Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Gillis On The Team 1040


nuck nit

Recommended Posts

Pessimist sounds more like it, but your honest in that its your opinion.

Where do you get any logic in that being a back breaker? MG kept Schneider for a reason. And no evaluation of the play off series against L.A could fault any play by Schneider. 3 games played, 4 goals against equalling a .960 save % and 1.31 GAA.

Conversation might more have gone something like;

How come you did not play big bad Kassian, you wanted a bigger player to compete against big line ups Alain?

Cuz he was out of shape Mike! I'm teasing here, but...

Now, throwing in my opinion (not even speculation by others), is it would be about how to get better. I do believe AV would have singled out match up problems.

L.A was the biggest team by weight in the league if I remember right. Boston clearly overpowered us physically. What do we do to retain our talent and balance these match ups? Having traded Hodgson, Kesler would have had to, and will have to score again. I believe in playing Kesler who (cough, will not be injury prone) with superb passer Danny and Booth because the line could score, stand up physically and play two way hockey against top match ups. Let Hank create secondary scoring, which he will with whomever he plays with. I suggest Burrows and an in shape Kassian or re-signed Bitz, Jensen a lower possibility. Those lines stack up physically and talent wise, where the Twins and Burr have sublime skills but get beat up. Then two defensive lines on the third and 4th. (Higgins, ??? Gaustad, Hansen / Lapierre, Manny, Pinnizotto). Those lines easily revert to Twins wi Burrows wi Amex against small lineups. AV would have to have also asked for a big right side D somewhere in the conversation?

But bottom line is AV and MG are probably discussing commonalities of philosophy to move forward or...

AV just wants out to coach Montreal? :rolleyes:

On AV:

Now, most of you readers will already know I, Primal, want to see AV gone, but these are the verbatim words out of MG's mouth. It is not 'reading too much into it" to read his exact words, and frankly, I see a phrase or two there that confirms my thoughts about MG and AV not being on the same page regarding coaching use of players provided by the GM.

I think losing the first round series with his healthy starting goalie on the bench might be the end of AV's tenure in Vancouver. Call it the straw that broke the back of his tenure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...