AnInconvenienceBrah Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 The last time AV said something that Kes didn't like, (the "he needs to use his wingers more" comment) the response was almost immediate improved play. Perhaps he's hoping that Kes will put in extra effort to prove him wrong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 AV was pissing me off in that interview yesterday. When Taylor asked "What are you going to improve next season specifically?" (something similar] AV started with "Oh thats a good question!" and continued to ramble on and not directly answer the question. Why wouldn't he just tell us? I would like AV if he was better at relations with the fans/media. But since he's not, he seems like somebody that I probably wouldn't want to chill with. He might be kind of a d**k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Too bad our next game is like 5 months away... makes no sense for a coach to call out a player like Kesler at the end of the season, AV should've been replaced he's calling out Kesler and players to cover his ass for not getting the team ready, he talked about how not having Danny caught him off guard for the playoffs and now he's throwing Kesler under the buss. I use to like AV but this crap is getting annoying, don't throw players under the buss at the end of the season to the media to make yourself look better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 The last time AV said something that Kes didn't like, (the "he needs to use his wingers more" comment) the response was almost immediate improved play. Perhaps he's hoping that Kes will put in extra effort to prove him wrong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnInconvenienceBrah Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Disagree. If he were "covering his ass" he be using Kesler's injury as an excuse for the team's early exit. BTW: It's Bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 he is in a way, he was said that Danny's injury caught him of guard, and Kesler didn't play well and it wasn't because of his shoulder. Makes no sense to call out players now, if a player shoulder is injured enough that it needs surgery, I would think that it would prevent a players ability but Dr. AV thinks different. It's getting annoying watch AV blaming players and down playing their injuries due to his inability to get the team ready for the playoffs. Gillis can't put friendship and business aside, AV should've been replaced, all of the coaching staff should've been replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 we have a chance to see gillis and company, mold this team again....i'm excited about that......forget all the external crap that is team related....none of us run this team, or could we....let's get behind this team and stop trying to drive a wedge between everyone....is this who we are?....god, i hope not..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAce Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 And he isn't in a way. He said he wasn't prepared for the eventuality of missing Danny for game one. That's taking responsibility in my book. He also was not using Kes' injury as an excuse. (even though it appears that Kes' agent is) I disagree that AV should have been replaced and more importantly, so did Mike Gillis. BTW: Gillis and AV weren't "friends" when he took over as GM. He re-signed AV because he knew it was the smart thing to do. Just as he did this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I can see the future. Doomed to be the next San Jose. Lots of talent, but can't get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 This blows me away though , how could he have not known Danny had a concussion when the rest of world knew it ? How could you not have a back-up plan in place just incase Danny wasnt coming back when entering the playoffs ? That is inexcusable in my books . AV then makes a comment that now he understands head injuries. Has he been under a rock ? Concussion issues have been front and center in this league for a couple years especially with the Crosby case. Ballard was also out for considerable time with a concussion so how can he say he didnt know much about them ? This all just confirms what many say about AV, he is a great regular season coach but not for playoffs. He didnt have the team ready and couldnt adapt to LA's style. As far as his comments about Kesler, it was another dumb move. Did he not learn from his Hodgeson comments that this stuff should be behind closed doors ? It doesnt do any good to throw Kesler under the bus like that. Even if he believes it, he should be sticking up for his players and saying the opposite to the press. His players would respect him alot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snolan Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 24 against the same division divided by four other teams in division = 6 games per team. 20 against other divisions divided by five teams = 4 games per team. Therefore, 2 extra games per team in same division times 4 other teams in that division = 8 games Back to the chalkboard