Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Vigneault's Trickle Down Effect


This topic has been archived.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

#1 DING

DING

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 01:36 AM

Hey CDC, thanks for taking my post. Long time reader, 2144th poster.

Gillis' most critical call this season isn't going to be which goalie he trades, what he does with Pahlsson, Booth, Kesler, or Salo.

It's going to be whether or not he retains our longtime bench boss, Alain Vigneault. Everything depends on it.

Personnel decisions aren't made alone by the GM in his office. He consults with the rest of the staff to determine what they feel they lack. If AV is gone, the new coach may indicate to MG that he wants certain players to stay.

First, Luongo's team next year depends heavily on who the Canucks coach is next year. He lives here, loves the city, and moving away isn't going to be easy for him. In the end, it might not be his decision, but rather Gillis'. AV gave his vote of confidence to Schneids. If AV stays, Roberto's gone. It's clear. If a new coach comes in, MG can have the option. I'd be shocked to see any players get moved before the coach for next year is set in stone. I don't necessarily believe that Cory has more value than Roberto on the open market either. One thing that I think everyone overlooks is that Cory is unsigned going into next season. A team is trading for his rights, not a guaranteed contract. That comes with risk. What if Cory decides to hold out or has his sights set on another team? I know RFA rights don't grant the player the same latitude as UFA rights, but it's still a factor to consider. This alone discounts Cory's fair market value.

Second, for all the people demanding for Booth, Ballard, and others to be gone, you can't completely judge next year's Booth, Ballard or etc. based on this year's version of them. We all know that AV has his favorites and dogs. Raymond plays game after game, while Ballard never sees ice. If AV is gone these players might receive different roles. Imagine if a coach like Tortorella was brought in and got on Booth's ass like he did on Gaborik to "stop in front of the net for once". Maybe Booth gets a few more black eyes but bangs in 25 garbage goals. What if he encourages Ballard and plays him game after game until Keith has the confidence to dominate offensively like we've seen him do and he notches 40 assists? If the new boss can motivate and assign roles correctly, we might see Booth and Ballard revive their careers in major ways. Then we'd all love them on CDC. Raymond of course would no longer be sucking up top-6 minutes.

Thirdly, I like the Kassian trade. For all the hype around Cody's vision, Kassian doesn't seem to be too far off as we've seen him make some really nice passes. No one knows how much Cody would have contributed this playoffs, but the ironic thing is that AV was the main factor for Cody's departure and now he might be on his way out, only a few months later. Food for thought: if MG never rushed the trade, Canucks still lost in the first round, and AV got canned, Cody might have been slotted onto the 2nd line, been the playermaker between Kesler and Booth next year, and loved it.

Ok I'll hit submit now and listen to what you guys have to say.

EDIT: I'm disappointed that no one's said anything about my team1040 call in reference. :(

Edited by DING, 24 April 2012 - 12:27 PM.

Posted Image


#2 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,210 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 01:58 AM

we need a really good defensman who is gifted both defensively and offensively , this is what we lack .

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#3 Islandboss

Islandboss

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 06

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:00 AM

Pretty much it.Lu will most likely split now,Raymond needs to go least have to fight for a job and show he will go to the net next training camp.On the fence with manny if he can get back to form or not..
I'd be happy to see AV replaced he's a good coach but a defense style coach only.We have to many offensive style players for that to work.Bring in a coach that loves to have goals scored first of all.Everyone in the league says we have some of the best D at jumping up in the play.Lets go with it and give Booth a full year and everyone else a year with the same line mates and see how they do.I think just the final point would make a huge improvement in goal scoring under pressure.
A statistician is a person who draws a mathematically precise line from an unwarranted assumption to a foregone conclusion.

Kelly is a great gal

#4 Kryten

Kryten

    Aladdin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:10 AM

we need a really good defensman who is gifted both defensively and offensively , this is what we lack .


Ding pointed out that we may already have that player in Ballard and a new bench boss may pull this diamond from the rough. My opinion is that we have a solid player in Ballard who I hope is given a major role with this club.

Edit: Good post Ding, keep 'em coming.

Edited by Kryten, 24 April 2012 - 02:12 AM.

