SUMMERLIN, Nev. — BostonSportsJournal.com's Greg Bedard sat down with Bruce Cassidy out in Las Vegas to discuss his firing from the Bruins, narratives surrounding his coaching tenure in Boston and his new opportunity with the Golden Knights.
_____________________________
For Bruce Cassidy, hockey is hockey - no matter where the puck is dropped.
Regardless of the setting of an NHL barn — be it the frozen tundra of Edmonton in January, the concrete jungle of New York City or the sunny coastline down in Florida — there isn’t a whole lot that the longtime bench boss needs to do when it comes to augmenting his approach or style once the first seconds begin ticking off the clock in the opening period of play.
But exiting the familiar, frozen confines of a rink? Well, that’s where the true growing pains are felt.
Because for as much as Cassidy is an avid golfer, there’s a sizable gap in tolerance between what one deals with during a muggy July morning down the Cape — and the scorched realm that is the Mojave here at his latest stop in Nevada.
“It's just hot,” Cassidy said to BostonSportsJournal.com at the Vegas Golden Knights’ facility in Summerlin, Nevada. “We're not used to it. I've golfed a couple of times. It's hot. No other way to say it. I think everyone says, 'Well, you appreciate it more than in like October, November when you're not shoveling.'”
Aside from the heat, the Cassidy clan has started to settle into their new surroundings, roughly 2,700 miles from Cassidy’s previous home — where he spent 14 years working his way up the coaching ladder from the AHL ranks to the helm of an Original Six franchise.
And even though the parallels drawn between the arid desert of Vegas and the varied climate of New England are hard to discern, Cassidy’s ambitions with the Golden Knights remain unchanged from his time in Boston.
“Do you have a chance to win the Cup? Because that's what you're in it for and balance that versus maybe a team that was on the rise,” Cassidy said of what made Vegas such an appealing destination for him after his firing from Boston back in June. “Us coaches want that chance to win. I think that tilted the scales. Not that the other teams don't. But that's just how I felt about Vegas. … You got a blend of everything. And that was it. A chance to win at the end.”
Of course, in a perfect situation, Cassidy wouldn’t have had to head west in order to continue his quest to hoist Lord Stanley’s Cup.
While Cassidy might hail from Ottawa, the Orr-led Bruins were always the club the fleet-footed blueliner supported growing up — and after more than a decade in Boston, the Cassidy family’s roots were set within the Commonwealth.
“We were a Bruins family,” Cassidy said. “My son was a guy that we went to playoff games for the Red Sox ... He loves the Pats. My daughter, the Celtics, we'd go there — we became part of the community in terms of all the sports, so that part it's tough to detach yourself. And it still will be a little bit. But being, whatever, five hours away by plane — like you're not even in that time zone. Like things are gonna change. But again, you always have a piece of yourself there. I don't think that'll ever change.”
The Cassidy’s might always have a piece of themselves in Boston, but the former B’s head coach was quick to note that long-term tenures as a coach are hard to secure — at least not without a couple of championships on your resume.
Still, aside from a fateful matchup on June 12, 2019, Cassidy felt as though he carried out his duties at a high level during his time with the Bruins — posting a 245-108-46 record during his six years behind Boston’s bench.
“We had six good years of good hard work,” Cassidy said. “I thought the fan base was proud of the Bruins. We didn't finish off Game 7 like we wanted. We know that and that will always bother me and the players and I'm sure the management. But I thought we were always there every night — we came to play, which is something to be proud of.”
Given his track record, Cassidy felt as though his job was secure following Boston’s first-round exit against the Hurricanes in May — noting back in June following his firing that he was told “it would be status quo” in regards to his fate.
“When you don't win — I always think there's a possibility,” Cassidy said of the possibility of getting fired. “I had some term left on my deal. So sometimes that can affect ... that's the business side of it. So yeah, there is a chance, but I felt like coming out of the meetings that wasn't going to happen — and then that changed.”