for you. Of those eight games, you don't award an automatic 2 points to Canucks, and you don't automatically award losses to other opponents in a different division. A cursory look at the total standings will reveal winning percentages fluctuating between 40% - 60%. So a safe estimate, again, in those eight extra games (divided by the other division's eight extra games) is probably even less of a differential than I originally guesstimated. Maybe 3-4 points. Leaving the Canucks with about 109 points for the year in an equally weighted Western schedule. Your point again? "Bland, uninspired" hockey where you still win is the epitome of an excellent team. (The opposite is teams who play as if it were game 7 of the SCF every single game yet still lose by one goal.) Save your energy and health (when possible) for the playoffs yet still beat the opposition anyway during the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 edit: fighting on the internet is stupid... so as opposed to several well thought out paragraphs all I will say is you clearly cannot math. You are caught up in a fallacy similar to the the 'missing dollar' riddle. You said 8 MORE games, we play 24 VS our division and 20 against other divisions (although there are 2 more division in the west) It IS STILL just 8 more possible points FROM the division due to extra games regardless!!!!!! Why is this so hard to grasp? It is 24 games vs 20 games vs 20 games.. If the team was slotted into a another division they would STILL play 20 games against the NW. Teams do not play to just squeak out wins, saying that is like saying we were just waiting to flip the switch this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I hope MG gives AV some better players this year. I'm not unhappy with some of the players he has uncovered/resurrected but when are we going to see a signing that doesn't have ????'s hanging over it. It seems to me we need to up the grit, sniping and quality of the top 6 We have two extremely good, cerebral goal/ points scorers who on prior evidence can be bullied off their game (but not intimidated) The twins are partnered by a tenacious, brave points scorer who does not have the bulk/physique to stand up defenders and relies on speed and agility. Our 2nd line has someone with a reputation for "crashing the net and going to the dirty areas"......unfortunately because he doesn't pass or know when or how to pass to effect he is totally one dimensional. Anyone looking at the playoffs can see that the most effective way to go to the net is usually after you have laid a pass off to a team mate. Booth is totally missing this part of the game and seems to think he needs to/is able to do it all himself. Our centre Kesler, has the heart of a lion and on his day, is a game changer. However he is starved by Booth and has not been helped by persistent injury. I feel he would benefit by a playmaker. Despite opinions to the contrary he and Raymond were the best combination we have had and some might argue even that was not good enough to win a Cup. It is therefore obvious to me that MG needs to give AV better top 6 tools if we are ever going to get this done in the Sedin window. MG needs to find a big gritty sniper who can stand his ground in front of the net and an equally large gritty playmaker for the 2nd line to play with Kes and Burr. I have thought for a while now that our tendency to depth has blinded us to the type of players we need to win playoff sets. We were great in 2010-11 but we were butchered in a series where if we had these type of top 6 players allied to a big gritty "take no prisoners" D we would have gone that extra step to the Cup So what I'm saying is "come on MG let's get the gloves off and give AV the tools to get the job done while we have all the other pieces required" Maybe then AV won't be subjected to this unfair criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snolan Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 *sigh* I'm not going through the math again. The bottom line, and the point I made which holds, is that being in the weaker division isn't the point panacea that so many make it out to be. A smattering of additional games against .400 teams as opposed to .600 teams will yield an additonal several points, meaning we would probably have missed the Prez Cup, but still amassed well over 100 points. Again, what is your point, then? As to the second point, you're not seeing the bigger picture. Why bust a nut for 82 games? What's the point of that? President's Cup's not enough? We have to win every game 6-1? I'd be upset if I were a season-ticket holder and it happened that we played "uninspired" too often, but the Canucks still won those games, and in the process didn't accrue the staggering injuries they did the year before, especially to the back end. (D Sedin the victim of a cheap shot is another story.) Maybe part of the reason for LA's success in the playoffs this year is because they jacked around so much the regular season, they're fresh as daffodils and dew for the real run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAce Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I