[Official] Canucks coach talk. Keep all talk here.

[Kanucklehead10]

@DarrenDreger: Glen Gulutzan is among the stable of coaches the Vancouver Canucks have interest in.

Gillis continues to flabbergast me.

[newgm]

It's amazing how many people keep saying what a good coach AV is, but agree with the decision to let him go.

He's gone thank god, so there's no point in the endless chicken or egg debate about whether he was a great coach with lousy players or a lousy coach with an elite team that won in spite his short comings.

You'd think this guy was Vince Lombardi for crying out loud. I didn't hear this kind of uproar when they let Crow go, and head to head he's won 127 more NHL games than AV and still has more wins than losses even after after 4 disastrous seasons in L.A. and Dallas.

There's no way Crawford ever returns, but my point is that at least he won a Cup with Colorado. AV won the Jack Adams trophy so what, so did Ted Nolan. Unless they bring back Bill Laforge any coach they pick will be an upgrade to AV.

[Canuck Surfer]

FTR I wish to keep two of Edler, Hamhuis, Garrison and Ballard. I feel we have to keep Bieksa as he is a right side defender with a right side shot. Only Garrison has proven viable on the right side as a switch hitter, but he still prefers to play left. Its not that I don't like them, but absolutely none of them are puck handling, puck rushing D.

Got to give some to get some; so off with Ballard and one of the others so we can add that skillset.

Yip, Edler in particular, but also Bieksa, Hamhuis and Garrison (in that order) can jump into a play and add offense. Garrison, Edler and Bieksa (sort of) add's an effective shot from the back end, Hamhuis puts it on net. All 5, particularly Tanev, then Hamhuis, make a good break out pass. Edler, Hamhuis and Bieksa are not bad at passing in the offensive end, can pinch if they have to. Plenty of good skills.

None are slow.

But none are speedsters while controlling puck. Certainly none routinely grab the puck and can beat pressure flying up the ice faster than defenders can get to them, handling the puck and drawing defenders out of position to dish on a rush. None navigate the middle to gain the zone on the PP. Once we're there, I have no complaints.

Bottom line is if there is no break out pass, we gain centre then dump and chase. Or in percentages, we cough up the puck and play defence. My observation is that is the biggest difference between our style of play then versus now. And the 2knd biggest reason is we don't put as much pressure on opoosing teams, either physically, or creating turnovers on the forecheck. Add it up, less pressure up ice offensively and defensively.

At least we're in agreement that we are not the dangerous, high tempo, high scoring team we once were. Just the reasons?

Higgins wasn't invisbale the last 15 games. Dont you remember how great he and Roy played prior to the playoffs? Thats what I am saying, there was proven success and chemistry between those 2 players and AV didn't go to that combination.

I was talking about Ballard (And I said that in brackets) And you seriously are unhappy about us keeping Hamhuis (WHAT?!!) And Edler (Gets alot of unfair hate) but you seem content with keeping Bieksa despite him being the worst of the 3. I even think Ballard is more reliable than Bieksa honestly. We have one of the best defense cores when everyone is motivated, healthy and on there game. And yes actually we have puck rushing, puck possesion guys, every Defenseman we have is a good skater. Edler, Ballard, Bieksa and Hamhuis especially are puck movers who can rush the puck up the ice and jump into the play. These aren't stay at home defenders, they are all mobile defenders who can rush the puck, Edler especially who is a 50 point defenseman just like Ehrhoff. And if you haven't noticed we now have 3 capable right hand shots, infact I am far more comfortable in Chris Tanev than I am Kevin Bieksa and we all saw how Frank Corrado played, that right there is 3 capable right hand shots, not to mention Jason Garrison who played great on the right side.

Here is the thing, we were a high tempo team in 10-11, we were even a high tempo team in 11-12. The personnel is basically the same.

How are we now able to play that style? You really think Ehrhoff and Salo were more valuable in that style of play than the Sedins, Kesler, Hamhuis, Edler, Burrows, Bieksa, exc. exc. (Basically everyone else) That there shows its not the players, cause they are the same players.

We needed a change and we got it. Now we need to make a hire and get younger.

[CanuckCup1316]

I love the work AV did here but agree a new coach is a step in the right direction. But getting rid of MG would be a much bigger possitive impact. First, no way would Luongo want to stay here with how both AV and MG treated him. But everyone knows we would get more for Cory in a deal. So we are going to get draft picks and retain a portion of his salary as appossed to improving out team now. It would be two punches in the gut, get little to no help now and have less cap room with cap going down. Plus buyouts and or deals involving Edler, Booth, Ballard etc.. are not going to happen with MG, but would most likely happen with any other GM. Is there a way we could get Wally Buono to be the GM?

