[MarkRagnar]

Check out:

http://communities.c...-vigneault.aspx

Selected excerpts for those who can't read a long article:

Quote

Thanks to an injury-riddled lineup and a lack of forward depth, Montreal became a team full of checkers designed to keep games close. (Sound familiar?) In 98-99, Mark Recchi led the team with 47 points. Yes, forty-seven.

Even during the age of clogged neutral zones and incessant holding, the Habs were an anomaly. In 1998-99, the NHL still had three 100-point scorers and only one team - the 19-win Tampa Bay Lightning - had a leading scorer with fewer than Recchi's 47 (Darcy Tucker, 43).

Recchi wasn't alone in terms of poor production under Vigneault: Vinny Damphousse's numbers dipped significantly before being dealt to San Jose. Koivu suffered through a rash of injuries and could never top 57 points in a single season. All told, Vigneault only had one 30-goal scorer and five 20-goal scorers during his tenure in Montreal.

The same thing's happened in Vancouver. Naslund's productivity has plummeted, although the departure of Todd Bertuzzi and age have played a part. Last year was Brendan Morrison's lowest output since he joined the Canucks in 2000. Matt Cooke is on pace for 20 points, a 33 percent drop from last season.

Quote

It helps that the current Canuck makeup is tailor-made for Vigneault's philosophy. You don't need to coax young prospects or third-line checkers into hustling and defensive responsibilities. You ask Alex Burrows to jump, he asks how high and through which window.

As for its aesthetically-displeasing appearance, Vigneault's system is intelligent on a variety of levels. He's got three game-changing performers (Luongo, Sedin, Sedin) who'll often make the difference in tight games. Ergo, Vigneault's main priority is to get the team into close-game situations and let his go-to guys do their thing.

Is it boring? Yes. Will it get the Canucks into the playoffs? Probably. Will it win a Stanley Cup? Not a chance.

And that's what's so frustrating about Vancouver hockey. It's totally tapped out. Where's the upside? Luongo can't play any better. Most nights, neither can the defence. The Sedins aren't going to score 100 points each - a point per game is about all you can ask.

[crisp]

wait,,,hold the presses... alain vigneault likes tight, checking defensive hockey. NO! get this on the front page

[MarkRagnar]

crisp, on Jan 16 2008, 09:30 PM, said:

wait,,,hold the presses... alain vigneault likes tight, checking defensive hockey. NO! get this on the front page

If you read the article, there is a bit of analysis.

[midastouch84]

MarkRagnar, on Jan 16 2008, 07:26 PM, said:

Check out:

http://communities.c...-vigneault.aspx

Selected excerpts for those who can't read a long article:

I just read your selected paragraphs, but this guy seems on point. With this brought to light, Naslund and Morrison look to go elsewhere, the only thing that may keep them here is thier longstanding ties to the organization and of course, B.C.

Better to draw our lineup from within, because I can't see a high impact scorer wanting to fit into this...

We may however see the likes of Arnott signing on, just not the player everyone wants.

The only factor is Luongo. Will potential additions to our roster forfeit offensive freedom to get in bed with a defensive styled team???? Only time will tell my friends.

[Gaborik_Fan#1]

It's pretty obvios we need some more skill to win a cup.

[sixwings]

it's obvious we need scoring, painfully obvious.


I think with Lui they need to play more of a run and gun style hockey game, take far more shots on net and allow it to become more a battle of which goalie lets in fewer goals. Luongo will these battles.


Instead of that, it seems we are content to lose by the smallest margin, or win by the smallest margin.


Although, we are leading the division, and I have never played hockey outside of P.E/road hockey, so my ideas aren't really valid.

[BurnabyJoe]

" Is it boring? Yes. Will it get the Canucks into the playoffs? Probably. Will it win a Stanley Cup? Not a chance. "

Bang on!!!!!!!!!!! Finally.

And he said it right in the article, Naslund, Morrison etc. are sucking donkey because of our donkey sucking system.

Stop defending it. We will never win the cup with this team, we will just make fans think we have a chance.

[Brick Tamland]

MarkRagnar, on Jan 16 2008, 07:26 PM, said:

Check out:

http://communities.c...-vigneault.aspx

Selected excerpts for those who can't read a long article:

*sigh* but how do you explain the Sedins then... AV works with what he has... Naslund has been going downhill for years, along with Mo...

PS: HE WAS THE JACK ADAMS AWARD WINNER LAST YEAR!

This province is full of morons...

This post has been edited by Brick Tamland: 16 January 2008 - 08:47 PM

[stawns]

yeah, let's go back to the WCE, Crawford style.......it got them so far.

[pyattlover135790]

BurnabyJoe, on Jan 16 2008, 09:45 PM, said:

" Is it boring? Yes. Will it get the Canucks into the playoffs? Probably. Will it win a Stanley Cup? Not a chance. "

Bang on!!!!!!!!!!! Finally.

And he said it right in the article, Naslund, Morrison etc. are sucking donkey because of our donkey sucking system.

Stop defending it. We will never win the cup with this team, we will just make fans think we have a chance.

k if ur gonna say that then just get off this site..

[BurnabyJoe]

stawns, on Jan 16 2008, 07:48 PM, said:

yeah, let's go back to the WCE, Crawford style.......it got them so far.

