wallstreetamigo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 How do you even define a better coach? Better at what? Communicating? x's and o's? Motivation? Player relations? There are so many factors that it comes down to what does the TEAM need most from the coach at this particular point in time. When AV came in the team needed structure. They needed to tighten up defensively and have a true system in place. And AV did a great job of putting that in place. At the time he was most definitely the right man based on what the team needed. Now, this team is playing unmotivated and uninspired hockey. Dispute that if you want to but it is painfully obvious that they get outworked time and again. They can't put in a full 60 minute consistent effort. They look like they have lost the ability to even understand what they are supposed to do out there. So if the team needs motivation, you get a motivator. AV is not a motivator and he is the first one to admit that. Almost very interview he says he does not really talk to the players much and lets them handle it. And it shows on the ice now. It is not about whether AV is a good coach......it is about whether he is still the right coach. And I think the answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 How do you even define a better coach? Better at what? Communicating? x's and o's? Motivation? Player relations? There are so many factors that it comes down to what does the TEAM need most from the coach at this particular point in time. When AV came in the team needed structure. They needed to tighten up defensively and have a true system in place. And AV did a great job of putting that in place. At the time he was most definitely the right man based on what the team needed. Now, this team is playing unmotivated and uninspired hockey. Dispute that if you want to but it is painfully obvious that they get outworked time and again. They can't put in a full 60 minute consistent effort. They look like they have lost the ability to even understand what they are supposed to do out there. So if the team needs motivation, you get a motivator. AV is not a motivator and he is the first one to admit that. Almost very interview he says he does not really talk to the players much and lets them handle it. And it shows on the ice now. It is not about whether AV is a good coach......it is about whether he is still the right coach. And I think the answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry_Wilkins Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 What about this year? Kings among peasants. Pauper among the greats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Just goes to show you that AV can't take this team over the hump. For God sake AV is still trying to figure what Time outs are for, never mind what fighting does for momentum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Extrapolate the Canucks point totals as of now to 82 games. They'd finish with 102 points. Not as good, but not the end of the world, either. Then again, it's only been 19 games. Detroit would finish with about 86 points and miss the playoffs. OMG FIRE BABCOCK! The Rangers would miss the playoffs, too. Tortorella was revered here by most AV haters last year when NYR were doing great. Guess we'll have to fire him, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Extrapolate the Canucks point totals as of now to 82 games. They'd finish with 102 points. Not as good, but not the end of the world, either. Then again, it's only been 19 games. Detroit would finish with about 86 points and miss the playoffs. OMG FIRE BABCOCK! The Rangers would miss the playoffs, too. Tortorella was revered here by most AV haters last year when NYR were doing great. Guess we'll have to fire him, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 wallstreet, what you say is interesting, but perhaps there's another reason the Canucks don't go all out for 60 minutes often. This group of players is the most intelligent I can think of in Canucks history. The Sedin twins, Burrows, Hamhuis, Higgins, Edler, they seem to know how relatively unimportant, after racking up two President's trophies, finishing 1st overall is in contrast with just being healthy and rested for the playoffs. Obviously, they know by now no one cares (besides the Chicken Littles in this thread) about point totals in April. As 5 time Stanley Cup winner Paul Coffey rightly said when he was in his last years with Detroit -- "why should I, or we, bust our a$$es during the regular season? Everyone knows we'll make it in easily anyway." Now you might argue that they have a duty to entertain the fans, and I'd agree. But that's a separate issue. If the Canucks tank this playoffs with a healthy squad, then even as a constant AV supporter, I'd be in favour of him being released. But this regular season means nothing. Canucks'll cruise to a division title, even without Kesler for most of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 You missed the obvious point that this team is starting to tune him out evidenced by uninspired play. That's reason enough to make the change. According to your logic, the only time to fire him is when the team has a losing record in the regular season. I don't see the value in waiting until that happens to make the change. That's my opinion informed by decades of playing and being a fan of this sport. Your rather petty retorts fail to acknowledge that others can have valid opinions that differ from yours. Chill out dude...it's a message board. Practice the logic skills you picked up at community college someplace where people give a crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c-a-n-u-c-k-s Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 hansen will have a bigger role again with Kesler out. As will Raymond. Watch both start to rise fast!! quote me on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonedanielsedin Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Troll much? Canucks have been kicking ass minus the last two games. Stfu thanks. We don't need Kesler he never shows up in the playoffs anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Troll much? Canucks have been kicking ass minus the last two games. Stfu thanks. We don't need Kesler he never shows up in the playoffs anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clonedanielsedin Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 No the Canucks have been winning games against weak competition.......and those teams will not be around to beat up on come playoff time..