[UFCanuck]

@DarrenDreger: Glen Gulutzan is among the stable of coaches the Vancouver Canucks have interest in.

[DeNiro]

Dreger's report on Gullutzan being considered is about as credible as his report about Gillis offering Luongo for two 2nd round picks and Ben Scrivens.

The guy is a tool who's best interest is to serve his cousin Dave Nonis. He has shown to have no inside knowledge on the Canucks, and any attempt to report on them is just to try and get national attention.

[Bodee]

There's no doubt being swept by the Pharts in the first round ultimately cost AV his job.

How much of that lands squarely on his shoulders is debatable, but who can argue that that kind of result in back to back years is likely to cost a coach his job regardless of what the mitigating circumstances might be.

It's a challenge for every team (not named the Penguins) to score in the playoffs, but when it came to having that extra measure of scoring creativity to push the team over the top, the Canucks came up short.

Despite the disappointing end, I have to say I was pretty impressed with what AV managed this season - to that point.

I realize alot of people had microquestions like why Ebbett or Alberts were playing (in both cases I think Schroeder's repeated shoulder injuries and Ballard's groin played a role) but leaving particular roster decisions or line matches aside, there were some other things that I think really defined an excellent season for AV.

First, he started the season without much of a camp (yes, all coaches did) and he had a pair of his top four just recovering from back and groin injuries. The blueline had to be made-shift on the go. Garrison was coming off a groin injury and joining a new team, Bieksa (the only right side veteran) was in and out of the lineup, Tanev had a very impressive rookie season but was absent in the end, Ballard again had injury (groin) problems, Hamhius had an uncharacteristic slow start - AV was not without his challenges piecing that group together.

The second line as everyone knows was absent. In addition to Kesler's injuries, there was the loss of Malhotra, and Schroeder was unavailable at the tail end of the season - piecework up the middle - as well as injuries to depth forwards like Weise and Pinizotto.

Every decision AV made regarding goaltending was national news. A new time zone was created - Luongo-time.

There were times when the lineup wasn't very impressive - perhaps average - and with the revolving door, there was also virtually no time to practice. Under the circumstances, I thought the fact that AV pieced that together pretty much on the fly, and pulled another Northwest title out of it was a pretty respectable result.

There's talk that he managed this because of a weak NW division (which many prematurely projected to be much stronger this year) - but AV managed this largely on the strength of a 9-2 record against the Central division, probably the NHL's strongest division. Their 3rd seeding wasn't an artificial result - without the division wining seed, they would still have finished 4th, a point out of that 3rd seed.

While he may not have found a way to push that offensive production over the top in the playoffs, what he certainly showed was the ability to sustain their competitiveness despite a constantly depleted roster.

I think he deserves credit for that - as opposed to the notion that any monkey could have gotten them into the position where a playoff loss is actually a disappointing result (as opposed to a playoff birth being an utter relief).

Excellent post oldnews.

[Dilly Canuck]

I know Gillis would take a lot of heat for this hiring but I like it. Gulutzan did a very underrated job in Dallas and all you have to do is take a look at the lineup he was managing on a consistent basis. The Stars also had several key injuries down the stretch and also lost Derek Roy to us at the deadline, yet he somehow kept the young inexperienced team competitive. This was the coach that delivered that impressive 5-1 drubbing to us late in the season with his squad of veterans and youngsters. Sure he doesn't have alot of NHL coaching experience, but let's not forget that AV was relatively un-experienced when he first arrived on the scene and last I checked the most popular coach...Eakins, has ZERO NHL coaching experience. How often do first time NHL coaches have success? It happens but not that often (especially when it concerns maintaining winning beyond the first year). The Canucks could definitely find a worse coach out there than Gulutzan.

[D-Money]

I don't know much about Glen Gulutzan, except this:

The Stars have a HORRIBLE line-up. Outside of Benn and Eriksson, they don't really have ANYBODY of 1st-line calibre. (And this season, they had to start without Benn). On paper, they should be toiling at the bottom of the league with the Avs. But in both of his seasons, Glen managed to get that rag-tag bunch to nearly make the playoffs. He had a winning record with those scrubs!

So based on that, I'm not opposed to his name being in the hat. AV would have missed the playoffs both of his first seasons too, had Luongo not gone on the hottest stretch of his life in the first one.

[Monty]

^^^

It's a tough one. Gulutzan might be a good choice, but like you said, there is not a whole lot to go on. The Stars iced an absolute terrible team, it's surprising they didn't finish dead last.

[canadiangunner]

Dreger's report on Gullutzan being considered is about as credible as his report about Gillis offering Luongo for two 2nd round picks and Ben Scrivens.

