Smashian Kassian Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 You do when you need size in the lineup Alberts is bigger so Ballard is out, it was just one game and we won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Check the OP, this thread isn't new, and wasn't made tonight. Been around for awhile. Lol, good on you. I've felt the same way before on here, it has a means of doing that too you. This cracked me up though. Keep on going! What it means is. In Playoff hockey when Quick would have been at his best and the Kings would have been tighter defensively. We would have lost. Absolutely, everytime this team bails him out, the AV lovers can come on here and act like a million bucks, and like it is all AV, and all our success is due to him. But really it is due to goaltending and the Sedins carrying us offensively 99.9% of the time. Oh and he also owes Luongo for winning him a Jack Adams. I think this is the logic some AV lovers don't understand. If it wasn't a biased decision in anyway and he just wanted size.. Then why the hell did Tanev dress? If it was about a sub-par preformence, which happens.. Then why the hell did alot of other guys still stay in the line-up? And why the hell didn't other guys like Bieksa get a seat in the press box earlier on? Now what options does that ultimately leave to justify this benching? Knowing the history of AV/Ballard. The theory that the decision was based on some sort of hate for Ballard is likely the most plausible one after examining all the variables of the other theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 If this is the case. Why the hell did Tanev play? He is a tooth pick compared to Ballard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I agree. Many people say MG needs to build a better team but I really think AV is not the right coach for this team. When our team sucked and was full of grinders, AV was great in that he played a defensive system that covered our weaknesses. As a result , we over achieved that year. MG started adding more and more talent on this team and we've seen the opposite happen. We've been under achieving. Maybe AV's style is more suited for defensive systems in which he doesnt have much talent to work with. When we are looking at guys like Tippett and thinking how awesome he is...maybe AV is just like that. You put him on a crappy team and he will get better than expected results. The problem is, I can't think of a clear better option for a coach who I know can work with our offensive players. I just don't want AV being replaced with another AV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Or you could think logically and realize we need size for this game so Alberts>Ballard. AV has given Ballard more ice time when he has played well which until this season has been few and far between. He's not "playing favorites" as you Ballard fans like to think he is going with the lineup that gives us the best chance to win. And yes that shockingly means playing Ballad more or less depending on how he has been playing or iwhether or not we need muscle in the lineup. And the majority of the time he is right in his decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 He's been our most steady defenseman. Having Tanev AND Ballard when you need size is redundant so he picked the better performing one to stay in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I can see you have the Ballard blinders on big time not worth even discussing Ballard has been good this year Tanev has been better it really is that simple, if you watch objectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I just find it amusing how the AV lovers come here after a win like tonight. Like some have posted, Quick had an off night. How many times do you see players beat him from 20 ft out with no screen? Well, we managed to do that 3 times tonight. Try ZERO in the playoffs I watched the game in CGY with non Vancouver fans and we were all commenting on how bad Quick looked tonight Even Quick felt this way as after those goals, you can see him cursing behind the mask, pissed for letting those in. Moreover, what was our strategy on the PP tonight? We were pressured all over the ice and had ZERO productivity. Expect more of the same in the playoffs except this LA will fine tune their PK even more and prob score a couple shorties in the series. We got dominated last year on special teams in the playoffs against them, why didn't we have a plan for tonight (especially with 3-4 days off?) Now its not all gloom and doom. Our guys came out with passion tonight and even Henrik was mixing it up. We got secondary scoring. I just wanted to point out that tonight however is not a great example for AVs fans to gloat about his coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I just find it amusing how the AV lovers come here after a win like tonight. Like some have posted, Quick had an off night. How many times do you see players beat him from 20 ft out with no screen? Well, we managed to do that 3 times tonight. Try ZERO in the playoffs I watched the game in CGY with non Vancouver fans and we were all commenting on how bad Quick looked tonight Even Quick felt this way as after those goals, you can see him cursing behind the mask, pissed for letting those in. Moreover, what was our strategy on the PP tonight? We were pressured all over the ice and had ZERO productivity. Expect more of the same in the playoffs except this LA will fine tune their PK even more and prob score a couple shorties in the series. We got dominated last year on special teams in the playoffs against them, why didn't we have a plan for tonight (especially with 3-4 days off?) Now its not all gloom and doom. Our guys came out with passion tonight and even Henrik was mixing it up. We got secondary scoring. I just wanted to point out that tonight however is not a great example for AVs fans to gloat about his coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 If this is the case. Why the hell did Tanev play? He is a tooth pick compared to Ballard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I find it funny how every win has nothing to do with AV and the goalie looked bad, defense played poor yet every loss is his fault... