k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 The cure for the Canucks? John Tortorella. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Bieksa, Burrows, Edler, Hansen, Kesler, Raymond, Schneider, Sedin, Sedin, Tanev. An argument can even be made for Hodgson. Works in progress: Kassian, Schroeder, Weise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Please. The Sedins are creditted to Crow, they were 1st line players before AV had anything to do with them. Schneider developed into the best goalie in the AHL, but not with AV. I don't see how that can be credited to him either. And if anything he stalled Cody's development. The rest of the list you could make reasonable cases for, although the thing that strikes me, is they are all great defensive guys, goes along with his system, that's why they worked, Kesler was a defensive center early on, Hansen was a defensive/grinding forward, Raymond was playing a secondary role early on, while being relied on for the PK. Ditto to Burrows. Edler and Bieksa are both good defensively. Although with guys like Cody, and even perhaps we are seeing it with Kassian. He can't develop the offensive side and teach them defense, he just parks them on the end of the bench. We saw it with Shirokov too. He has been alright at developing players, but I will take Crow over him as a developmental coach. It's like MG is the only GM in the league who hasn't been able to consistently make impact deals that make sense........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Really, what have they won under Carlyle? Did they win last night? When was the last time they won? The Leafs have to make the playoffs before they can say they've won anything. Leafs are still a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It was the main reason, not the only one. Tim Thomas had a lot to do with it as well. (as I already pointed out) And speaking of "closed mind".... how many times are you going to drag out the silly "he should have found a way, but he got outcoached!" routine? Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it any less inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 agree with you on MG. another thing with MG is .. have you noticed all Dmen that he signs are over 4 Million at least? its like every new D he finds through FA is the next big thing and makes a case for paying them a boat load. I think his assessment of players is not as good as some give him credit for. I think he could benefit from an advisor .. someone more experienced before he's relieved of his duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I, unlike you, can admit that no coach - not even your exalted AV - is perfect. If he is not responsible for any of the playoff failure of this team over the yeaers (as you like to suggest) then it stands to reason that he is also not responsible for any of the team's success over the years as well.....you can't have it both ways I'm afraid. You sound like a person who has never coached a team sport at any kind of competitive level. Coaching is all about putting players in a position to succeed and taking advantage of a players strengths and minimizing their weaknesses. The goes for the whole roster....... Playing favorites is human nature. At the NHL level though it needs to take a backseat when those favorites are not getting the job done. Waiting for guys like Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, etc to "find their game" works in the regular season because AV has unlimited games to wait. In a 7 game series we see what happens when he chooses to wait.....the Canucks lose and they lose ugly. I could care less that the Canucks lost the SCF to Boston. It is HOW they lost that matters. They - taking a cue from their coach - simply gave up........so did AV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 ofcourse gillis defended it.. his job is on the line. its the same as when burke defended the kessel trade. we all know its a bunch of BS and if he could do it all over he wouldn't. dont' take this personally but you're way too defensive about this coach and his actions. this coach has shown me over the last 5+ years that he is easily out coached, he plays favorites wayy too often and is not willing to give the young players on our team any chance to succeed. if you don't feel the same way, then good for you. leave your attitude at home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Not sure you took my original post the right way, just in case it was that all MG's struggle to make impact deals that make sense. Everyone thinks trades are made easily, and that there is a great deal out there just waiting for us, but it isn't the case. And I don't think 4 million is paying them a boatload. That has proven to be the norm for top 4 defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Gillis made that statement before Hodgson was traded. It came out in response to whining by Tony G about Coho's "lack of icetime"... I'm pretty sure Tanev has been "given the chance to succeed". Same for Burrows, Kesler, Hansen, Raymond, Bieksa, Edler..... And speaking of "attitude", take a long look in the mirror... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 You sound like a person who has never coached a team sport at any kind of competitive level. Coaching is all about putting players in a position to succeed and taking advantage of a players strengths and minimizing their weaknesses. The goes for the whole roster....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 i pointed out an opinion / fact and you answered back with a response and ended with 'next' i think that's considered attitude in anyone's books. PS all players you listed were not rookies under AV's watch. except maybe hansen so he gets credit there. but we've already seen what happens to rookies since he's become coach. Co-ho (gone), Grabner (doghouse, gone), shirokov (no chance, gone), Kassian (earning 5 - 10 mins a line on 3/4th line). your argument fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It won't happen this season. AV will get his shot, i don't realistically see this team going anywhere and AV will be fired in the off-season. MG will have a short leash.. Costing Aqualini alot of money with these buy-outs now they'll have to pay the coach as he watches from his tv as well lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 okay i get you. but i think we have ballard, hamhuis, edler, bieksa and now garrison paid over 4 million. they can't all be top 4. and if they are, 1 - 2 of them are underachieving and should be tradeable (IE: ballard ) but that's not the case. i guess its hard for me to assess top 4 talent because anyone that's ever been good elsewhere comes here and struggles. so its either MG's talent assessment or our Coaching staff that is not up to par with what needs to be done .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I'm not going to bother with the "playing favorites" routine. We've been over and over that. AV "favors" the players that he thinks give him the best chance to win, as does every coach in league history. Remember when you claimed Rome was his "favorite"? Why didn't AV do anything to keep him around? I may "sound" like a person who's never coached a team at a competitive level to you, but as usual, you're incorrect. (I thought we had already established that I have more real world hockey experience than you... ) I've coached competitive hockey, baseball and football. I've also worked as an assistant instructor at a hockey school formerly operated by Darcy Rota. BTW: I don't "exalt" AV. It's statements like this that make you look childish. He bears some responsibility for the playoff losses, just not the bulk of it, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring_Back_Bertuzzi Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 i know i am not the only one saying this but i got 1 word RUFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_man08 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I refuted your opinion and asked if you had anyone else in mind. If that's "attitude", then I suppose I'm guilty as charged. As are you, considering your last sentence in this post. PS: It doesn't matter whether or not the players mentioned were rookies under AV. They were all young players who gradually worked their way into being regulars in the lineup. Most of them also developed under AV in Manitoba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I'm not going to bother with the "playing favorites" routine. We've been over and over that. AV "favors" the players that he thinks give him the best chance to win, as does every coach in league history. Remember when you claimed Rome was his "favorite"? Why didn't AV do anything to keep him around? I may "sound" like a person who's never coached a team at a competitive level to you, but as usual, you're incorrect. (I thought we had already established that I have more real world hockey experience than you... ) I've coached competitive hockey, baseball and football. I've also worked as an assistant instructor at a hockey school formerly operated by Darcy Rota. BTW: I don't "exalt" AV. It's statements like this that make you look childish. He bears some responsibility for the playoff losses, just not the bulk of it, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 see bold^^^ choosing the correct personnel for the job is likely the biggest role the coach plays. If he continually makes the wrong choice or continues to make the same choice despite failure, would you not see that as a coaching failure? I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Exactly....Av favors the players HE THINKS gives the team the best chance to win........how many times does he get to be proven wrong in the playoffs before there is a change though? It is already overdue imo. If you have coached that much and you still do not see that a coach needs to get the most out of all of his players for the team to be successful and that he needs to put his own "favorites" and "ego" behind what is best for the team, than I am glad you never coached my kid. Stubbornness and favoritism to that degree amounts to nothing more than lazy and ineffectual coaching. Anyone can keep doing the same things over and over hoping they will finally work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.