BedBeats™2.0 Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Shirokov's failed due to Coaching and Management. Grabner had no place here either way. Now to get back to what I was saying before, Schneider was made in the AHL. He came into the NHL ready and poised to be a star. Nothing to do with coaching. And the Sedins are cause of Crow. They were PPG before AV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 This thread is horrible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Where do you come up with this misinformation??!!!!!! Shirokov failed for disappearing quickly after very few games with the Canucks, even after a great camp (and getting unlucky with injuries). AV gave him a chance to succeed, did good in one game, and it was exposed that he could not contribute defensively. He was not NHL ready whatsoever. He needed seasoning with the Moose. And he started to develop. He couldnt even stick again after a call up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanIsleNuckFan Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Retarded thread.... AV has developed a lot of our players and this will be no exception.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Where do you come up with this misinformation??!!!!!! Shirokov failed for disappearing quickly after very few games with the Canucks, even after a great camp (and getting unlucky with injuries). AV gave him a chance to succeed, did good in one game, and it was exposed that he could not contribute defensively. He was not NHL ready whatsoever. He needed seasoning with the Moose. And he started to develop. He couldnt even stick again after a call up. A rookie can only excel if he buys into the team concepts/system. And he failed at the NHL level. Has absolutely nothing to do with coaching. But it is fair to say that management failed in not being more patient with him. And used him as trade bait to secure a deeper option for the 4th line. He failed even with the Panthers. Your comment about Schnieds is spot on. About the Twins is just revisionist history. They were not PPG players with Crow. They were learning defence and the NHL game/life with Crow. Guess who was in the 2nd PK unit, guess who the 3rd liners were. The better they got, the more ice time they got. Sound familiar?! They flourished into PPG players under AV. Goddamn this thread just sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 May I be so bold as to say to you coach, considering your track record with younger players of recent, to offer you some advice. Please for the love of Gawd don't f#@k-up Corrado's confidence. Don't sit him, don't play head games with him. Let him play. He looks good. Please!! I mean it must be tempting, after making Kassian a complete basket-case of late, for you to beak off non-sensically about some shortcomings but, it would behoove you to zip it and let the kid play. No Hodgsonesque questioning of his committment to play, no Grabneresque......oh bloody hell, you get it. #26- Petri Skriko's old number, Great Tursas Beard!!! Love it!! Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Yep, AV's gonna put Corrado on 3rd pair and give him 5 mins TOI just cause you made this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Yup. Im concerned too, given recent history. Hodgson, Kassian, Schroeder, Shirokov, Grabner, for whatever reason have not fared well. The only positive during that time I can think of is Tanev. Its natural to question the way AV handles young players, Im not sure why youre getting flak for it. Nothing wrong with bringing it up, its obvious AV doesnt treat all players the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 AV wants 2 way forwards on his team other than Sedins. If you doubt, look at Kassian, Schreoder was ok but Ebbett is better than him in defensive zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Is that why Edler and Bieksa take their ice times for granted? Because they earned it when they were younger but now that they are vets, they can make mistakes and continue to be thrown out on the ice? Sorry for the sarcasm. Just pointing out that maybe he should treat people equally or it might be considered favoritism or perhaps "ageism". When younger players get benched for every little mistake and then see their vets make tons of glaring mistakes yet still being given ice time might actually hamper their development and result in negative feelings toward the organization. Gillis has always said the best players will play. Now what kind of a message would it send it he says that and if a rookie is playing better than a vet but gets benched as soon as he makes a mistake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 When people name the players that came up through AV, the common theme is, they all started as grinders in a checking role. The problem that some of us have with AV is that while he may be a fine coach for younger players who start off as grinders, he doesnt have the same effect with high end talent where their offensive prowess might be stronger than their defensive. Those players are doomed under AV unless they are able to become completely different players and become a defensive stalwart. For instance, if AV was the coach when the Sedins started their careers, he would have put them in 3rd and 4th line checking roles where they would have been destroyed. He would probably then send them to the minors to work on their 2 way game. Think of any young offence first players in the NHL that may be not be as strong defensively For instance Tavares. -14 and -16 in his first 2 years. Under AV, the 1st overall pick would be buried in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 The guy that plays a strong two way game tends to have the longer career. As his offensive ability declines he becomes a defensive specialist and scoring depth (Yzerman being a prime example). Racking up minuses faster than points doesn't make for a successful team. Ask Scottie Bowman. if you weren't going to play a two way game you weren't going to play for Bowman. That included Yzerman who was a purely offensive player when Bowman took over the Wings. Might be the reason he's regarded the greatest coach in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 When people name the players that came up through AV, the common theme is, they all started as grinders in a checking role. The problem that some of us have with AV is that while he may be a fine coach for younger players who start off as grinders, he doesnt have the same effect with high end talent where their offensive prowess might be stronger than their defensive. Those players are doomed under AV unless they are able to become completely different players and become a defensive stalwart. For instance, if AV was the coach when the Sedins started their careers, he would have put them in 3rd and 4th line checking roles where they would have been destroyed. He would probably then send them to the minors to work on their 2 way game. Think of any young offence first players in the NHL that may be not be as strong defensively For instance Tavares. -14 and -16 in his first 2 years. Under AV, the 1st overall pick would be buried in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Edler and Bieksa have paid their dues. When Corrado has 40+ point season he will likely be cut some slack as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 I don't think AV is bad with Rookies, atleast some of them, I have kinda changed my opinion on that a bit. But Schneider and the Sedins were in no way his develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Um....Raymond? Made the team in a top six role. Demoted and benched along the way. Yet is now a solid two way player and a regular on the pk. As to Tavares, that's the difference between a contender and a bottom feeder. The contender can groom a player in the minors to make them better. The bottom feeder is desperate for help now. Which is actually better for a players career? The guy that plays a strong two way game tends to have the longer career. As his offensive ability declines he becomes a defensive specialist and scoring depth (Yzerman being a prime example). Racking up minuses faster than points doesn't make for a successful team. Ask Scottie Bowman. if you weren't going to play a two way game you weren't going to play for Bowman. That included Yzerman who was a purely offensive player when Bowman took over the Wings. Might be the reason he's regarded the greatest coach in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 You do know that Hansen was a scorer/sniper before he got looks with the Canucks??!!! He was that under AV when he coached the Moose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrogZilla Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Schroeder listed as 5'8 175 Ebbett listed as 5'9 174. I don't think size is the difference here. They are both small. Fair enough though if you think Ebbett has the edge defensively and thats why he plays over Schroeder. My logic was just that while Schroeder might lack "just slightly" in defensive play over Ebbett, he is much more capable of making his linemates play better than Ebbett and instead of defending a 1 goal lead with Ebbett, Schroeder might be the one to set up Kassian or Booth to give the Canucks a 2 or 3 goal lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Ebbet has been put in some seriously tough roles lately. Where he's been getting physically dominated by huge front line players. Personally I'm glad it's Ebbet that's been taking that beating instead of Schroeder, while Schroeder has been getting top line minutes down on the farm & playing the best hockey of his career. Schroeder is being put in a position to succeed & develop, instead of being put in a situation where he had little chance of success. Schroeder being up might of given us a better chance to win, but in the long run that end of season run he had with the wolves probably did him a world of good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 The Sedins, no. But Schneider? Most definitely so. He first became our backup under AV's regime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.