Posted Image

#5 DING

DING

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:20 AM

Ding pointed out that we may already have that player in Ballard and a new bench boss may pull this diamond from the rough. My opinion is that we have a solid player in Ballard who I hope is given a major role with this club.

Edit: Good post Ding, keep 'em coming.


We do have Gragnani now too. We can't forget that. As undersized and deficient he is on his own side of the ice currently, he's definitely got an "outside the box" feel for offense.

It'll be interesting to see if he gets a shot next year. The team didn't play him and retain his RFA rights for nothing.

PS. Bourdon would've likely been that D man. Our Letang maybe? So sad. RIP.

Posted Image


#6 Kryten

Kryten

    Aladdin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:32 AM

We do have Gragnani now too. We can't forget that. As undersized and deficient he is on his own side of the ice currently, he's definitely got an "outside the box" feel for offense.

It'll be interesting to see if he gets a shot next year. The team didn't play him and retain his RFA rights for nothing.

PS. Bourdon would've likely been that D man. Our Letang maybe? So sad. RIP.


Yes MAG certainly has his offensive prowess dialed in and with careful tutelage, his defensive acumen will improve. I was surprised we didn't see him play this post-season considering his previous success, but I can't argue that bringing him along slowly is a bad idea.
Posted Image

#7 AndyBernard

AndyBernard

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,411 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:46 AM

I like the optimism and the different point of view. A lot of things really do depend on AV's future with us. Hopefully that is figured put before the draft so that MG and our scouting staff can have a real game plan going in, involving trades etc.
Posted Image
credit - VintageCanuck


#8 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:49 AM

What's this about Ballard not being played?................who was that with 4 on his back that played over 50 games for us. The truth of it is that once KB swapped to his natural side he has been sensational. He has shone and AV has liked him.

All this AV not playing players is a load of crap. He plays them when they're ready and he plays them when they're fit. Unlike some on here, he looks at their whole game not just the bits that do or don't stand out.

Hodgson was not fit enough to play longer minutes. He started to make mistakes after 10-12 and fade out the game. He got more in Buffalo and he was blowing out his ass when I watched him. His overall game was poorer than under AV too.

AV is a great coach. MG needs to start getting him players who are in form and ready to play instead of rehab cases and good young players not ready to play in an elite team.

Edited by Bodee, 24 April 2012 - 02:52 AM.

Kevin.jpg

#9 Guest_BuckFoston_*

Guest_BuckFoston_*
  • Guests
  • Joined: --

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:52 AM

Plus one for originality... :rolleyes:

#10 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,110 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:55 AM

<p>

Ding pointed out that we may already have that player in Ballard and a new bench boss may pull this diamond from the rough. My opinion is that we have a solid player in Ballard who I hope is given a major role with this club.

Edit: Good post Ding, keep 'em coming.

Who are you going to take ice time away from to give Ballard a "major role"? Do you take away from the 50 point Edler or our best shutdown d-man Hamhuis? The truth is Ballard's cap space could be better used than on that 3rd pairing.
Posted Image

#11 Hotdawg

Hotdawg

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,096 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 03:19 AM

What do you mean by "LUONGOS TEAM", the "Canucks are "AQUALLINIS TEAM"!

#12 Hotdawg

Hotdawg

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,096 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 03:31 AM

Man, some of you with avatars of Clowns and Leaukimia patients I just wonder why, why? Quite pathetic.

#13 E-ROD

E-ROD

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 158 posts
  • Joined: 11-March 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 03:47 AM

DIng, I agree and hope we have a coaching change in the near future. These guys need change. Some will say "look at AV's record" but I say consistent playoff appearances are just that, consistency. The talent this team has is slowly being wasted, AV's had enough time to tweak the lines. Time for a new captain to steer this battleship...

#14 Kryten

Kryten

    Aladdin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 24 April 2012 - 04:01 AM

<p>Who are you going to take ice time away from to give Ballard a "major role"? Do you take away from the 50 point Edler or our best shutdown d-man Hamhuis? The truth is Ballard's cap space could be better used than on that 3rd pairing.


Hamhuis I wouldn't argue about because the guy plays a consistent two-way game and obviously has excellent hockey smarts: a defacto top two guy.

