The Case Against Travis Green

[Boudrias]

On ‎4‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 1:13 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

Just because our team is not flush with talent does not mean we have nothing to lose. We actually have a lot to lose if those players we do have don't develop properly. There is no buffer if the next core doesn't take big steps forward the next few years. That's a lot of risk.

 

Should we trust that to Green who has not yet shown any real tangible results at developing pro hockey players in the AHL? He has gotten his team to work hard, but has also fallen back on AHL veterans rather than Canucks prospects at times and really hasn't produced anyone of note for the Canucks. Yes he has not had a lot to work with but he has had some that have simply not been developed to take that next step.

 

I like Green and think he is a talented coach but two caveats. First, Willie Desjardins had a far better track record of both winning and developing pro players in the AHL and look where he ended up. He struggled with adapting to NHL coaching to a certain degree and that's with having been an associate coach in the NHL. And second, this team needs a coach who can not only develop the young players but also navigate a few veteran players in the Sedins and Edler who all need to be moving into smaller roles. Can a rookie coach stand up to that challenge or will he get pushed aside by a veteran group protecting their turf? If those core players can lead to three experienced and strong minded coaches in AV, Tortorella, and Desjardins being pushed out I imagine they will own a rookie coach in no time at all. A continued focus on building around the Sedins and Edler on the lineup card is my fear with Green. Because the only way that won't happen is if the coach is strong enough to make it happen. Maybe Green is but again that's a real risk.

 

I dont know what Green brings that sets him or the team up for success at this point. I am very skeptical of rookie coaches who always seem to have their success with their second coaching job and beyond. Definite buyer beware of hyped AHL coaches. Dallas Eakins serves as a reminder of what happens when you don't factor in all the relevant facts and base it on hype. Green is highly regarded but his resume is actually very thin in the main area we need of developing impact pro players.

 

I hope if the hire him he is up for it. Because the next coach has to be a clear and demonstrated improvement over Desjardins in several areas to take the heat off Benning and Linden. And despite his flaws, Willie will not be as easy an act to follow as some might think. It will take a strong coach.

My take is that you blame coaching for the results this season not just in Vancouver but Utica as well. I am one who thinks that player development should have trumped all other priorities in the org for the past 3 years. Desjardin and Green are very experienced coaches and might rightly think that being as competitive as possible and shielding rookies yields more in the way of development. One can also repeat the argument that Linden and Benning have not embraced the full rebuild which would have influenced WD's decisions.

 

IMHO this is past history now. Two seasons at the bottom of the league has likely changed, if needed, the org's development priorities. Sorry but the influence of the Twins and Edler are done. No disrespect to them but the reality of this group now lies with Horvat and likely Guddy. Even throw in Stecher simply because of the drive he has. That is a very thin group to build off especially with Tryamkin gone.

 

If Green is the hire then he will be fighting a tough battle developing young talent. Much harder even with the thin talent rosters he had in Utica. Trying to develop NHL caliber players as they play their first few seasons in the NHL. He likely will not last through the rebuild and any other expectation would be over optimistic in my view. This franchise likely has another 5 years of rebuild ahead. I had edged shorter with Tryamkin but unless he reappears with a better attitude the longer time line stands. Who really knows what the Tryamkin deal was. That aside I considered him having top pairing potential which did not exist in the org prior to the start of the season.  

[YummyCakeFace]

There's no case against him. He's the right choice for this team at this time. 

[wallstreetamigo]

3 hours ago, Boudrias said:

My take is that you blame coaching for the results this season not just in Vancouver but Utica as well. I am one who thinks that player development should have trumped all other priorities in the org for the past 3 years. Desjardin and Green are very experienced coaches and might rightly think that being as competitive as possible and shielding rookies yields more in the way of development. One can also repeat the argument that Linden and Benning have not embraced the full rebuild which would have influenced WD's decisions.

 

IMHO this is past history now. Two seasons at the bottom of the league has likely changed, if needed, the org's development priorities. Sorry but the influence of the Twins and Edler are done. No disrespect to them but the reality of this group now lies with Horvat and likely Guddy. Even throw in Stecher simply because of the drive he has. That is a very thin group to build off especially with Tryamkin gone.

