sandlakthehouse Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I agree that its time for a change. I don't know enough about the technical aspects of hockey to say AV is getting outcoached or whatever but I think this team would benefit from a new coach who brings a new perspective and different ideas. The stats support the fact that all recent Stanley Cup winning teams have coaches who had been there less than 3 or 4 years for example Tortorella, Laviolette, Carlyle, Bylsma, Queenville, Julien, Sutter, Babcock. I'm not suggesting we promote Claude Noel or bring back Crawford but the right candidate would give us a better chance to win the cup. I for one wouldn't mind a coach with some emotion as opposed to standing there folded arms with a smirk when we're getting bad calls or thumped on the scoreboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I agree that its time for a change. I don't know enough about the technical aspects of hockey to say AV is getting outcoached or whatever but I think this team would benefit from a new coach who brings a new perspective and different ideas. The stats support the fact that all recent Stanley Cup winning teams have coaches who had been there less than 3 or 4 years for example Tortorella, Laviolette, Carlyle, Bylsma, Queenville, Julien, Sutter, Babcock. I'm not suggesting we promote Claude Noel or bring back Crawford but the right candidate would give us a better chance to win the cup. I for one wouldn't mind a coach with some emotion as opposed to standing there folded arms with a smirk when we're getting bad calls or thumped on the scoreboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Well stated. I recant my previous claims that you have nothing to offer to the conversation. For example, when you stated "Whine whine whine, bitch bitch bitch...", I couldn't help but realize I hadn't seen it as clearly and thoughtfully as you have. And your brilliant riposte "you do nothing but whine and bitch no one cares about your philosphy[spelling incorrect]", has revealed the truth about why AV should remain the head coach. And how could I have overlooked "If you have zero hockey IQ, maybe you should watch curling Vansicle" when pondering the potential reasons for retaining AV's services? It took your astute observations and thought provoking insights to help me come to the realization that my position is clearly flawed. Thank you, once again, for illustrating just exactly how incorrect I was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 His argument as to why AV shouldn't be fired is that he hasn't yet been fired. In other words, he stands behind whatever MG does. So, if you follow that to it's logical conclusion, if MG fired AV tomorrow, it was the right thing to do. And I get the whole idea that "MG knows best", as he is, after all, an NHL GM. But the whole point of conversations like this is to speculate, debate, and discuss. The whole point of web forums is to debate. But if your position is "I agree with whatever MG says/does" then it's not really your position, is it? It's someone else's. I don't think AV needs to be fired today. Necessarily. I just think it's a fools argument to say that because he hasn't been, he ought not be. Give me something better than "good thing you're not GM". That's just kid's stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandlakthehouse Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I've been over the reasons why I disagree with the first part of your post, but the last sentence is one of those things that gets stated all the time and is not the case, IMO. Did no-one hear Cheech mention the fact that AV was going nuts about the non-call when Kes was interfered with on the Canucks' first PP? Just because the camera doesn't show him freaking out like Torts, doesn't mean that he's emotionless. Scotty Bowman and Al Arbour were coaches who didn't show much emotion, but they never amounted to much.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Funny thing about being an expert, V... ...I consider myself to be a knowledgable hockey fan, (and I think my post history backs this up) but I don't consider myself an "expert". The experts, IMO are the guys who actually get paid to make decisions by an NHL hockey team. Does it mean that they're always right, or always make the best decisions? No. However, for people to sit on the sidelines and say that someone with an impressive coaching record should be fired because he was only able to win 15 post-season games and not 16 is ridiculous in the extreme as far as I'm concerned. Your point about Gillis kind of reinforces what I said in my earlier post. Even though Gillis has given AV a vote of confidence, you suggest that he may not have confidence in his coach. Basically, you're making something up to support your argument. I see you as one of the more reasonable AV detractors, but using unfounded suppositions like that doesn't help your argument. Stick to the line juggling, lack of line juggling, wrong type of line juggling, wrong matchups, improper use of timeouts, etc. At least those are actually verifiable. (not anyone's opinion, just the fact that these things do sometimes happen) I assume your not one of those who criticizes the coach for chewing gum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 You're close to the truth here, V....with a big exception. I feel that firing AV right now would be the wrong decision, especially considering that I don't see anyone out there who would be an upgrade. I've said this many times, as (I believe) you're aware. I mention the fact that Gillis shares my point of view to strengthen my argument, not as the basis for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Nope. I'm making the opposite supposition based on your assertion that everything is fine because AV still has his job. My "assumption" is a supposition, and is in direct retort to s position you hold. I do not say that MG finds AV to be unfit as coach. I suppose it is possible.There's a difference. My comments suggest that your assumption that all is well may not be as they seem. I do not know. I posit my ideas based on my perspective. I do not call anyone an "armchair expert". I resent being