Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Face it folks, MG built an AV style team


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#31 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:28 PM

Gillis choked hard, we could have had Torres, Jokinen, or gone all out for Ott, but no, nothing.

On D? M.A. Bergeron would have been perfect to improve our Powerplay - Jamie Mcbain was also rumoured to be out there...so wtf?


Just curious here: what would you have given up to get these guys?

Torres went for a 3rd. The Coyotes 3rd is, as the standings currently sit, a couple of places higher than what the Canucks' 3rd would be. What would you add to the Canucks' 3rd to get Torres? I can't say I've seen what the conditional pick is for Jokinen, but please indicate what you would have given to get him.

What would you have been willing to give to get Ott? I suspect that it would have to be more than a 2nd and a prospect (what the Canucks paid to get Roy, who was dealt for Ott).

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#32 Sea2Sky Country

Sea2Sky Country

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,084 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 09

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:34 PM

Just curious here: what would you have given up to get these guys?

Torres went for a 3rd. The Coyotes 3rd is, as the standings currently sit, a couple of places higher than what the Canucks' 3rd would be. What would you add to the Canucks' 3rd to get Torres? I can't say I've seen what the conditional pick is for Jokinen, but please indicate what you would have given to get him.

What would you have been willing to give to get Ott? I suspect that it would have to be more than a 2nd and a prospect (what the Canucks paid to get Roy, who was dealt for Ott).

regards,
G.


i think MG could have offered a 2nd for Torres and a 4th or 5th. he would have been a nice addition but I guess the right price just wasn't there. just a little weird considering our 3rd round draft pick is very close to san jose's, and it depends where we both finish in playoffs....

Edited by Sea2Sky Country, 03 April 2013 - 03:34 PM.

  • 0

#33 rb4u

rb4u

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 296 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 11

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:37 PM

AV styled or not. This will be his last year as the coach of this team.

Edited by rb4u, 03 April 2013 - 04:34 PM.

  • 0

#34 canuck73_3

canuck73_3

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,620 posts
  • Joined: 11-May 04

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:37 PM

i think MG could have offered a 2nd for Torres and a 4th or 5th. he would have been a nice addition but I guess the right price just wasn't there. just a little weird considering our 3rd round draft pick is very close to san jose's, and it depends where we both finish in playoffs....


And that would be a massive overpayment.
  • 1


credit to canuckforever00 for the sig :)

RIP Luc Bourdon

#35 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:40 PM

He built an AV style team, but AV doesn't have the right players to succeed?

So if AV were fired, MG would have done a better job building the team?


The truth of it is that MG built an Aquilini-MG style of team. Supplied AV with players to execute that style.

This has been historically documented since the last off season with Nonis, and with Gillis taking over.
  • 0

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#36 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:41 PM

AV styled or not. This will be his last yeat as the coach of this team.


Source?
  • 0

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#37 Duda

Duda

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 504 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 08

Posted 03 April 2013 - 05:13 PM

The Canucks dont trap.

Durrrrrrr.

Another myth.


Obviously not, which is apparent to anyone who watches intently, myself included. At least since the first time they played Chicago in the playoffs and tried to trap the 1 goal lead and gave away the puck, losing the game. Nowadays it just looks trap-ish because practically no one is capable of a zone break out, unless it's a stretch pass.

It was is more for people saying we have to play 1-0 wins or 2-1 wins. Canucks are notorious for panicking in the dying seconds and giving up the late goal. With the pathetic 3rd period efforts this year, it would be even worse. I put that on the coaching staff.

Frustrated with AV is all. Carry on.
  • 0

#38 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 03

Posted 03 April 2013 - 05:22 PM

MG built a AV style team?
Then why is it, that for all the guys MG has brought in, that he doesnt play them, instead benches them, or has them on the 4th line?
He perfers to play Burke/Nonis guys and never does that to them, no matter how they play
  • 0

#39 cc_devil

cc_devil

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 813 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 07

Posted 03 April 2013 - 05:31 PM

Another failed year by Gillis.
Roy is your big deadline pick up??
  • 0

#40 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:32 PM

i think MG could have offered a 2nd for Torres and a 4th or 5th. he would have been a nice addition but I guess the right price just wasn't there. just a little weird considering our 3rd round draft pick is very close to san jose's, and it depends where we both finish in playoffs....


The Canucks 2nd for 2013 was already gone (Roy), unless you're talking the 2nd for 2014 (and that one has perhaps not as much value as the one from this season), so what else would you give up for Torres?

Further, where would you see Torres playing on this team? It's not 2011. There's Sedin, Sedin, Burrows, Kesler, Kassian, Roy, Hansen, Higgins, Raymond, Schroeder, maybe even Booth, all of whom I'd play ahead of Torres. Would you play Torres on the third line? And would you sit Higgins or Hansen to do it?

Not looking to start an argument with anyone, but we've been seeing constant demands that Gillis get player "X", but there never seems to be any consideration given as to just what the team would have to give up to get that particular asset, or what the team would do with him once he was here.


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#41 RFL33

RFL33

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,248 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 04

Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:18 AM

AV plays 1-2-2 most of the time not 2-2-1 which indicates he is more reserved and likes to clog up the neutral zone.

He rarely goes 2-2-1 and if we have a lead, forget about it. It's definitely 1-2-2 but the forechecker is passive and in the high slot rather than deep in.

Moreover, if he's such an offensive genius, how are we so horrible on the PP? Because he leaves that up to Brown? Shouldn't he step in if it sucks this badly?



You’re really oversimplifying the 1-2-2. The first fore checker is absolutely not passive in the 1-2-2. He’s pressuring the strong side, and if he hasn’t engaged, is generally in the lower part of one of circles, trying to force the skater to make a decision about the breakout. Fore checkers in the high slot is more like a 2-3 or simply a prelude to something like a left wing lock.

1-2-2 is a basic read and react system. Coaches use it not because they want to clog up the NZ, but because it’s incredibly diverse. People love to call it the trap, but it’s not. The decisions the fore checkers make or don’t make, dictates the formation that their team can use in the neutral zone. If the first fore checker engages and applies pressure well, he’s going to get support. If that happens and the team stills makes a nice breakout play, it sure as hell isn’t the trap or clogging up the NZ.

Even with a lead, it wouldn’t make any sense for AV to use one passive fore checker in the high slot and I can’t recall ever having seen this. (Though I do watch less of the Canucks these days). He would simply play a 2-3, as trying to play a 1-2-2 read and react with one skater high in the zone is asking for disaster.

And when I watched the Canucks regularly, I saw plenty of 2-1-2 particularly with Kesler and Burrows.
  • 1

#42 snucks

snucks

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,707 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 03

Posted 04 April 2013 - 09:23 AM

Its all about Edler. The D is built around Edler and everyone else has to adapt to his limitations.
  • 0

#43 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 04 April 2013 - 09:58 AM

Gillis sucks, the only thing he's good at is contracts because he was an agent.


But Luongo said his contract sucks
  • 0

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.