For the Bruins, the decision to chart a new course with Jim Montgomery was a measure rooted in the franchise’s desire for a “new voice” behind the bench. It was an expected narrative for the Bruins to focus on, with Cassidy noting that he felt there was no breakdown in communication with Don Sweeney — adding that any critiques regarding his messaging style with players were expected evaluations that are broadcast during most exit interviews.
“There was always feedback from Donnie,” Cassidy said. “At the end of the year, players meetings with him, my player meetings about ... some of the younger guys felt at times that there was, whatever Donnie said ... it's the messaging. He said, 'Well, we'll work on that with the young guys and you've got to perform, right? Get the best out of everyone.' So we'll make some adjustments. And I think we have done that over the years. You saw it this year alone with Jake (DeBrusk) — he finished well, so I think that was a credit to everyone involved to get the player back to where he needs to be, and hopefully a real good player for Boston.
“So that's basically some back and forth that would be no different than any other year in terms of here's what the players liked, here's where I'm hearing that we should think about and how you want to adjust for our style of play. There were some comments. I thought the Bruins had a very distinct style of play over the years that made them successful. …There's a certain amount of conviction a coach has to have and I felt we played a way that was best suited for us to win. And I think Donnie agreed. I know he agreed with me on that most nights. … We would talk about always getting better. But what do you take from this area to get better in that area? Those are typically discussions that we would have almost every year.”
Now more than two months removed from his firing, most of the narratives surrounding Cassidy’s tenure in Boston and the flaws that Boston likely honed in on have been mapped out at this point.
For as much as Cassidy’s blunt delivery and high standards in regards to Boston’s younger wave of talent painted the picture of a coach who stunted the development of prospects while favoring established veterans, Cassidy pushed back at that talking point, noting that the Bruins incorporated a number of younger pieces into the lineup during his six years in Boston.
“That was a little bit of kind of where I disagree with some of the narrative of ... we put a lot of younger players in the NHL in my time in Boston,” Cassidy said. “From McAvoy, Carlo, Grzelcyk, Swayman, DeBrusk, Bjork. Some of them were traded — Donato for a guy like Coyle, where we were upgrading our team. They were young players that other teams wanted. And it was Frederic now who's coming in to play the full year last year. And even Pastrnak was young when I took over. So there was a lot of young guys that I thought we developed well for Boston.”
Of course, one can also point to the causality between Cassidy’s removal from his post and Boston’s subsequent roster moves this summer — with Patrice Bergeron returning for a 19th season, David Krejci coming back stateside after a year abroad in the Czech Republic and DeBrusk rescinding his trade request.
But Cassidy didn’t believe as though his relationship with Boston’s veterans like Bergeron and Krejci had an impact on their decisions to return for the 2022-23 season — although DeBrusk’s motivations are a bit more unclear.
“What I know about Bergy, we talked at the end of the year — he was upfront about I'm going to take some time. I don't think the decision they made with me had anything to do with Bergy,” Cassidy said. “He's played for a lot of different coaches. If you look at his last (few seasons), his scoring numbers are up. He's won Selkes. I mean, he's had a very successful tenure. So I don't believe that with Bergy.
“Krejci was very upfront last year — he told us that his parents were getting older, he wanted his kids to get to know his grandparents. With COVID, there was a good challenge and he was going home. For how long? He said 'I don't know. But if I come back' and he said, 'Listen, 'I'm gonna probably just come back for the Bruins.' He didn't want to speak out of turn and I don't wanna speak for him. So that one was upfront.
“The Jake one? Only he can answer that. I thought he had a really good finish to his year. I think there was different things that went into his trade demand. We just signed Taylor Hall to a long-term contract, who was a left winger. Marsh had a long-term contract, so there may have been some issues of how high I can get in the lineup. I think the thing that worked out with Jake is he switched to play the right wing and that really helped him get more ice time and play with higher-end players. So that was a good thing for him to be amenable to that switch. But only he can answer that. But Bergy and Krech, I don't believe that. I think they had good years. With Krech, we never had disagreements — he wanted to play to (David) Pastrnak more than he did. Who didn't, right? He'd be the first to admit it. Hopefully get gets his chance this year. I don't know how the lines will shake out. But Pasta is gonna get two great centermen to play with."