characterized as an armchair expert, an accusation that has inherent double edged sword implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kack Zassian Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Has anyone proposed any coaches to actually replace AV? (aside from Lindy Ruff) It seems like everyone is saying "Replace AV" but have no idea who a potential replacement is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Has anyone proposed any coaches to actually replace AV? (aside from Lindy Ruff) It seems like everyone is saying "Replace AV" but have no idea who a potential replacement is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 You're close to the truth here, V....with a big exception. I feel that firing AV right now would be the wrong decision, especially considering that I don't see anyone out there who would be an upgrade. I've said this many times, as (I believe) you're aware. I mention the fact that Gillis shares my point of view to strengthen my argument, not as the basis for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kack Zassian Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 there is no one. if they are better than AV, they have a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 LOL you post about people's spelling and then post this ROFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I don't entirely disagree that it may not be easy to replace him (although I hear Ruff is available). But that is a logical fallacy. Because it would be hard to replace him is not a strong reason to suggest that he is fit to remain. My argument is that the team has been playing with no heart. They've look disjointed. They've had bad meltdowns in defensive coverage. Their breakout and offensive zone entry is as predictable as one of Aladeen's impotent rants. I refuse to believe the players are not talented enough. So what remains? Their captain has possibly lost their allegiance. He has possibly run out of ideas, and it has gotten to the point where even his forte, defense, is looking more like a shortcoming. Some of the other arguments - line juggling, defending one goal leads, not getting pumped/fired up during games - are small complaints. Others like calling out players, benching guys after one bed shift, loyalty to certain players and not rewarding others, these are slightly larger complaints. But, as I always say, you can't argue with numbers. He has lots of wins. I just wonder if it is holding this team back that they can win even when they play poorly, since it wiould make it impossible to accurately evaluate his performance. I'm just speculating. I am not saying "I am correct to the exclusion of all others. Those who disagree are false and armchair experts". I allow that I may be wrong. I'm not sure that some around here do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Is there another spelling for the word 'may'? I'm sorry ou didn't understand my post. That may be a product of public schooling, or marginal parenting. Again. Reading=Fundamental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Is there another spelling for the word 'may'? I'm sorry ou didn't understand my post. That may be a product of public schooling, or marginal parenting. Again. Reading=Fundamental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Nope. I'm making the opposite supposition based on your assertion that everything is fine because AV still has his job. My "assumption" is a supposition, and is in direct retort to s position you hold. I do not say that MG finds AV to be unfit as coach. I suppose it is possible.There's a difference. My comments suggest that your assumption that all is well may not be as they seem. I do not know. I posit my ideas based on my perspective. I do not call anyone an "armchair expert". I resent being characterized as an armchair expert, an accusation that has inherent double edged sword implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Nope. I'm making the opposite supposition based on your assertion that everything is fine because AV still has his job. My "assumption" is a supposition, and is in direct retort to s position you hold. I do not say that MG finds AV to be unfit as coach. I suppose it is possible.There's a difference. My comments suggest that your assumption that all is well may not be as they seem. I do not know. I posit my ideas based on my perspective. I do not call anyone an "armchair expert". I resent being characterized as an armchair expert, an accusation that has inherent double edged sword implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Either av is a complete idiot for not pulling luongo to start the third or schneider was hurt or sick. Absolute bonehead move to let ur franchise goaltender get shelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 I'm an avid hockey fan but am no expert so I don't know all the technical information like strategies, Xs and Os, etc. Here are the facts that I do know to be true... 1) Van has had a long run of icing one of the best line ups in the NHL but have only made it out of 2nd round once. (AV's time) 2) We currently sit at 10th in GAA while having 2 Elite goalies and icing the deepest blue line in the NHL 3) Against playoff teams this year, we are 3-3-3 while only winning one of those games convincingly while the other 2 wins were a shootout win and a 1-0 win over Nashville. On the other hand, out of the 3 outright losses, we have been shellacked 7-3, 4-1 and 8-3. Out of the 3 OT/Shootout losses, our goalie stood on his head for the Chicago game which should have been a loss. So to reiterate, we are currently 3-3-3 (which is pretty much 3 wins 6 losses) and while we barely win when we do beat a playoff team, when we lose, we have been spanked many times. Although I don't agree with AV's line combination sometimes or his lack of passion or inspiration behind the bench, those types of criticism is opinion based rather than fact based. What I'm wondering is, based on facts 1-3 alone, is a coaching change needed? Are our players NOT playing up to their potential (in which a new coach might help them reach their potential) OR are we just overvaluing our players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.