Pelicans made an exceptional decision that turned the direction of the club.

The Pelicans’ last season was challenging. The financial side faltered as the league qualifiers had strained corporate sales. Thus, ice and rink advertisements remained unsold well into the season.

The Pelicans team also had its own problems. Out of the first 18 games, the team from Lahti had lost 12.

On November 3rd, the Pelicans made an extraordinary decision. Assistant coaches Tony Virta, Jussi Taipale, and Tom Koivisto were let go. However, head coach Sami Kapanen was allowed to stay. The new assistant coaches were promoted from the Pelicans’ junior teams: Teemu Leppänen and Ville-Matti Koponen.

The decision proved effective. The Pelicans’ game improved, and even with a weak offensive lineup, the team from Lahti reached the league quarter-finals.

In an interview with SuomiKiekko, Sami Kapanen recalls the turning point and reveals why the Pelicans got into such significant trouble in the first place.

– It was an exceptional decision. Of course, I have to be grateful that the club management showed trust in me, Kapanen says.

The change in assistant coaches was not just a personnel change; it also involved a shift in playing style. The early season had been played in a more straightforward, physical, and fast-paced manner at the request of the club management, which had not worked. With the coaching change, they returned to a more traditional Lahti-style, puck possession game.

– I believe that the personnel change and the shift in playing style gave the team a certain boost and a sense of security that they returned to a puck-controlling style of play. With that self-confidence, they were able to create momentum that carried into the spring, Kapanen says.

Kapanen does not want to criticize his old coaching team nor compare the new one to the old.

– In defense of the old coaching team, it is fair to say that the mindset was to take the organization in a completely different direction with the playing style. It was a fairly radical change that does not happen overnight. Players need to be able to adapt and implement it, as does the coaching team. If it is a very different playing style than what has been coached before, it is not easy for the coach either, Kapanen says.

Kapanen does not want to criticize the Pelicans’ management decision to change the playing style. He emphasizes that the decision might have been reasonable despite the poor outcome when viewed from a broader perspective.

– It is easy to speculate in hindsight whether the change should have been made gradually or whether the coaching team should have been different from the start of the last season, but one must consider the financial resources, the need for renewal, and why the change is being made. Perhaps the change in playing style was intended to bring more energy to the audience.

Can you, however, from a coach’s perspective, tell how it feels when asked to coach a playing style that is not characteristic to you?

– If the playing style is not characteristic to me, I will express that. I will always voice my opinion. Sometimes I will say it even if I am not asked. I will definitely bring up my concerns and views because I am aware that in this sport and profession, the head coach is the one who pays the price first for the organization’s decisions, player recruitments, losses, or changes in playing style.

The puck possession playing style has also brought results this season. Out of their first six games, the Pelicans have won three. The team from Lahti has created the seventh most expected goals per game while at the same time allowing the second least expected goals to their opponents.

Read more