clock. Once again I believe that this coaching issue led to this player issue...

By the time Gavin got the ball he had very little time to make an extra pass or put a move on a defender to get a higher quality shot on goal and was forced to throw a shot on net to avoid a shot clock violation. Pinning our struggles on all the players and Gavin in particular doesn't seem very fair when, especially on the offensive side of the floor, they were dealing with a coaching style that gave them a lot less time to run the offense. Expecting a player to put up the same shot percentage and score the same amount of goals in two completely different offenses seems unfair to that player.

I mentioned this earlier but wanted to touch on one of your points again and that is you continued to mention or hint that there are a few players that you and the coaching staff aren't sure if they want to be here or buy into the system. All I can say to this is that is concerns me a lot, because I would bet that a lot of these players are veterans who played for the previous coaching staff and are players who I would consider fan favorites and the face(s) of the Mammoth. If the players who I think you are talking about end up playing for another team I would be thoroughly disappointed. I understand getting rid of these players who aren't on board is necessary to make the team better, but it would definitely hurt seeing them in different colors.

One other topic that has been heavily discussed on the forums is the departure of John Gallant. Now that it seems official can you please give us a little insite as to what happened and why John was not one of the protected players? Was he was one of the players who didn't believe in the same goals as management? Or was it assumed that since he came out and said he would and could only play for the Mammoth because of other obligations that Boston would not pick him up?


Overall, I want to thank you again for actually reading and being a part of these forums. I can tell you that it makes me mad when people threaten to not renew season tickets after one down year (even a year in which we made the playoffs). I can assure you that no matter what the results or what personel decisions are made I will be renewing my season tickets for many years to come, because win or lose I'm a huge fan of the Mammoth. (But it is a lot more fun when we win).

Great questions raised by mseinbeck. Normally I don't like conversing in the GM forum, but I think msteinbeck is echoing what a lot of us are thinking (or at least myself). Obviously Steve knows most about what's going on being at the helm, but I agree with most if not all of what was posted and I'm looking forward to Steve's response.
I think it's obvious from most of the other posts in the off season that the fans are not understanding or appreciating the paradigm shift by management/coaching. As everyone continues to mention; it's great to hear from the GM and I am looking forward to this next post!

_________________
Mammoth Hooligan

Thank you for a very thoughtful response. Certainly as a fan you are entitled to your opinion, and I will never argue opinion. I can only offer insight as to what might be happening that you don't have true access to.

Your suggestion that Hammer had a bigger impact on this team than we are admitting, might be possible. I would suggest to you that it was merely coincidence, I would also suggest that Hammer would tell you that himself. In fact, we spoke about this last night, after a good laugh, he said just tell them that the last time he was in Pepsi Center the Mammoth won 11-4 with him at the helm of the other team.

The bottom line on the Hamley issue is that he left, period. He left to become a GM and Head Coach, a position that is not currently available with the Mammoth. Did we miss him, of course we did, but it had little to do with wins and losses. Morale did not change when he left, we loved him and we bid him good luck.

The discussion topic is specifically about the lack of offense, yes, everyone endures injuries, that doesn't detract however, from the impact on their respective roles. The absence of Sims and Carey affected our offensive output, that cannot be argued. Our record with them in and out of the lineup is irrelevant to the point that their contribution on offense was missed.

As I suggested in my original post, there was a slight shift in philosophy, a very sound shift, to take care of our own end first. None of the transition players were told not to break out of our end, in fact they were encouraged to do so along with the entire defense. One of the reasons why most fans embraced Bruce Murray is because he didn't hesitate to pick up the ball and run it out of our end. Those players have very clear instructions to clear the ball and fast!

I am curious as to why the coaching philosophy is blamed for Josh Sims not running up the floor and lowering his shoulder and scoring goals like he did the year before? At no time was Sims ever told not to transition the ball, in fact that is what he is paid to do, that is what is expected of him. Your suggestion is that somehow it must be the coach's fault if he doesn't do it? Does the player have no responsibility here?

Shot clock violations... we actually had very near the fewest in the League. What we did lack was second shot opportunites, again this is a hustle stat, are we willing to go get the ball in the corners?

After watching numerous game films, I can tell you that our offense was not affected by a slightly more defensive philosophy, perhaps our break away and odd man transition might have been slightly affected but the 5 on 5 offense consistently had 18-22 seconds in any given offensive set. This is consistent with previous years.

If the offense has the same time as in previous seasons, then the argument that players were somehow "forced" to shoot bad shots doesn't carry any weight whatsoever. Again, the offensive sets and schemes did not change, the game plans and player expectations didn't change. The coach that has run the offense for the past three seasons didn't change.

The suggestion that I am "pinning" our struggles on the players actually drives me insane! The players play the game, I realize there may be an attachment to certain players that we have made the "faces" of the team, but come on people, the players must execute and the players must lead. Exonerating anyone of us from blame for a poor display in the playoffs over the last two seasons is unacceptable. From myself through the coaching staff to the very last practice player, we are all responsible. Pointing that responsibility out is not blasphemy, holding people accountable is not taboo. Holding a team leader accountable for his performance is part of this process.

