The New Jersey Devils signed Lindy Ruff to a multi-year contract extension. But as Adam Proteau writes, recent NHL history shows an unsuccessful season can lead to a coaching change at any point.
Sometimes, in hockey as in life, it’s the little details that say the most. This much is true as far as NHL coaching goes.
All we have to do to recognize that fact is to look at the small print of the New Jersey Devils’ announcement this week that coach Lindy Ruff agreed to a multi-year contract extension.
The term “multi-year” is the key passage in the announcement. The team didn't specify the exact number of years Ruff’s new contract runs for. That’s because the NHL coaching profession has become hyper-transitory, to the point it doesn’t matter how long you’re on the payroll. You’re always an extended losing streak or playoff miss away from being dismissed.
The most recent example of the “multi-year” contract meaning essentially nothing in the coaching ranks comes from the Calgary Flames, who extended the contract of bench boss Darryl Sutter in October of 2022.
At the time, the move made sense, as Sutter led the Flames to a Pacific Division title in 2021-22. He also won the Jack Adams Award that year. But before that extension could kick in this fall, Sutter stumbled badly, reportedly alienated many of his players, and was fired in May. It didn’t make a difference that Sutter had the security of knowing he was under contract beyond this season; he was unable to deliver wins, and the team cut ties with him because of it.
Similarly, Gerard Gallant also learned the hard way that the league’s coaching carousel spins faster than ever these days. He spent the past two years with the New York Rangers, compiling a 99-46-19 regular-season record, and he set a franchise record last season as the first Blueshirts coach to post back-to-back 100-point seasons in the standings.
In some NHL markets, that would’ve been cause for a contract extension for Gallant. But in Manhattan, the expectations bar is significantly higher for the Rangers. After their disappointing first-round Stanley Cup playoff exit at the hands of the rival Devils, the Rangers “parted ways” with Gallant.
You can see where the fickleness of the profession could exasperate Gallant. But that organization was looking for more than he ultimately could produce, and his failure to lead the team to win enough playoff games spelled the end for his role on the Rangers.
There is no full disclosure for coaches’ salaries, just as there’s no disclosure for GMs and management members. Having the green light from owners to make changes in spite of their relatively high financial costs is a luxury for teams, and the coaching costs aren’t governed by the salary cap. It wouldn't be surprising if the bean counters for most teams project they’re going to be paying somebody not to be their coach anymore as part of their annual budget projections. It’s the cost of doing business.
At the very least, NHL coaches need to have the job security of one season under contract beyond the one they’re presently operating in. That does send a message to the players; there’s no discussion of “lame-duck” status or a coach coaching for his job in the last year of his deal.
However, the dynamics between coach and players change in the dressing room over time, just as they do in any other line of work. And what once was a positive situation sours more quickly than anyone might have guessed. Often unforeseeable events wind up causing tension between players and coaches. It’s all so much trial-by-fire, and every organization's approach to hiring and keeping coaches differs.
Ruff can and should be celebrating his extension. It wasn’t all that long ago he was on the hot seat in New Jersey. Many observers (this one included) thought he was in real danger of losing his job last year, but Ruff hung in there, and the Devils got much better, so he staved off dismissal and landed an extension. Good for him.
That doesn’t automatically mean Ruff is going to be New Jersey’s coach for the next two or three seasons. Circumstances can drastically change – players get injured or stop producing at elite levels – and the coach is often the one who must fall on their sword as a result of change.
Having some sort of longer-term financial security does work in coaches’ favors, but the last thing it does is guarantee a coach will remain in that position with any one team. Hired today, fired tomorrow.