 

If Green is the hire then he will be fighting a tough battle developing young talent. Much harder even with the thin talent rosters he had in Utica. Trying to develop NHL caliber players as they play their first few seasons in the NHL. He likely will not last through the rebuild and any other expectation would be over optimistic in my view. This franchise likely has another 5 years of rebuild ahead. I had edged shorter with Tryamkin but unless he reappears with a better attitude the longer time line stands. Who really knows what the Tryamkin deal was. That aside I considered him having top pairing potential which did not exist in the org prior to the start of the season.  

I don't blame coaching for anything other than not prioritizing development over trying to squeak into the playoffs the last few years. 

 

In fact, I pretty much agree with everything you just posted there. 

[Crabcakes]

6 hours ago, Boudrias said:

My take is that you blame coaching for the results this season not just in Vancouver but Utica as well. I am one who thinks that player development should have trumped all other priorities in the org for the past 3 years. Desjardin and Green are very experienced coaches and might rightly think that being as competitive as possible and shielding rookies yields more in the way of development. One can also repeat the argument that Linden and Benning have not embraced the full rebuild which would have influenced WD's decisions.

 

IMHO this is past history now. Two seasons at the bottom of the league has likely changed, if needed, the org's development priorities. Sorry but the influence of the Twins and Edler are done. No disrespect to them but the reality of this group now lies with Horvat and likely Guddy. Even throw in Stecher simply because of the drive he has. That is a very thin group to build off especially with Tryamkin gone.

 

If Green is the hire then he will be fighting a tough battle developing young talent. Much harder even with the thin talent rosters he had in Utica. Trying to develop NHL caliber players as they play their first few seasons in the NHL. He likely will not last through the rebuild and any other expectation would be over optimistic in my view. This franchise likely has another 5 years of rebuild ahead. I had edged shorter with Tryamkin but unless he reappears with a better attitude the longer time line stands. Who really knows what the Tryamkin deal was. That aside I considered him having top pairing potential which did not exist in the org prior to the start of the season.  

Coaches coach the way management want them to.  They're no different than middle managers in this way.  When they're hired, it is because they coach the way management wants the team to be coached and there is generally 100% buy in.

 

What was the plan when Willie was hired?  To give the old core another shot at a cup.  Willie likes to roll 4 lines and did a nice job in year 1 despite not having a proper 2nd line centre.

 

Now, things have changed.  There are more young players than veterans and the focus is on development and living and dying with youth.  We know this since Burrows and Hansen were moved.

 

Willie doesn't want to change.  This isn't what he signed up for.  Willie wants to win above all and if it means playing Biega as a forward because there's nobody he can trust and Chaput or Megna on the top line for the same reason.  That's the best he can do.

 

Won't change?  You're out.  Sorry Willie.

 

The thing is, management wanted alignment from top to bottom in the organization.  Utica would be coached the same way as Vancouver.  The question is, will Green coach the team the way they need to be coached?  He was hired to coach the way Willie coached.  Is he the best option for a young developing team?  He certainly helped guys like Baertschi along.  The jury is out on Virtanen.  So, we have mixed results.

[Baggins]

5 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I don't blame coaching for anything other than not prioritizing development over trying to squeak into the playoffs the last few years. 

 

In fact, I pretty much agree with everything you just posted there. 

Isn't that managements fault? They're the ones that set making the playoffs as the goal. Willie was right in that regard. If the focus is development, you can't worry about wins because young guys will make costly mistakes. If you want to make the playoffs you have to shelter the young guys until they prove themselves. Trying to do both at the same time is fine when you have one young guy inserted, but folly when when you have several. That's on management, not coaching.

 

After year two I thought this past season should have been the shift to development over playoffs. Particularly with more youth inserted. Willie did well keeping them in the playoff hunt as long as he did. But it wasn't going to take as many injuries as the previous year for the wheels to fall off. No, this past season management should have abandoned the playoff goal in favor of ice time and development for the young guys.

