Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 5 votes

Ian Esplen Nails The Coaching Problem (Must Read)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
82 replies to this topic

#61 sQuish

sQuish

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:20 AM

In fact this thread should just be locked as it's another anti-AV thread, we already have 50 of em.

#62 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,633 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:22 AM

I've never heard of this guy and judging by the content of the "article", there's a good reason why.

He sounds like a lot of the clueless 14 year-olds who clutter up CDC with similar tripe.
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#63 Sugar baby watermelon

Sugar baby watermelon

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,559 posts
  • Joined: 15-September 11

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:26 AM

Wow, I am sorry I read this thread. Hockeybuzz = pointless fan written post meant to come off as hockey analyst post. I want the last two minutes of my life back.

#64 Scoobydooby

Scoobydooby

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,388 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 08

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:28 AM

Pretty poorly written for an "article". Whenever you read a supposed article and it has spelling mistakes in it, the credibility takes a pretty big kick to the gut if you ask me.

I don't entirely disagree with what it gets at though.. I haven't been a huge fan of AV over the years and i think the op does touch on several points of frustration that I have with AV for sure. Doesn't make him a bad coach, obviously he is a very good coach. That said, I think he's been here and had a chance long enough.. just like Raymond. Either you get it done after this many years or you don't. Its tough, but that's the way it is. If something isn't working for you, you gotta make the change.

Lastly, why do people feel the need to add "must read". I mean come ON. If your topic and its content is good enough people will read it.. putting "must read" in the title is so lame and unecessary and in this case entirely untrue. Its not even close to a must read.. its barely a "might want to read".

Posted Image


#65 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:16 AM

In a war situation I would tend to trust the calm guy more. I don't want to see the coach throw a Tort or start gumming a load of bull in the players ears like Suter. These are not single brain cell soccer players they are highly intelligent hockey professionals who know the score.

Did it ever occur to you the reason we don't have bampots on our team is they are "screened for the right stuff" before we acquire them. We have elite leaders in the team itself and I'm sure if something needs said by AV and his coaches it gets passed on in a quiet controlled manner...............Focus and keep doing what the situation requires.


We don't have bampots on our team because we have no Scottish. Plus Burberry caps and trackie bottom have never been en vogue in Canada.
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.


Logic at its finest.

#66 Quaz

Quaz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 10

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:39 AM

I don't see how you support that argument.

We here not bludgeoned out of the SC Final series by Boston. Sure there were a few unsavoury incidents like the face wipe etc. But game 7 could have gone either way, we gave as good as we got. We were injured before Boston and then took some more but I think you take Tim Thomas out and it doesn't even go to 7.


Sorry, wasn't completely clear. Was talking about the inability to score.

Boston's system against us countered us to the point that we could barely move out there.
What was it, 7 goals in 7 games? Boston took all the space and time away and rendered
our team pretty much useless. We were left with taking shots from the perimeter and made
TT's job that much easier. Physically we weren't able to get enough net presence to make
a difference.

This is exactly what the Kings are doing too. And why not? It worked perfectly well for Boston.
Here we are down 3-0 to a team we SHOULD be able to beat but can't because we have no
space out there and we can't get to the front of their net. The puck possession game doesn't
work (for this team at least) when they are aggressively checked 1 on 1 like they have been
in this series.

We are not built to play this kind of game and I don't think AV should carry any of the blame.
You can't coach size and strength and just recognizing it as a problem isn't enough. The type
of players you're looking for have to at least be available right? Unfortunately for us, Gillis
wasn't able to find what we needed and did a patch job by giving us size and strength on a line
that only plays 5 minutes a game.

#67 Jester@wraiths.ca

Jester@wraiths.ca

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,226 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:29 PM

In regards to puck possession style getting shut down by what the Bruins and now Kings are doing, there are differences in the Canucks puck possession style and say a team like Detroit's. The Detroit puck possession system generates high quality scoring chances with players going hard to the net, our system generates perimeter shots. It's two very different things, even though the systems are both "puck possession".

Against a good goalie, generating 50 perimeter shots is pretty much useless. You're going to get 1 goal every hundred of those types of chances, and that won't win you games. A good puck possession style holds onto the puck and moves it smartly while players go hard to the net, and then take the shot, instead of wasting bad shots from far out that have no chance of a goal unless they get a fluke deflection.