Alex "50 point" Edler on the other hand is not so reliable. Looking at the stat sheet (and not the +\- column as it is a real-time stat and hardly tells the full story), Edler is an all-star top-tier defenceman. Watching him play however, really does not convince me that the top-four spot should be his alone. Please don't lump me in with the knee-jerk reaction twits who ask for someone to be traded after a lousy playoff performance, I'm not one of them. I believe that Edler played sub-par all season and that the majority of his points came from secondary assists and a whole schwack load of Swedish luck. I know he is offensively talented, but like others had said of Ehrhoff, is he irreplaceable? I am curious to find out.

As the OP was hinting at, a change in bench boss (and/or assistants) means a possible change in systems and certain personnel could find themselves higher in the depth chart due to style of play. It's all hypothetical of course but stranger things have happened.

Man, some of you with avatars of Clowns and Leaukimia patients I just wonder why, why? Quite pathetic.


Your avatar is cleary superior to ours, I apologize for offending you oh great Attorney Avatar General.

P.S. It is obvious you have never watched Red Dwarf, and for that I pity you.
Posted Image

#15 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,961 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 24 April 2012 - 05:31 AM

I agree that AV's legacy is whether or not he can create roles & make use of secondary players. It seems to me he determines roles for the Sedin's, Keslers & Edlers of the world & the Ballards of the world have to play whatever is left.

Ballard for example, Booth also, has specific physical attributes and skills. But he spent much of his time playing the offside & not rushing the puck. Because our game was the breakout pass behind Hamhuis, Edler (even Tanev). But we could not breakout & it looked like we needed a guy to lug the puck up the ice.There have been players like Ballard who AV has simply not found the right role for. And because AV had a preconceived notion of what a 3rd line center should be, we ended up giving away a guy who certainly had the skills to craft A role. In short, AV is a systems coach.

Its funny, because he lets his top players create very distinct roles? There is no line like the Sedins anywhere in the league. But there are underutilized players. With Booth, he probably just needs a play maker, MG's responsibility. With Ballard, with Hodgson, you might think the coach could have done better with them. At the end of the discussion you most certainly are right; MG has to decide if another guy can create complimentary roles before he starts shuffling the line up.

Hey CDC, thanks for taking my post. Long time reader, 2144th poster.

Gillis' most critical call this season isn't going to be which goalie he trades, what he does with Pahlsson, Booth, Kesler, or Salo.

It's going to be whether or not he retains our longtime bench boss, Alain Vigneault. Everything depends on it.

Personnel decisions aren't made alone by the GM in his office. He consults with the rest of the staff to determine what they feel they lack. If AV is gone, the new coach may indicate to MG that he wants certain players to stay.

First, Luongo's team next year depends heavily on who the Canucks coach is next year. He lives here, loves the city, and moving away isn't going to be easy for him. In the end, it might not be his decision, but rather Gillis'. AV gave his vote of confidence to Schneids. If AV stays, Roberto's gone. It's clear. If a new coach comes in, MG can have the option. I'd be shocked to see any players get moved before the coach for next year is set in stone. I don't necessarily believe that Cory has more value than Roberto on the open market either. One thing that I think everyone overlooks is that Cory is unsigned going into next season. A team is trading for his rights, not a guaranteed contract. That comes with risk. What if Cory decides to hold out or has his sights set on another team? I know RFA rights don't grant the player the same latitude as UFA rights, but it's still a factor to consider. This alone discounts Cory's fair market value.

Second, for all the people demanding for Booth, Ballard, and others to be gone, you can't completely judge next year's Booth, Ballard or etc. based on this year's version of them. We all know that AV has his favorites and dogs. Raymond plays game after game, while Ballard never sees ice. If AV is gone these players might receive different roles. Imagine if a coach like Tortorella was brought in and got on Booth's ass like he did on Gaborik to "stop in front of the net for once". Maybe Booth gets a few more black eyes but bangs in 25 garbage goals. What if he encourages Ballard and plays him game after game until Keith has the confidence to dominate offensively like we've seen him do and he notches 40 assists? If the new boss can motivate and assign roles correctly, we might see Booth and Ballard revive their careers in major ways. Then we'd all love them on CDC. Raymond of course would no longer be sucking up top-6 minutes.