 

I thought Willie should have had his final year without the playoff goal. He'd actually have some young offensive talent available at forward next year. Something he didn't have much of with a playoff goal set for him these past two years. Too much young talent on the back end and insufficient scoring talent up front making playoffs iffy even if staying healthy. Personally I think Willie got screwed this past season and wound up the sacrificial lamb because of managements playoff goal.

[mpt]

2 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Isn't that managements fault? They're the ones that set making the playoffs as the goal. Willie was right in that regard. If the focus is development, you can't worry about wins because young guys will make costly mistakes. If you want to make the playoffs you have to shelter the young guys until they prove themselves. Trying to do both at the same time is fine when you have one young guy inserted, but folly when when you have several. That's on management, not coaching.

 

After year two I thought this past season should have been the shift to development over playoffs. Particularly with more youth inserted. Willie did well keeping them in the playoff hunt as long as he did. But it wasn't going to take as many injuries as the previous year for the wheels to fall off. No, this past season management should have abandoned the playoff goal in favor of ice time and development for the young guys.

 

I thought Willie should have had his final year without the playoff goal. He'd actually have some young offensive talent available at forward next year. Something he didn't have much of with a playoff goal set for him these past two years. Too much young talent on the back end and insufficient scoring talent up front making playoffs iffy even if staying healthy. Personally I think Willie got screwed this past season and wound up the sacrificial lamb because of managements playoff goal.

Yup agreed, this is proven by the acquisition of Eriksson who makes the excuse to a bad season of he always has a first bad season with a new team.  Why spend to the cap ceiling when we expect a bottom 5 result?  Spend to the cap floor, lower ticket prices, let the fans watch the players they are excited about and turn a profit at the same time

[Baggins]

9 hours ago, Boudrias said:

My take is that you blame coaching for the results this season not just in Vancouver but Utica as well. I am one who thinks that player development should have trumped all other priorities in the org for the past 3 years. Desjardin and Green are very experienced coaches and might rightly think that being as competitive as possible and shielding rookies yields more in the way of development. One can also repeat the argument that Linden and Benning have not embraced the full rebuild which would have influenced WD's decisions.

 

IMHO this is past history now. Two seasons at the bottom of the league has likely changed, if needed, the org's development priorities. Sorry but the influence of the Twins and Edler are done. No disrespect to them but the reality of this group now lies with Horvat and likely Guddy. Even throw in Stecher simply because of the drive he has. That is a very thin group to build off especially with Tryamkin gone.

 

If Green is the hire then he will be fighting a tough battle developing young talent. Much harder even with the thin talent rosters he had in Utica. Trying to develop NHL caliber players as they play their first few seasons in the NHL. He likely will not last through the rebuild and any other expectation would be over optimistic in my view. This franchise likely has another 5 years of rebuild ahead. I had edged shorter with Tryamkin but unless he reappears with a better attitude the longer time line stands. Who really knows what the Tryamkin deal was. That aside I considered him having top pairing potential which did not exist in the org prior to the start of the season.  

It really depends on the quality of the youth you're dealing with. A McDavid won't need sheltering. Many lesser players may need sheltering so they aren't costing you far more than they're providing.

[wallstreetamigo]

14 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Isn't that managements fault? They're the ones that set making the playoffs as the goal. Willie was right in that regard. If the focus is development, you can't worry about wins because young guys will make costly mistakes. If you want to make the playoffs you have to shelter the young guys until they prove themselves. Trying to do both at the same time is fine when you have one young guy inserted, but folly when when you have several. That's on management, not coaching.

 

After year two I thought this past season should have been the shift to development over playoffs. Particularly with more youth inserted. Willie did well keeping them in the playoff hunt as long as he did. But it wasn't going to take as many injuries as the previous year for the wheels to fall off. No, this past season management should have abandoned the playoff goal in favor of ice time and development for the young guys.

 

I thought Willie should have had his final year without the playoff goal. He'd actually have some young offensive talent available at forward next year. Something he didn't have much of with a playoff goal set for him these past two years. Too much young talent on the back end and insufficient scoring talent up front making playoffs iffy even if staying healthy. Personally I think Willie got screwed this past season and wound up the sacrificial lamb because of managements playoff goal.