#68 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 299 posts
  • Joined: 11-March 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:46 PM

I've said for a very long time that this team has won a lot of games simply because of the roster being extremely strong, coasting to wins when it wasn't a tight game. But when the team faced real adversity, when teams gave it their all against us, we faltered. In the playoffs, same thing. Those times ARE what defines an honestly good coach. Any coach that is even close to average can coach a roster like we've had (with our world class goalies) to regular season success, but when the games get tough and tight, you see how good a coach is. How he counters what the other team does, what he does, how he sees whats being done to his team and gives them a gameplan that beats that.

Look at AV. When another team's coach solves what we're doing, AV stands there and chews... and stares. Where is the coach when they need him to give them the solution? he stands there. When they make mistakes, he doesn't coach them, he stands there. When there is a time out and normally you see the head coach explaining to his troops what they need to do, where is AV? He's standing there while the assistant does it. meanwhile the opposing head coach is drawing the gameplan for the other team.

And to give no support at all to your Captain, your star, who honestly played his heart out and looked like he was channeling Trevor Linden, is despicable. I had little respect for AV before, but even less now.

Absolutely agree!

#69 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,081 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:50 PM

Mike Babcock shows incredible amounts of passion.


Just about every coach in the NHL does except for AV.

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#70 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:03 PM

I like how you suggest the Kings will tune out Sutter even less than a year into his tenure as their coach. Remind me again of how long AV has coached the team, and why don't we find out the average tenure of NHL coaches while we're at it.

No matter what you think of the coaching, we are down 3-0 to the 8th place team in the west. They are relying on solid defense and sublime goaltending. At some point the coach has to figure out how to exploit the holes in the Kings' strategy, and get the players to buy into this strategy. All I hear is "stick to the gameplan" and where has that gotten us?


You just backed up my argument with your first paragraph.

AV has coached the same team in a pressurized hockey city for six years. That alone makes his run here impressive.

Darryl Sutter coached SJ for about 4 years before being fired midway through next season. Even that is long-term by NHL coaching standards. Check out his playoff record while also having semi-long tenure. It was pathetic with the team he had in front of him. AV stacks up pretty well against Sutter in that regard.

So you're basing, then, the "difference" in quality between coaches within a three game series. By that token, Joel Quenneville should have been fired long ago -- you know, the guy who every AV hater said outcoached our team in those payoff matchups. Quenneville had a nine-game losing streak late this past regular season, and the fans were fed up with him. Oh, but wait, they turned it around, and suddenly he's a genius again. AV had an identical eight game losing streak in January the year they then went on to have the best post All-Star break record in the NHL before beating the 2nd best post All-Star team, St Louis, in four games straight.

My point? The Canucks, through a combo of unexplainable slumps combined with bad luck and Edler's sudden phobia of playing hockey, are going through this at the worst possible time.

If you don't believe me about Sutter next year, we'll just have to wait and see, but the track record for tough-as-nails coaches has always been a short shelf life. Would that work for the Canucks short term? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm not a fan of volatility in the decision-making staff. Mike Keenan as GM and coach ring any bells? He convened in the darkest days of this franchise. Dave Tippett would be my first choice if AV were to be repalced. I think he's the best coach in the NHL, but as LonnyBohonos has quoted above, way too much credit is given to Cup winning coaches, and often far too much blame (in the Canucks case, currently, for sure) is given to coaches on excellent teams who don't get it done. Look around the NHL, and if you're consistent, you'll have to revise your opinion very shortly on Bylsma, and one of Babcock or Trotz.

#71 King_Canuckian

King_Canuckian

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,229 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 03

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:33 PM

^ My point with AV having been here for so long is more to do with being past the best-before date. Players can only listen to a coach so long before the voice turns into a drone (or like when adults speak in the Charlie Brown world). Much in the same way a trade can rejuvenate a player, a coaching change can rejuvenate the coach's career, and get a team back on track.

Clearly, AV isn't getting through to the players. The after-whistle play is really making the Canucks lose their focus. AV can't seem to keep Kesler from falling. The discipline of the team is a joke. And I just absolutely hate his favourtism.

Canucks are the better team on paper, even without Daniel in the line-up. The coach has to prepare the team for their opponent... is this something that you feel has actually transpired?

10055118.jpg

 

You don't understand anything, man. Leave your stupid comments in your pocket


#72 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:48 PM

^ My point with AV having been here for so long is more to do with being past the best-before date. Players can only listen to a coach so long before the voice turns into a drone (or like when adults speak in the Charlie Brown world). Much in the same way a trade can rejuvenate a player, a coaching change can rejuvenate the coach's career, and get a team back on track.

Clearly, AV isn't getting through to the players. The after-whistle play is really making the Canucks lose their focus. AV can't seem to keep Kesler from falling. The discipline of the team is a joke. And I just absolutely hate his favourtism.