Thirdly, I like the Kassian trade. For all the hype around Cody's vision, Kassian doesn't seem to be too far off as we've seen him make some really nice passes. No one knows how much Cody would have contributed this playoffs, but the ironic thing is that AV was the main factor for Cody's departure and now he might be on his way out, only a few months later. Food for thought: if MG never rushed the trade, Canucks still lost in the first round, and AV got canned, Cody might have been slotted onto the 2nd line, been the playermaker between Kesler and Booth next year, and loved it.

Ok I'll hit submit now and listen to what you guys have to say.



#16 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,235 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 24 April 2012 - 05:38 AM

AV will probably stay but I want all of his assistant's heads to roll. Bowness did a terrible job managing the defence, who were gambling too often, playing a stupid free-wheeling style of hockey and were victimized for being out of position against the league's 2nd worst offence. Our goalies made our defence look much better than it really is, and we have some great pieces on the blueline minus one big physical defenceman, so it all comes down to defensive coaching.

Bowness has to go.

Then there's Newell Brown who has done a good job of the PK, but has to go because this powerplay cannot sink as low as it did in the regular season. From 1st overall to 27th after the half-way mark of the season, you can't have a 10% powerplay with the 2 best playmakers in the world. This guy has probably the best pieces in the league to work with on the powerplay and still can't get anything done.

Brown has to go.
Posted Image

#17 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,961 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 24 April 2012 - 05:45 AM

Maybe the grand plan was to trade Edler for Weber. Suddenly we need a left side guy? More likely, getting Hamhuis just after Ballard was a bit of an accident.

I do agree that $4.2 sitting behind Edler and Hamhuis is a bit of a waste. But so is not letting Ballard rush the puck.

<p>Who are you going to take ice time away from to give Ballard a "major role"? Do you take away from the 50 point Edler or our best shutdown d-man Hamhuis? The truth is Ballard's cap space could be better used than on that 3rd pairing.



#18 rkyway

rkyway

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 07:04 AM

"Yes MAG certainly has his offensive prowess dialed in and with careful tutelage, his defensive acumen will improve."
- He's no kid, so why do you think his 'defensive acumen' will improve? It sure hasn't so far. The only hope for him is a move to forward... but I expect it's a bit late in the day for that.
- why did they keep playing him? To save themselves from embaressment over the trade. I can't imagine he'll ever play with the Canucks again.

#19 DING

DING

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:08 AM

"Yes MAG certainly has his offensive prowess dialed in and with careful tutelage, his defensive acumen will improve."
- He's no kid, so why do you think his 'defensive acumen' will improve? It sure hasn't so far. The only hope for him is a move to forward... but I expect it's a bit late in the day for that.
- why did they keep playing him? To save themselves from embaressment over the trade. I can't imagine he'll ever play with the Canucks again.


i'd imagine to meet the games requirement so that they could keep his rights.

Posted Image


#20 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:33 AM

I don't think it's so much coaching change that will turn Raymond and Ballard into different players. I mean we watch the games too right? Ballard's problem wasn't his lack of confidence and Raymond's problem wasn't his role on the team. I don't agree with AV on some coaching decisions, but he's proven more right than wrong.

#21 cc_devil

cc_devil

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 813 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 07

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:43 AM

Edler for Weber. Get ur done MG. Lol!

Many may go for that but highly unlikely.

#22 realnucksfan2010

realnucksfan2010

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 10

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:03 AM

In my humble opinion I think that MG will keep AV, Kes, Salo, Ballard, Bieksa, Malhotra, Bitz, Luongo, Alberts, and Rome will all be moved at some point during the off season, there are not to many coaches of AV's caliber out there, and it is obvious that this team needs a shake up. Of course this is just my best guess based upon what i have seen this year combined with 18 years of playing, coaching, and reffing. Hank can't be the captain, this guy is way to soft, your captain has to be a leader in all areas of the game not just in goals and assists, for example Trevor Linden, Mark Messier, Erik Staal, Ryan Getzlaf, Sydney Crosby, i could go on. Hank does not posses the qualities required of an NHL captain.
I would rather see Burrows or Lapy as captain, someone who shows up every night to play, and that shows up in other areas of the game besides the score card, after all this is a multi faceted game!