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 The Canucks were the only team to show Chicago any competition. I'm not panicking yet. We need the 2nd line to solidify then we can win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 You call giving up 30 socring chances (may actually be an NHL record) giving Chicago competition? What a joke. The Nucks were out-classed in every aspect of the game except goaltending and were VERY fortunate to score two "iffy" goals late in the third to get a point. WIth average goaltending, the Nucks would be out of a playoff spot right now and the half-way point in the season is looming. Something has to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Most of these topics have been lobbed back and forth like a tennis ball, so I'm going to focus on one point that has been bothering me for quite a while: The "Luongo won AV his Jack Adams award" routine. There is no doubt that Louie had a great year in '06-'07. However, he did not lead in any statistical category. There were about a half dozen goaltenders ahead of him in both GAA and SV%. Guys like Hasek, Brodeur and Backstrom were all ahead of Louie and Brodeur was deserving of his Vezina that year. The fact is, Vigneualt took a team that finished 17th overall the previous season to 8th. He did so with an offense that ranked 22nd in the league. (Their 6th leading scorer that season was Kevin Bieksa, who was 2 points behind Bryan Smolinski) His defense included names like Krajicek, Fitzpatrick and Sopel. Because of injuries to Mitchell and Salo, Yannick Tremblay and Patrick Coulombe both saw time on the Canucks' defense. The fact is the Canucks played the defensive game to a T. Virtually the entire team finished as plus players. The only regulars who did not were Ohlund, (who likely saw the opposotion's top players on a regular basis) krajicek and Linden, who was a team worst -6. The reality of the situation is that Vigneault did a masterful job of making the most out of the roster he had. Yes, the goaltender played a big part, but by no means was Luongo on an island. He had plenty of help. AV was absolutely deserving of his Jack Adams and to try and discredit his win in '06-'07, is as weak an argument against him as gum-chewing and timeouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I've been a big AV supporter since day 1, but even I think it's just about time for a change of culture. I just don't know who is out there who would be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I don't mind our current coaching, but part of me wishes there was a plan in place to secure Lindy Ruff. AV never talks to his players on the bench, his teams' corsi isn't high enough and his adjustments are more random attempts than anything. Ruff is a far superior in-game tactician and he actually talks to his players. Respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I don't mind our current coaching, but part of me wishes there was a plan in place to secure Lindy Ruff. AV never talks to his players on the bench, his teams' corsi isn't high enough and his adjustments are more random attempts than anything. Ruff is a far superior in-game tactician and he actually talks to his players. Respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 How do you even define a better coach? Better at what? Communicating? x's and o's? Motivation? Player relations? There are so many factors that it comes down to what does the TEAM need most from the coach at this particular point in time. When AV came in the team needed structure. They needed to tighten up defensively and have a true system in place. And AV did a great job of putting that in place. At the time he was most definitely the right man based on what the team needed. Now, this team is playing unmotivated and uninspired hockey. Dispute that if you want to but it is painfully obvious that they get outworked time and again. They can't put in a full 60 minute consistent effort. They look like they have lost the ability to even understand what they are supposed to do out there. So if the team needs motivation, you get a motivator. AV is not a motivator and he is the first one to admit that. Almost very interview he says he does not really talk to the players much and lets them handle it. And it shows on the ice now. It is not about whether AV is a good coach......it is about whether he is still the right coach. And I think the answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 You call giving up 30 socring chances (may actually be an NHL record) giving Chicago competition? What a joke. The Nucks were out-classed in every aspect of the game except goaltending and were VERY fortunate to score two "iffy" goals late in the third to get a point. WIth average goaltending, the Nucks would be out of a playoff spot right now and the half-way point in the season is looming. Something has to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.