Canucks are the better team on paper, even without Daniel in the line-up. The coach has to prepare the team for their opponent... is this something that you feel has actually transpired?


Agree with the best-before-date. All players eventually tune out a long-standing coach. The problem I have with that scenario right now is that usually we, the fans, hear some inkling of dissension when it happens, especially in a heavily-scrutinized media atmosphere of Vancouver hockey. It could be there, but until I hear any post-mortem comments, when these things are more apt to come out, I'll reserve judgement.

I'll grant that game 1 we looked pathetic. Yes, part of that has to be tagged to Vigneault. But, unlike many others here, I always put the responsibility of players' intensity right back on the players themselves. Remember, we led the regular season in first goals of the game. So before game one, (and we also scored first that game), preparation was obviously a strong part of an AV-coached team. I thought we were the better team in game 2, and especially in game 3. But the best team doesn't always win on any given night -- look at last night's Ott-NYR game. Lundquist stole the game for the Rangers.

Bottom line is, barring some surprising post-loss negative revelation, internally, about AV, I'd hope he's back, but I doubt that he will be, so the AV haters will get their wish in any event.

#73 resdog

resdog

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 07

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:05 PM

Bottom line is, barring some surprising post-loss negative revelation, internally, about AV, I'd hope he's back, but I doubt that he will be, so the AV haters will get their wish in any event.


I agree, even if the team bows out to LA, AV is back next season...unless the core players go over his head and ask for a change.

As for the haters...it must feel dirty and greasy to know that the only way you can be proven right is if the team you are supposedly cheering for fails.
Perception is 9/10ths of the flaw

#74 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,633 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:05 PM

@ Barry: We've had our disagreements in the past, but I have to say that you're pretty much the only one in this thread who knows what he's talking about. Well done.

Edit: Sorry resdog. Typed before I saw your post.

Edited by RUPERTKBD, 17 April 2012 - 04:07 PM.

Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#75 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,605 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:07 PM

Even Henrik said he was fine with the hit.

Vigneault didn't "throw Henrik under the bus". He made a reasonable comment about a hard, clean hit. The message: suck it up and play through it. But then AV knew that anyway. That's what a good captain does, Henrik missed a shift, then played well the rest of the game.

Patting players on the back after they make mistakes is great if they're peewees. Adults don't need to be coddled. And there're plenty of times when Bowness gives instruction to players on the bench -- (without the love taps and flowery encouragement).

Horsesh*t. Patting players on the back is what I saw Sutter do to one of his guys when he made a bonehead play. His team is up 3-0.
The players have the talent. There's no doubt about that. So what are they missing? Heart? Well, as a coach, you find a god damned way to maotivate them to show some heart.
I tell you what. You go ahead and love AV all you want. And when he's gone, you go root for the team he coaches. I will be rooting for the Canucks, no matter who their coach is, but eswpecially if they find a coach who knows how to get his men to play with purpose. It's the coache's job, after all.
And you do stick up for your captain and star player, no matter how "good" the hit is, not because you think it was a dirty hit, but because he's your captain and star player and he needs to know you've got his back through thick and thin.
Once an AHL coach, always an AHL coach. I can't wait 'tioll they ship his arse out of here.

Edited by Vansicle, 17 April 2012 - 04:07 PM.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#76 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:07 PM

@ Barry: We've had our disagreements in the past, but I have to say that you're pretty much the only one in this thread who knows what he's talking about. Well done.

Edit: Sorry resdog. Typed before I saw your post.


Cheers, Rupert.

#77 CanuckFan1981

CanuckFan1981

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 677 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 06

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:08 PM

I would point out that Scotty Bowman, greatest hockey coach of all time rarely if ever showed ANY emotion behind the bench. If you want current day coaches, neither Bylsma or Trotz show any emotion (Trotz has that eyebrow twitch, but not kicking and screaming at his guys). Sometimes that emotion can spark a team, I admit. In other cases it only gets the players more hyped to the point they lose their discipline.

AV has 267 wins, 148 losses, 45 OTL's with the Nucks
in the playoffs he is 32-27 (and the first couple years we sucked)

FYI, Torteralla and his firey emotions haven't made it out of the first round in the same time frame.