#23 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,427 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:13 AM

Pretty much it.Lu will most likely split now,Raymond needs to go least have to fight for a job and show he will go to the net next training camp.On the fence with manny if he can get back to form or not..
I'd be happy to see AV replaced he's a good coach but a defense style coach only.We have to many offensive style players for that to work.Bring in a coach that loves to have goals scored first of all.Everyone in the league says we have some of the best D at jumping up in the play.Lets go with it and give Booth a full year and everyone else a year with the same line mates and see how they do.I think just the final point would make a huge improvement in goal scoring under pressure.



#24 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,427 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:18 AM

Too many offensive players? Is that why we can't score enough goals to win a 1-2 game?
The problem is not AV. There are assistant coaches too who are in charge of the PP etc....you can't just put the blame on AV.
It doesn't matter who the head coach is, eg. if the Sedin's and Booth are going to stand in front of our goal and collectively cannot contain Richards then we will not win many games with players playing only offense. Now that is ....offensive.

Edited by bluesman60, 24 April 2012 - 09:21 AM.


#25 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:27 AM

So much fail in this thread.
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.

#26 the boards

the boards

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 11

Posted 24 April 2012 - 10:29 AM

I was really P.O.'ed at AV's post-series comments. He had nothing to say but the equivalent of Bertuzzi's 'It is what it is; what am I going to do about it?'
There was no meat at all in what he had to say, and it's because if he said anything meaningful, it could only reflect poorly on himself.
We do have plenty of good players; I think MG has to get rid of the coach - 'shelf life' has expired.
Not sure it's the right thing, but I don't think he has a choice at this time.
I really don't know who it would be, but surely someone a wee bit more animated behind the bench would be better than AV's laissez-faire demeanor. Crawford, anyone?
Of the dwarves, little is said.

#27 Tystick

Tystick

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 12

Posted 24 April 2012 - 10:40 AM

The biggest problem I find with AV is he continuously juggles the lines. The players will never build chemistry if they don't play with them enough.
Posted Image

#28 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 10:40 AM

Yep. Coaching has never been the problem.

Gillis just hinted that AV will probably helm the bench, upon finding out what his own his future holds with ownership.

Sorry...you dont make sweeping changes for a team this good, even though the last part and the first round were incredibly underwhelming.

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#29 gocanuckzgo

gocanuckzgo

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 09

Posted 24 April 2012 - 10:58 AM

There is nothing wrong with this team, there was nothing wrong with last years team. We have good players, they just don't play to their potential. You don't win back to back president's trophies with bad teams or bad coaching. Last year we lost one game: game 7 and that's why we lost the cup, this year nobody showed up. Luo was good, Shnieds was great, everyone else was crap. Unless you think we should trade away the core then there is nothing to do besides hope that the team plays to its potential.

#30 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,110 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 24 April 2012 - 11:28 AM

In my humble opinion I think that MG will keep AV, Kes, Salo, Ballard, Bieksa, Malhotra, Bitz, Luongo, Alberts, and Rome will all be moved at some point during the off season, there are not to many coaches of AV's caliber out there, and it is obvious that this team needs a shake up. Of course this is just my best guess based upon what i have seen this year combined with 18 years of playing, coaching, and reffing. Hank can't be the captain, this guy is way to soft, your captain has to be a leader in all areas of the game not just in goals and assists, for example Trevor Linden, Mark Messier, Erik Staal, Ryan Getzlaf, Sydney Crosby, i could go on. Hank does not posses the qualities required of an NHL captain.
I would rather see Burrows or Lapy as captain, someone who shows up every night to play, and that shows up in other areas of the game besides the score card, after all this is a multi faceted game!


You don't think Hank shows up to play? I don't care what your experience is, throwing a big hit isn't the only way of playing physical. The Sedins face the top shutdown players in the league night in and night out and don't avoid contact. They battle along the boards and win more often than not. If you question their work ethic you know nothing about sports at all. And without points you don't win. Leadership is about work ethic, leading by example, and getting the job done. Burrows: 1 assist. Lappy: 1 assist. Henrik: 2 goals and 3 assists. I can understand liking gritty players as I like them too. But I'd take Henriks leadership over either of the yappy lapdogs you'd have as captain.
Posted Image




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.