guess I'm not part of the rest of the world, because I didn't know it either. I suspected, but it was never confirmed prior to the start of the playoffs AFAIK. I don;t know the entire situation, but I.m pretty sure the Canucks have medical staff, so I'd have to assume that they didn't let AV know either. Just curious as to what the "back up plan" should have been in your opinion. Put in a different 40 goal scorer? BTW: this "Great regular season, but lousy playoff coach" stuff is ridiculous and the product of people who don't know anything about coaching a high level. Coaches don't forget how to coach once the playoffs roll around. They don't change the methods that got them there in the first place. Take a look at the Rangers. They're doing exactly what they've done all season. If they'd given up one more goal to the Caps in the wrong situation, they'd be golfing instead of playing. Instead of a "great playoff coach" who "knows how to motivate his players", he'd be the guy who "didn't make the necessary adjustments". At least he would in the eyes of the uninitiated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 24 against the same division divided by four other teams in division = 6 games per team. 20 against other divisions divided by five teams = 4 games per team. Therefore, 2 extra games per team in same division times 4 other teams in that division = 8 games Back to the chalkboard for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 Sigh all you want, YOUR math is WRONG!!!!! Why are you so thick-skulled? Why do you keep arguing BASIC things. First of the whole idea of predicting actual POINTS is something you have initiated, and completely stupid. WITHOUT making a complex algorithm and comparing many different factors no prediction is even close to accurate, not even mentioning intangibles. The easiest way to do it is to just look at winning percentages and assume the deviation that would result from a switch. Have you even taken statistics? Here I will again, show numbers that are usable. The AVERAGE position (in standings) of teams by division was: Atlantic 9.6, NE 19.2, Cent 11.2, Pacific 15.8. The NW is 18.2 WITH the Canucks and WITHOUT the Canucks the average position of competition was 22.5 !!!!!!! All that can be concluded from this is that the level of competition is weaker in the NW than at least 3 divisions. MY POINT is that the NW has inflated the point total, and you keep coming back saying "yeah by like 4 points" and then brought me into a dummy math race, but you don't know that. ALL I know is that the Canucks performed at a higher rate against the NW (weaker competition), and I have trouble fathoming they would win the president's trophy (again, see your claim, that they are the best in the league) if they were in the Atlantic, Pacific, or Central. All of Vancouver's injuries last year? These were the scratches for the first playoff game .... VAN SCRATCHES: R. TORRES, A. ROME, J. TAMBELLINI, MALHOTRA Compared to : VAN SCRATCHES: D. SEDIN, A. ALBERTS, K. BALLARD, M. GRAGNANI, A. EBBETT, D. WEISE The point? Neither year is worse than the other injury wise. You are again presenting something as fact when it is not. You aren't checking facts, aren't doing math correctly. The Kings didn't conserve themselves, they had to fight for their playoff lives. Only a complete fool thinks teams play just hard enough to coast by. It's not JUST about the margin of victory, it's about the quality. Put a different way, we could have easily have been 6 or 7th in ROW this year, whereas last year we were 10 ROW points AHEAD of Philly. See the difference? No team says 'we'll wait until the shoot-out to win it'. Just like waiting until the last week of the season to clinch a playoff spot right? Look i'm disproving what you are presenting as facts, with numbers and facts. In return you are coming back with saying you are right (based on your assumptions). You are being disproven, and debating it in a nonsensical manner. I get what your saying, and agree yes playing in the NW is not a 15 point difference. But playing in the NW AND getting a lot of bounces they did this year means it could have been. Have a nice life! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 Sigh all you want, YOUR math is WRONG!!!!! Why are you so thick-skulled? Why do you keep arguing BASIC things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck'nAnimal Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 If you want it to be Christmas every regular season game the Canucks play, you'll continue to be disappointed. I can't imagine how you'd feel with the editions of the Canucks that played sub .500 hockey for 14 or 16 years in a row in their early years. You don't know how lucky you've got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jigsaw99 Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 Great. Now players won't want to sign with or get traded to us this offseason knowing they have to play under this asshole. Hopefully he gets fired becuase his 2 years are over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.