Hey mr. sarcasm! We had Dan Cloutier. When you have Luongo you dont exactly need to play the way we do.

[luongod_1]

we actually have the skill in our organization, but they are not in the lineup!!!!

jaffray and raymond were magic together, why break that up?

[stawns]

sixwings, on Jan 16 2008, 09:43 PM, said:

it's obvious we need scoring, painfully obvious.
I think with Lui they need to play more of a run and gun style hockey game, take far more shots on net and allow it to become more a battle of which goalie lets in fewer goals. Luongo will these battles.
Instead of that, it seems we are content to lose by the smallest margin, or win by the smallest margin.
Although, we are leading the division, and I have never played hockey outside of P.E/road hockey, so my ideas aren't really valid.

If only the other 90% of the posters here would come to that realization and halt their mindless drivel, things here might almost be bearable. I don't mind people posting their feelings, opinions, as long as this little caveat follows the end of the post. This board is chalk full of arm chair GM's who have likely never laced up a pair of skates in a com[etitive game in their lives, yet like to pontificate and critisize the staff of the Canucks who have forgotten ten times more than they will ever know about playing hockey (and that's being mighty generous).

[luongod_1]

BurnabyJoe, on Jan 17 2008, 03:51 AM, said:

Hey mr. sarcasm! We had Dan Cloutier. When you have Luongo you dont exactly need to play the way we do.

i concur, i don't get why people react like that. crawford won the stanley cup with colorado, and patrick roy is essentially luongo. perhaps, crawford knows how to utilize his offense in a better way

[stawns]

luongod_1, on Jan 16 2008, 09:54 PM, said:

i concur, i don't get why people react like that. crawford won the stanley cup with colorado, and patrick roy is essentially luongo. perhaps, crawford knows how to utilize his offense in a better way

They had a little more than Roy

1996 COLORADO AVALANCHE: Rene Corbet, Adam Deadmarsh, Stephane Fiset, Adam Foote, Peter Forsberg, Alexei Gusarov, Dave Hannan, Valeri Kamensky, Mike Keane, Jon Klemm, Uwe Krupp, Sylvain Lefebvre, Claude Lemieux, Curtis Leschyshyn, Troy Murray, Sandis Ozolinsh, Mike Ricci, Patrick Roy, Warren Rychel, Joe Sakic, Chris Simon, Craig Wolanin, Stephane Yelle, Scott Young. (Head Coach: Marc Crawford)

[Sweet 16]

BurnabyJoe, on Jan 16 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

Hey mr. sarcasm! We had Dan Cloutier. When you have Luongo you dont exactly need to play the way we do.

In the real world you don't get Luongo and the WCE. You get the WCE and Dan Cloutier or you get Luongo and Brad Isbister.

Sorry.

[MarkRagnar]

Brick Tamland, on Jan 16 2008, 09:46 PM, said:

*sigh* but how do you explain the Sedins then... AV works with what he has... Naslund has been going downhill for years, along with Mo...

PS: HE WAS THE JACK ADAMS AWARD WINNER LAST YEAR!

This province is full of morons...

Quote

AV works with what he has

He doesn't just work with what he has, he goes out and gets more of them i.e. the gritty plugs he likes so much. The Canucks fill up on the Burrows and Rypiens.

Quote

Naslund has been going downhill for years, along with Mo

Morrisons, Naslunds and Cooks point production has been going down like Damphousse, Recchi's and Koivu's did under AV.

I'm not saying AV's system is wrong ; if we get more goals than the opposition it's right. (I posted the article because I thought it showed a bit of insight and analysis, not because I agree with everything it says.) People shouldn't, however, expect Naslund and co to score like they did under Crawford.

Quote

PS: HE WAS THE JACK ADAMS AWARD WINNER LAST YEAR!

He did a fantastic job changing the character and indentity of a team in one year, and bringing them back to winning form. I'm not saying he's not a great coach; it's just that, as advertised, he may doesn't have much offensive imagination. The question is: does he have enough?

When you are behind in the 3rd, you have to find some offense somewhere. Our dismal record this year shows that we need to be able to find a bit more. And here is where I fear the KB might be right:

Quote

Vigneault is obviously dedicated to his system. But when things go wrong, dedication can look a lot like inflexibility. Or, even worse, ignorance. The fact is, Vigneault has not yet proven he can get the best out of an offence. He's the Herm Edwards of the NHL: ultra-conservative, not enough imagination.

This post has been edited by MarkRagnar: 16 January 2008 - 09:20 PM

[MarkRagnar]

Sweet 16, on Jan 16 2008, 10:18 PM, said:

In the real world you don't get Luongo and the WCE. You get the WCE and Dan Cloutier or you get Luongo and Brad Isbister.

Sorry.

That would have been an excellent point, if it didn't fall immediately after Stawn's posting re: the '96 Avs roster.

Make that In the real, post-cap world you don't get Luongo and the WCE. You get the WCE and Dan Cloutier or you get Luongo and Brad Isbister.

[crisp]

Nothing to see here, move along

[Triconn]

I don't care what kind of system the team is playing under A.V., just win the cup before I turn 40! We still got 2 more years with Luongo, if he leaves the team by the end of his contract, DN must go. We're turning into Vancouver Maple Laughs, 38yrs and counting...