Granted, even with all of the talking points regarding Cassidy’s coaching style and what could have prompted Boston’s decision to let him go, you could also counter many of those assertions by arguing that Boston’s inability to get over the hump in recent years had more to do with failings in the front office as far as roster management is concerned, rather than Cassidy’s coaching.
So did Cassidy feel as though he was a scapegoat following a season in which both Sweeney and Cam Neely also warranted valid criticism?
"Well, I certainly wanted to come back and felt that I had deserved to come back,” Cassidy said. “I thought I did my job. Nobody's happy when you don't win the Cup. I'm not gonna sit here and say the staff was infallible or anything like that. We needed to be better in the playoffs in certain years. At the same time, I thought we got a lot out of the players that were in front of us. It's tough to win. We were in the mix every year, we just couldn't quite get it done. So I don't know about 'sacrifice'. I just felt thought our staff did a really good job.
“But I also know this right? Longevity in the coaching business is a luxury, and you have to typically win a lot of championships, like Bill (Belichick), to stay in one place for a long time. Typically, that's the way it is. The date you're hired, you're on the clock. I understand that. So I didn't look at it necessarily in those terms. I just looked at it — did I give the Bruins my best? And I felt I did. A new voice, that happens a lot. That's a decision they made and I landed in a great spot. I look at the positive side of it.”
While Vegas might have its own set of roster holes that will need to be addressed (specifically, in net), Cassidy feels as though there’s a lot to like about a Vegas team that, much like himself, has plenty to prove in 2022-23.
Getting his name etched into the Cup remains his top priority — but a win or two against his former club in December (Dec. 5 at TD Garden, Dec. 11 at T-Mobile Arena) is also an enticing scenario that is not lost on the former B's coach.
"Listen, 14 years in the organization — it's natural to want to put your best foot forward against the team that let you go,” Cassidy said. “We'll prepare the players like we would any other game. Hopefully they're ready to go that night. But at the end of the day, like I said, we will go back there in the summers (to their house on Cape Cod), I'm sure. I can't predict the future, maybe we'll find something here that's better for our family. So I'll always have the Bruins kind of tattooed on me. But at the end of the day, my heart's in Vegas.
“The goal doesn't change for me. I want the name on the Stanley Cup. I would have loved to do it with Boston. But now it's Vegas. Like I said, I wish them well. I've got some real good friends there, I met some great people, good memories. All those things. There's really no negatives other than we didn't win Game 7 in that Final that would have accomplished some of the goals that we all wanted. But we got to get back there and maybe have another chance here."
Here are a few other takeaways from our interview with Cassidy, presented in Q&A format. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Q: Going from a market with an Original Six franchise to a market with a franchise that’s going into its sixth season — how do you compare/contrast the hockey environment between Boston and Las Vegas?
"That's to be determined. I think, for me, you can't replace the history of a team. The banners, the retired jerseys. The old documentaries — you just don't have that here yet. They were close to a banner. They've been able to develop a brand here, I think, faster than probably any expansion team that you can think of. Like the Knights logo is everywhere. So they've been able to market this team, and the logo and the name and all of that. So I think that separates them a little bit from an expansion (team). The level of success they had that first year is probably unparalleled, so they've got a little bit of that going.
“So that also develops a bit of hatred too. Some franchises around the league that haven't done much now are a little resentful. So they're out there. They're developing. So that part of it I've learned that already. And then the Vegas born — I'm starting to realize how important that is to this city. Maybe versus the Raiders coming in from another market, this is theirs from inception. I think that's where, when you look at Boston back home and all their teams in the Original Six, here I see that the Vegas-born mentality — and especially with the tragedy of the shooting all tied together — is what has really been something in this market that's galvanized the community and the Knights together. That's something you wouldn't know from the outside. Now that you come in, you see a lot more, just talking casually with people. … The fan base has really taken to the team. Obviously, a lot has to do with that first year. It was a magical run. I guess that's where we got to keep building on that.”
Q: What made the Golden Knights such an appealing opportunity for you?