#78 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

Horsesh*t. Patting players on the back is what I saw Sutter do to one of his guys when he made a bonehead play. His team is up 3-0.
The players have the talent. There's no doubt about that. So what are they missing? Heart? Well, as a coach, you find a god damned way to maotivate them to show some heart.
I tell you what. You go ahead and love AV all you want. And when he's gone, you go root for the team he coaches. I will be rooting for the Canucks, no matter who their coach is, but eswpecially if they find a coach who knows how to get his men to play with purpose. It's the coache's job, after all.
And you do stick up for your captain and star player, no matter how "good" the hit is, not because you think it was a dirty hit, but because he's your captain and star player and he needs to know you've got his back through thick and thin.
Once an AHL coach, always an AHL coach. I can't wait 'tioll they ship his arse out of here.


The point is that it doesn't matter what you or I think of AV.. It's the players that matter. And through 6 years of blood, sweat and tears, aside from a few malingerers (and AV did the right thing in those cases) like SOB and Wellwood, there've been few players who've had a problem with him personally or with his coaching. Amazing when you think of the expectations, media scrutiny, and longevity.

Oh, and when AV is gone, I'll be cheering on the Canucks as I've done every year since their inception. (Not sure where you're going with that.)

#79 Jester@wraiths.ca

Jester@wraiths.ca

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,226 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:35 PM

I would point out that Scotty Bowman, greatest hockey coach of all time rarely if ever showed ANY emotion behind the bench. If you want current day coaches, neither Bylsma or Trotz show any emotion (Trotz has that eyebrow twitch, but not kicking and screaming at his guys). Sometimes that emotion can spark a team, I admit. In other cases it only gets the players more hyped to the point they lose their discipline.

AV has 267 wins, 148 losses, 45 OTL's with the Nucks
in the playoffs he is 32-27 (and the first couple years we sucked)

FYI, Torteralla and his firey emotions haven't made it out of the first round in the same time frame.


I don't in any way feel that a coach needs to yell or be emotional, he just needs to do something. AV watching the assistants do everything while other teams head coaches counter us, isn't my idea of a head coach that is doing HIS job. When we're struggling, the head coach should be the man to get the team focused and give them direction. I don't see that from AV.

As for "AV's" record. As a Canuck, Luongo has 224 wins, 114 losses, 41 OTL's.
AV's NON Luongo record was 43-34-4 , not even close to as good.
Luongo's otherworldly play won AV coach of the year, without amazing goaltending, AV does not get wins here. Other teams still win with mediocre tending, but whenever Luongo or backups have been just plain average, AV's "coaching" can't cope with that...

Edited by Jester@wraiths.ca, 17 April 2012 - 04:39 PM.


#80 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:31 PM

whining about Weise, Kassian or Ebbett not being utilized it ridiculous - game three was vital - two full days rest afterwards - AV was using his best players as much as he could trying to get the win - had nothing to do with bad coaching or failing to trust the depth players - look at the circumstances.

#81 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:44 PM

In regards to puck possession style getting shut down by what the Bruins and now Kings are doing, there are differences in the Canucks puck possession style and say a team like Detroit's. The Detroit puck possession system generates high quality scoring chances with players going hard to the net, our system generates perimeter shots. It's two very different things, even though the systems are both "puck possession".

Against a good goalie, generating 50 perimeter shots is pretty much useless. You're going to get 1 goal every hundred of those types of chances, and that won't win you games. A good puck possession style holds onto the puck and moves it smartly while players go hard to the net, and then take the shot, instead of wasting bad shots from far out that have no chance of a goal unless they get a fluke deflection.


So who pray tell is our Holmstrom et al.

We simply don't have the personnel who will do these things.

The only guy I see consistently standing in front of the net and planting himself is Kassian. And as a 4th liner it ain't happening much.
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.


Logic at its finest.

#82 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:50 PM

I don't in any way feel that a coach needs to yell or be emotional, he just needs to do something. AV watching the assistants do everything while other teams head coaches counter us, isn't my idea of a head coach that is doing HIS job. When we're struggling, the head coach should be the man to get the team focused and give them direction. I don't see that from AV.

As for "AV's" record. As a Canuck, Luongo has 224 wins, 114 losses, 41 OTL's.
AV's NON Luongo record was 43-34-4 , not even close to as good.
Luongo's otherworldly play won AV coach of the year, without amazing goaltending, AV does not get wins here. Other teams still win with mediocre tending, but whenever Luongo or backups have been just plain average, AV's "coaching" can't cope with that...


So you're saying personnel (players) make the difference?

If so bravo and a handclap for you.

Now if you believe the players make the team why do you think anyone else would do better with this team as it currently is?

Why wouldn't changing the mix of personnel (those making the actual difference) be the focus?
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.


Logic at its finest.

#83 Standing_Tall#37

Standing_Tall#37

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,954 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:10 PM

Another note about hockeybuzz, that Canucks mod on it sure seems like a ****** :)




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.