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I wouldn't go that far... If the Canucks produce many solid chances and score on great opportunities, i wouldnt say that the opposing goalie played badly. Fact is however, based on what we've seen of Quick in the past, he had a sub par game. Do you disagree? Does Quick normally post a 0.823 save percentage and lets in 4 goals on 23 shots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I just find it amusing how the AV lovers come here after a win like tonight. Like some have posted, Quick had an off night. How many times do you see players beat him from 20 ft out with no screen? Well, we managed to do that 3 times tonight. Try ZERO in the playoffs I watched the game in CGY with non Vancouver fans and we were all commenting on how bad Quick looked tonight Even Quick felt this way as after those goals, you can see him cursing behind the mask, pissed for letting those in. Moreover, what was our strategy on the PP tonight? We were pressured all over the ice and had ZERO productivity. Expect more of the same in the playoffs except this LA will fine tune their PK even more and prob score a couple shorties in the series. We got dominated last year on special teams in the playoffs against them, why didn't we have a plan for tonight (especially with 3-4 days off?) Now its not all gloom and doom. Our guys came out with passion tonight and even Henrik was mixing it up. We got secondary scoring. I just wanted to point out that tonight however is not a great example for AVs fans to gloat about his coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 I wouldn't go that far... If the Canucks produce many solid chances and score on great opportunities, i wouldnt say that the opposing goalie played badly. Fact is however, based on what we've seen of Quick in the past, he had a sub par game. Do you disagree? Does Quick normally post a 0.823 save percentage and lets in 4 goals on 23 shots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Boudreau Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 A,V can't adjust in the playoffs he has been out coached in the past. All he is a coach who loves his grinders like Burrows and Hansen and Higgins and will never give skill guys a chance to develop. The only guys that develop under A.V. are the ones who are solid defensively who he trusts enough to then put in offensive situations. Why would not play Schroeder at center with Kesler out? He is a natural centre damnnit and what about Kassian? I know it worked tonight with Raymond but how long can he get by like this? They need a coach who understands offence and nurtures offensive talents while being patient with their defensive games. The only guys exempt from worrying about being benched for their poor play in the d-zone is the Sedins because he gives the latitude to them to freelance in the offensive zone as 1st liners. The other guys like Kassian and Schroeder are languishing not getting playing time to develop. The Canucks aren't going to do anything in the playoffs this year the way the team is currently constructed. Fire Vigneault and hire Lindy Ruff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Goalies have bad games, Patrick Roy let in 8 before, good teams take advantage of good goalies having poor games. Doesn't make this win any less significant it's a W that's all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Does Lu? It happens from time to time. Personally i would have played Bernier over a goalie just recovering from injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostdivision Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Av said tonight ballard did not play because there were 6 other defense men who played better then him, he would have put barker in before ballard. He kept putting alberts and bieksa pairing out despite many close near goals, schneider bailed them out. Finally he went back to tanev alberts, tanev covered for alberts well. I dont know what av's thought process is. He is alot more popular here then other canuck areas on the internet. By the way there are other options then just recycling former coaches from around the nhl. Alot of people are high on jon cooper. http://theahl.com/co...he-year-p177029 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 The idea that a W is all that matters is precisely what's wrong with our attitudes and why we always get a rude awakening when playoffs come. Unless we think Quick will have those games once or twice a round in the playoffs, our chances to win are greatly diminished. It's about being real in your assessment of the team and understanding why we won or lost, recognizing deficiencies and working to improve it. Despite the success the Sedins have had, they say that they are their own toughest critics and thats what continues to drive them to improve. This is the same idea when evaluating a team. No team is perfect but you still should look at areas of improvement instead of sitting on your laurels and say, hey, we got the W. Champions arent made that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Av said tonight ballard did not play because there were 6 other defense men who played better then him, he would have put barker in before ballard. He kept putting alberts and bieksa pairing out despite many close near goals, schneider bailed them out. I dont know what av's thought process is. He is alot more popular here then other canuck areas on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.