Well, they were one of the teams that were the most interested. So you feel right away, especially after being let go that 'Hey, this is somebody that wants you. It's not fake'. They explained why — what they thought their team needed., what I brought to the table and with Boston — strong special teams, accountability with players, played good team defense. A lot of things they felt would translate into what they were looking for. And I knew George McPhee from Washington years ago. So there was a little bit of that familiarity, but there wasn't a lot of the players and I thought that's okay — that's good and new and fresh. They've had three big playoff runs. So they've been there.
They've got some players that have been through it. They're not young, but they're not old. Some people said that after, 'Oh, well they're on the down turn'. Look at the age of their group. They've got some good young talent that still is going to grow. And they've got some established guys like (William) Karlsson, (Jonathan) Marchessault, (Reilly) Smith line, for example. They're here from the original day and they're, I think they're 30 years — they're not old, they're just not kids. And they've got some young talent."
Q: You’re inheriting a team that missed the postseason for the first time in franchise history, but is still positioned to try and contend in 2022-23. What have been your initial impressions of this roster?
Strong down the middle. Obviously, (Jack) Eichel is healthy — young, lots to prove. Jack has been in the league for a while. I think he's 25 years old. He's just sort of learning. Chandler Stephenson's a very underrated player down the middle. Nick Roy is a fourth-line center that can move up. It's something that I believe in. We did in Boston, four lines. ... And then (William) Karlsson, so they're strong down the middle. I think their D corps is as good as any. (Shea) Theodore and (Alex) Pietrangelo are two guys who would have been on Team Canada, most likely. Two world-class players and some solid guys that won a cup in Alec Martinez and (Brayden) McNabb. So you have a mix of old and young. And the third pair is very underrated too, they got two young guys.
“The question mark a little bit was in net with (Robin) Lehner's injury. It turns out that it's probably a little worse than we originally thought, so that's an area we're gonna have to work on. They have a young guy in (Logan) Thompson, who's a little bit like Swayman in Boston. Has played well in a short (time). So he has to prove himself, but there's some real upside there. So that's what I thought of the team, I thought they're really good down the middle, excellent D corps. So usually when have that, you're in every game if you get the saves, because you're gonna be good defensively and good all around, 200-foot game. And then you put some wingers in there that can score. I know they moved a few. So for me, that's why think of the lineup. And like I said, a good balance of veteran guys. And a lot of younger guys. Mark Stone, he got hurt last year, there's another world-class player. So you've got some guys on this team that would have been — similar to Boston. They had some stars that obviously carried the team and they had some good soldiers behind them. I see similarities there."
Q: What would your message for a young player like DeBrusk to push forward and be sort of the player that he can be?
"Those messages have all been sent, to be honest with you. I'm a Knight now, he's a Bruin. I've said this many times. Jake is a good person. He was low maintenance in terms of dealing with him. My message always with Jake was in an every-day league, every day be ready to play, be at your best, second effort — that makes you climb up the ladder of the league in terms of going from a good player to a great player. And I think he has the ability to be a great player. So that's my job as a coach to push him to that level. How you push them from player to player is always something you re-evaluate. And we did with Jake and every other player — there comes a time when they earn more rope. And there are times we have to remind them of the process. He is a good player in the league and he is really, really good because he's got elite skating and he can finish. It's kind of, at some point, on the player to push through to get to the next level, like Marchy and Pasta in the past. So he may get to that age where now's the time. Maybe a different voice could be the time. We'll see."
Q: With the Tuukka Rask situation last season and how it all played out - were you on board with it?
"I was on board with it. Tuukka is a world-class goalie. Uncertainty with how his rehab would go, so there was a bit of that. Did it affect the other two goalies? My guess is yes. Again, those are questions for them. Swayman ends up getting sent down because of it. We knew that might happen. I don't think that's detrimental to Swayman in the big picture. Because he's gonna play games down there. Most goalies have to earn their way. And we didn't know how long it would be. Turns out it wasn't very long at all. (Linus) Ullmark, coming in as a new guy, competing for the number one (spot), knowing that could have affected him a little differently, coming from a situation with Buffalo where he had some injuries, a team that didn't go as well. Now you're in a market that has high expectations — especially for the goaltender position. So maybe with him, again, I don't want to speak for these guys. They were told from day one in September that Tuukka would end up practicing with us and there was a good chance he might play for us down the road if things go well. So they were aware of the situation. Might not have loved it and ideal for them to know that, but that's pro sports. So you take care of your work and you'll be fine.
