spliced Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 lol Oilers. One minute they're keeping Kruger the next he's gone. Whatever the case I think it's the right move getting rid of Kruger, we'll see how Eakins works out. I thought Eakins had a good shot at ending up in Vanccouver. You better get someone good Gillis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomniac604 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Unfortunate but not disastrous. We need a coach that's been in the NHL. Our team needs a change of playing style so someone that has played against us will be more valuable. You want a guy that has tried to defend and out-score our team. A guy that has watched tape trying to find our weaknesses. I think Eakins will fit well with the Oilers. A green unproven coach with a young unproven team. They will learn together. Canucks can't afford growing pains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I'm gonna guess Bylsma, Stevens, Tippet, Ruff, and Torts Is who Gillis is going after now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 lol Oilers. One minute they're keeping Kruger the next he's gone. Whatever the case I think it's the right move getting rid of Kruger, we'll see how Eakins works out. I thought Eakins had a good shot at ending up in Vanccouver. You better get someone good Gillis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gradin123 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I really believe AV shouldn't haven't been fired until a replacement was in place. Change for the sake of change isn't a good thing. I suppose Stevens is the most obvious choice now but what if he decides to go elsewhere. It seems like he has a lot of leverage on the Canucks now and there are still teams looking for a coach. I also don't think many coaches are all that excited to work under Gillis. I still wouldn't be surprised to see Scott Arniel end up as the coach of the Canucks next year especially if Stevens doesn't pan out. It wouldn't be a popular choice but it seems like he is a Gillis guy and there isn't many Gillis guys out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gradin123 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 The first three are also my prediction of MG's list. (And they coincide with my preferences.) I very much doubt if Ruff will be hired and I think there are at least two or three others on the list ahead of him. I am virtually certain Torts will not be hired and am pretty sure he is not on the list at all (or maybe just after Mike Keenan in about 43rd spot). I think Stevens is better than 50-50 right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 ^ Replacements are never, ever 'in place' when coaches are fired unless you're talking about an assistant coach mid-season. Since it's the offseason, why in the hell would a team rush to put anyone in place before the coach is fired? That's working behind his back. ie. Totally unprofessional. AV had a long time here. Longer than most coaches get. Change for the sake of change is good if the current coach has essentially lost the room. Besides, it's a results-related job. Not sure why Stevens would be the obvious choice. Just like Eakins was supposed to be? There are a ton of candidates out there, really. Like anyone would have leverage. It's a 30-job market with literally hundreds of coaches begging for a chance, and the Canucks are probably offering the best position currently available. Not sure why a coach wouldn't be excited about working under Gillis. Because he doesn't really interfere with coaching decisions? Or that he's ultra-patient with his coaches in general. Wow, that's really tough. Arniel might be the coach and that wouldn't be a bad thing. Sure he failed in Columbus, but that was Columbus, at a time when Carter was there and he really, really didn't want to be. And neither did Nash. Arniel was given a raw deal. If he becomes the coach, it'll be as AV became coach, but it will be tough for the franchise to sell that as a move up. Not sure what you mean by Gillis guy. I suppose Arniel and AV are Gillis guys, in that they work for this franchise. Is that what you mean? How do you become a Gillis guy? Was Eakins a Gillis guy? How would he be a Gillis guy over all the other candidates? So many puzzling thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gradin123 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 ^ Replacements are never, ever 'in place' when coaches are fired unless you're talking about an assistant coach mid-season. Since it's the offseason, why in the hell would a team rush to put anyone in place before the coach is fired? That's working behind his back. ie. Totally unprofessional. AV had a long time here. Longer than most coaches get. Change for the sake of change is good if the current coach has essentially lost the room. Besides, it's a results-related job. Not sure why Stevens would be the obvious choice. Just like Eakins was supposed to be? There are a ton of candidates out there, really. Like anyone would have leverage. It's a 30-job market with literally hundreds of coaches begging for a chance, and the Canucks are probably offering the best position currently available. Not sure why a coach wouldn't be excited about working under Gillis. Because he doesn't really interfere with coaching decisions? Or that he's ultra-patient with his coaches in general. Wow, that's really tough. Arniel might be the coach and that wouldn't be a bad thing. Sure he failed in Columbus, but that was Columbus, at a time when Carter was there and he really, really didn't want to be. And neither did Nash. Arniel was given a raw deal. If he becomes the coach, it'll be as AV became coach, but it will be tough for the franchise to sell that as a move up. Not sure what you mean by Gillis guy. I suppose Arniel and AV are Gillis guys, in that they work for this franchise. Is that what you mean? How do you become a Gillis guy? Was Eakins a Gillis guy? How would he be a Gillis guy over all the other candidates? So many puzzling thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Eakins will have lower expectations with the Oilers than with the Canucks. Plus, there's no where else left to go for Edmonton but up anyways. Pretty much a win-win for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLions Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I'd read the timing of the canning of Krueger and immediate hiring of Eakins as the Oilers having to wait for the Canucks decision to play out. In other words Eakins' first choice was the Canucks, he didn't get the job, so went the Oilers way. The Oilers wouldn't have fired and hired in the same day otherwise. It's a risk on Gillis' part but he will end up with 2-3 solid choices to pursue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Don't worry MacTavish, He'll be back..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Eakins will have lower expectations with the Oilers than with the Canucks. Plus, there's no where else left to go for Edmonton but up anyways. Pretty much a win-win for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gradin123 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I just think the view around the league right now is Gillis is skating on thin ice as a GM. Any coach would have to factor that in if they choose the Canucks because if Gillis gets fired any new GM would likely also want a new coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gradin123 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I'd read the timing of the canning of Krueger and immediate hiring of Eakins as the Oilers having to wait for the Canucks decision to play out. In other words Eakins' first choice was the Canucks, he didn't get the job, so went the Oilers way. The Oilers wouldn't have fired and hired in the same day otherwise. It's a risk on Gillis' part but he will end up with 2-3 solid choices to pursue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avicii Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Well now the Oilers will likely win a cup within the next 5 years. Perfect coach for developing their stacked young core. Again Gillis' patience will leave him with nothing, just like with the Luongo trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangelos Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 I don't understand why Gillis is after no name assistants and AHL coaches. You'd expect him to go after guys with a proven track record in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Knee jerk reaction. I like Eakins but Boucher is still a better option IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLions Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 My point was the Oilers were willing to stick with Kreuger if Eakins wasn't made available to them. So they did have an immediate replacement before they fired Kreuger. Kreuger would NOT have been fired if Eakins wasn't available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Eakins will have lower expectations with the Oilers than with the Canucks. Plus, there's no where else left to go for Edmonton but up anyways. Pretty much a win-win for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 They went up the standings this season, so they can go down next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.