The guy is a tool who's best interest is to serve his cousin Dave Nonis. He has shown to have no inside knowledge on the Canucks, and any attempt to report on them is just to try and get national attention.

Well said, agreed 100%. Add to that he kisses east coast but any chance he can get. Its awful that a credible organization like TSN would allow this bias reporting to continue. Can't stand Dreger just promotes Leafs interests any chance he gets. Outside of that is the guy ever right?

[Noseforthenet]

I think what has to be the question here is what coach available can help the Canucks play a full 60 minutes. Year after year, we have seen the team skate by on the amount of talent they have and not play the full 60. While that's great for talent, it's bad for winning when it counts. So which coach out there gets the Nucks to play a full 60? Not exactly sure, but if the answer is none, then any new hire coach is a sideways move and that means a piece or pieces of the core need to go. And if MG isn't prepared to have to do that, someone will have to be hired who will.

[canadiangunner]

I think what has to be the question here is what coach available can help the Canucks play a full 60 minutes. Year after year, we have seen the team skate by on the amount of talent they have and not play the full 60. While that's great for talent, it's bad for winning when it counts. So which coach out there gets the Nucks to play a full 60? Not exactly sure, but if the answer is none, then any new hire coach is a sideways move and that means a piece or pieces of the core need to go. And if MG isn't prepared to have to do that, someone will have to be hired who will.

Dave Tippett.

[Noseforthenet]

Dave Tippett.

I was thinking that too, but it has been awhile since he has coached a ppg star. We have 3 of them.

[RonMexico]

Why hire Tippett when you could have just kept AV?

The team needs a fresh, new direction. Old retreads are not the way to go.

[dildo_baggins]

Why hire Tippett when you could have just kept AV?

The team needs a fresh, new direction.

I couldnt agree more...

The last thing this team needs, is More of the Same..

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Glen Gulutzan will join Jeff Paterson and Don Taylor on the TEAM 1040 Afternoon Show at 4 PM today.

[Neversummer]

What I still can't get over is why for 2 years in a row, AV did not have post-season presser. If it was MG sheltering him, I disagree. If it was AV not wanting to ... I also disagree. I think it is common practice that GM and Coach does a post-season presser and answer questions ... especially if they crap the bed.

[oldnews]

Most people know I am not much of an AV fan. He still made some very counter-intuitive decisions that I feel cost the team especially in the playoffs.

But you make a lot of good points. I think one of the main reasons for firing him was that it was one of the only immediate things Gillis could actually do. The bad contracts and such really did hem in this team.

When it comes down to it the team will be largely the same, at least the core of it. And I don't think AV could get out of it what he would need to in order to win a cup. Firing him was the right decision. But that does not mean that the responsibility is all about him or his failings as a coach. That is far too simplistic.

He did some good things as coach and some bad things, just like any other coach. But it was time for a culture change more than anything.

You make claims like this a lot - AV made 'counterintuitive' decisions - but you don't offer much in the way of examples to backup what you are claiming.

You also keep singing the bad contract song, but the three bad contracts are overplayed here more than cookie cutter Nickelback albums. Not many teams are without a few 'bad contracts'.

What does 'hemmed in' mean anyway? That too is overplayed.

I can think of a lot of factors around the league as a whole that made cutting deals difficult. There was very little player movement around the entire league. Ray Shero may be considered a genius by some, but if the Pens fail, the cost of all the futures spent on rentals may not look the same in the near future. In addition the cap drop will necesarily effect player valuation.

Compact schedule, combined with fatigue and short recovery times = teams sustained a lot of injuries and moveable roster players were fewer and at a premium.

A short season with no training camp and little practice time gave advantage to teams already composed, known quantities, as opposed to rolling the dice on significant and numerous changes.

The new CBA made it difficult and more complicated for GMs - at least a dozen teams in the NHL are facing significant cap and roster challenges - for the few with cap space, the incentive to deal was not there as conditions will only improve for them at season's end.

The shortened season resulted in very few teams being out of the playoff races at the trade deadline. The buyer/seller balance was lopsided.

[RUPERTKBD]

What I still can't get over is why for 2 years in a row, AV did not have post-season presser.  If it was MG sheltering him, I disagree.  If it was AV not wanting to ... I also disagree.  I think it is common practice that GM and Coach does a post-season presser and answer questions ... especially if they crap the bed.

I don't see any reason to do so...

He'd either get accused of "making excuses", "throwing his players under the bus" or he'd put it on himself and Vancouver media and fans would deride him for that.

Besides, who needs AV to answer any questions when it's clear that the aforementioned media and fanbase already have all the answers anyway...