Use the 2008 Rochester Knighthawks as a very good example, a defending champion, with very few, if any, roster changes, no coaching changes. An excellent coach and staff, changes nothing about his approach or philosophy. Who underperformed when they missed the playoffs in 2008?? I would argue that it wasn't the coach. Players play the game.

Coach McMahon and I speak every day, both of us have spent very long hours looking in the mirror and reevaluating what we do to get better as individuals and then for the team.

Now is the time someone must take responsibility for change. Fun job, but it is mine. Performance in this business is the measure of success.

Folks, the paradigm shift is very simple, RESULTS, we are not satisfied with the results of losing in the first round of the playoffs. We expect more, you should expect more. I am hearing our fans loud and clear, they want change, but don't want to focus very acute attention on the real issues. The coach then becomes the easy target.

As stated in another post, I won't discuss ongoing discussions that we are having on several fronts regarding several personnel.

The goal is to have a focused, dedicated team that appreciates the quality of the organization and fans that support them, and to reward themselves, their organization and their fans with the pursuit of excellence every season.

The continued pursuit of that goal is a result of multiple factors that need to be managed as responsibly as possible. The overall good of the team always outweighs any one individual.

SG

Thank you for your insightful response Mr. Govett. Just like in any business, it can be easy to get caught up in the details and lose sight of the big picture. None of us like watching our team not play up to their abilities. And although I have some trepidation towards our upcoming season, I also am very excited to see what the Mammoth can do this year.

I'm in complete agreement with you that players have responsibility and are ultimately responsible for their own play. It drives me nuts that in all sports the head coach is always the scapegoat. But yes my suggestion is that it may be the coaching philosophy that doesn't allow him to do it. As you said in your earlier post, there is now a higher emphasis on the defensive end of the floor and the tranny players were told to secure their end of the floor first. Because of this players like Sims stay in the defensive end for a second or two longer and then start running up the floor. By the time they make it to mid field the other team already has 2 or 3 defenders on the field making it very hard for him to run over multiple defenders and attempt to score a transition goal. Maybe this is because other teams know how dangerous our transition game can be so they bail out on offense quicker in an effort to their defense on the floor to stop that? I'm not sure.



You obviously have access to all the game film and do much more research then me since it is your job, and if you found this to actually be true then you're right that my argument that players were forced into bad shots doesn't carry any weight.

My argument to that would be that I'm sure there were many possessions where we had 18-22 seconds, but I know that there a lot more that didn't have that. I sit behind one of the nets, so for half the game I see the entire play from behind which actually helps you see a lot of things - including having a great view of the shot clock. By the time Prout (who was usually the last offensive guy to join the play) made it out to the field there wasn't always 18 seconds on the clock. In fact, I remember a game later in the year when I paid specific attention to this all game and it was more like 12-14 seconds by the time all of the offensive players got into position. There were definitely some possessions where they had 20+ seconds and still didn't score, but from what I saw the majority of the possessions didn't have that. Now that was a small sampling so it may be an anomaly or a specific strategy for that opponent, but the game I paid specific attention to it was not typically 18-22 seconds. I guess my point is that it seemed like our offense always seemed rushed and when I actually paid attention to that it seemed like the problem stemmed from our players not having enough time. I chalked this up to transition players not getting the ball down the field quicker. When our transition guys actually were involved with the offense instead of just taking it up field and then stopping right after mid field and dumping it off to our offense we were more dangerous.

As far as accountability it is great that EVERYONE gets held accountable for their play - including Prout because the team leaders should be held just as accountable if not more then the other players. This alone will help the Mammoth get back to dominance and win another title.



That is a true statement for any professional sport including the NLL. The problem is that fans, including myself, measure performance for players on goals and assists and we measure performance for coaches and management on wins. When the captain of the team nearly sets an NLL record for assists in a season, top goal scorer Carey gets hurt mid way through a good year scoring wise, Langtry has a better statistical year then he had the past 2 seasons, the defense lets in the fewest goals in the league, and the only 3 players who really had down years statistically speaking were Sims, Carlson, and Gajic and 3 of those guys are transitions guys, then I jump to the next level and say the coaches must have had something to do with it. It can't be a coincidence that all 3 of our transitions players all have bad years in the same year, when most of the other offensive players had pretty good statistical years. If the system is set up for transition players to succeed then there would have been at least one of those guys who would have stepped up and performed well. When their is a handful of players that heavily relied upon who's production is pretty consistent from year to year over the past few years, and then their is a coaching change and the production drops - what are we to think?

I know that there is A LOT more to it than just the statistical break down and the entire teams needs to be judged and held accountable for one number and that's W's. You have the privilege of seeing the day to day operation of the entire franchise so you truly do know what is taking place - I'm just giving a little bit of reasoning behind what some of us, who don't know as much as you because we aren't involved with it everyday, think.

I have a feeling that your long winded responses are getting tiresome....for all.

Amen!

You guys are probably right. Sorry to write such long messages I just get on a rant trying to explain myself and end up with a 19 chapter novel. I'll make sure to keep it concise in the future.

Look, it's an ***!




PS: Nobody is holding you at gunpoint and making you read anybody's posts. And if somebody is, well, you're on your own.

It's not that, I just think that constantly picking apart the GM's statements are rather annoying. I don't think that SG would go to your office and tell you how to do your job, so what makes any of us think that we can tell him how to do his?