"It would have been difficult — I remember to start the year, Swayman and (Dan) Vladar were both young guys to go in the year like that, without knowing about Tuukka. So I think we were all in agreement that we had to have a proven goaltender at that position. It ended up being Ullmark in free agency. And at the end of the day, that situation resolved itself because obviously Tuukka took himself out, didn't feel his body was holding up to play. I think it was a good, I don't want to say risk. I think it was a good play to see if he had hockey left in him. Because he was a good goaltender that has taken the Bruins a long way. It would have been a good problem to have more good goalies than not enough, I guess, in the long run."
Q: How do you feel your strengths as a head coach can complement this group in Vegas?
"I'm going to coach similar to what I did in Boston. I'm going to get a feel for how the players react to that. … We are a little farther along in terms of younger guys who aren't quite at that level. Now that could change in Henderson (AHL), these young guys may push, but that's what I've been told — like our roster is a little more defined than maybe the first few years when I got there. We changed some of the older guys that we've signed through free agency and brought in our drafted players. Like I said, the Bjorks and Vatranos and Donatos and (DeBrusk) and the defense. So that part we should be able to go right in, there should be familiar familiarity in the locker room for the players. The only new guys will be me and (Phil) Kessel. So not going to change a ton that way.
"Having said that, when you get let go, you're always thinking back — what could I have done differently? What can I change going forward? And as I said, there'll be a little bit of that and we'll see how it translates there without getting too much into it. And we'll find out how the players are. With travel, I was always a big practice guy — take care of details. Well, how does that affect you here? Your practice time — you're getting home two hours later, you know what I mean? Versus the East Coast where a lot of trips, you're back at home and in bed by 12:30 at night, so you're a little fresher the next day. But those are some things that will be new to me. that Some of them might be projecting anyway, it's hard to say I'm gonna do this and that until I get in front of the group and see how they react to my style, and I react to what they're doing. At the end of the day, you've got to meet somewhere in the middle to get the best out of them. That much how I know."
Q: What can you tell me about Jim Montgomery and have you had any discussions with him?
"Monty talked to me during his interview process. I was happy to answer any questions he had more about coaching the Bruins in general — because he has four kids, family, some of the dynamics, the dynamics of working for the Jacobs family. Like I said, I had nothing but positive things to say about coaching the Bruins. There are no negatives. It's a passionate fan base that loves the team. They'll let you know they don't like the team and I think that's out there. There's pressure and I think the pressure is good. It means you got a decent team and a fan base that cares. And he got a few questions along the way about — I didn't get into too much with each player because that's not my business. That's up to him, but more about how the environment worked. He's a smart guy, did well in Denver. Had some issues that obviously he's corrected and worked hard to correct. So I think he'll do well there. I've never worked with him. So I can't tell you that he's going to mesh with this guy or that guy, because I don't know his style."
Q: Beyond that Game 7, any other regrets you have from your tenure in Boston?
"You always look back and see what you could have done differently. We lost Game 7 last year. What could the coaching staff have done differently to help us win that game? I mean if you go through the whole time, like I said, there are small things along the way that you can learn from that you correct the next game. Always wondering when Krejci was there, should we have moved Pasta and balanced the lines? It's easy to second guess — we went to a Game 7 with those lines. But you're going to wonder about D pairs, whatever. Goaltending starts. But I think that you can beat yourself up all day long with those decisions. That's part of the business — you make some good calls and you make some where you say, 'Well, I guess I should have done this.' It's just a lot of stuff that you look back on. But all in all, I thought we were a pretty well-oiled machine most nights and the guys were accountable to one another and we had good communication with the leadership group, a lot of things that helped our team be better — I thought we did well as a staff. Overall, you analyze your game with analytics, there was a lot of strong play from the team."