It's maybe not entirely fair to move the goal posts so significantly on Desjardins (although they probably should have been closer to where they are now when they hired him) so yes that part is on management for sure. They hired a guy that is all about winning and expecting him to change his DNA and go completely the development route was clearly not going to happen from the get go. So yes, a certain amount of that is a scapegoat type situation (which I said from the moment he got fired and actually said even before he got fired that it would be).

 

Having said that, when they changed the focus, his only job is to adjust and do what they wanted him to do. He struggled with that and it ultimately cost him his job.

 

His stubbornness (that he himself admitted to a few times iirc) cost him because he couldn't let go of the only way forward that he saw, even after Benning publicly said he would. That never ends well for a coach when you don't adjust when you are told to.

 

I dont think Willie is a terrible coach. I just think his weaknesses were severely magnified by this team as time went on. And he couldn't make the changes he needed to make to buy himself more time.

 

I really think with a team where the veteran players are actually the top guys that he can lean on and he is integrating one or two quality young two way players, his style would work much better. I also think though that to be successful in the NHL he has to get much better at his lineup choices and his bench management. And he needs to learn to better adapt and make changes to both strategy and in game tactics in real time. Sticking with failed strategies or ineffective lineup decisions is a significant weakness he needs to learn to improve.

 

Like I have said for years, the Canucks needed to be realistic about what was possible. Being playoff competitive beyond the first few months can look easier thanks to loser points. Realistically assessing your team is critical and I think big mistakes were made there.

 

Its not all on Desjardins but he certainly didn't make it easy on himself or make their decision harder.

[Vinny in Vancouver]

On 4/22/2017 at 8:51 PM, Baggins said:

I thought Willie should have had his final year without the playoff goal. He'd actually have some young offensive talent available at forward next year.

I believe one of the reasons he was let go is that people didn't think he would actually use those young offensive talent by giving them enough minutes...

[cuporbust]

Just listened to tony G on 1040 and he made allot of sense saying basically the same thing as the OP. Green has not done a great job developing. They say he didnt have much to work with ? Maybe he did and they became " not much" because of him. I am not a green fan at all at this point. 

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

This case is closed!

 

The verdict will be read soon.

[Sugar baby watermelon]

welcome to the Canucks Travis green

[Boudrias]

17 hours ago, cuporbust said:

Just listened to tony G on 1040 and he made allot of sense saying basically the same thing as the OP. Green has not done a great job developing. They say he didnt have much to work with ? Maybe he did and they became " not much" because of him. I am not a green fan at all at this point. 

Tony G caused the "presstitute" moniker. Absolute BS'er!

[R3aL]

On 4/11/2017 at 8:41 PM, AK_19 said:

I have been incredibly surprised at the amount of support Travis Green is getting from fans as someone who would be a good coach to replace WD. I am absolutely opposed to Green becoming the next head coach of the Canucks for the following reasons:

 

WD's resume before joining the Canucks:

9 years experience as WHL Head Coach

2 years experience as a AHL Head Coach
2 years experience as an Associate Coach with Dallas Stars

WHL Championship

CHl/WHL Coach of the Year
2010 World Junior Head Coach (Canada)
AHL Championship

Green's resume currently:

1/2 season experience as a WHL Head Coach

4 seasons as an AHL Head Coach

WHL Championship

 

I have some major red flags with Green which include:

 

1) Not getting hired as a coach last year when there were a number of openings. Of note, he was in the running for Colorado and lost out to whatever bozo is running that team.

2) His unwillingness to be an assistant coach. This one bothers me because it makes him seem pretty arrogant especially considering his lack of experience compared to many of his peers who made the jump to the NHL as a head coach.

3) Like Willie, he appears to also not promote players unless forced to by injuries. Of note, Demko has played significantly less games than I would've hoped this year. It wasn't until call-ups/injuries that he started getting longer strings of games and getting a much improved groove for the game. The players that seem to be getting the most minutes are fringe-NHLers or not Canuck property. 

4) Green's teams have been as offensively choked as the Canucks team. In general, the Comets play quite a similar game to WD.

5) There are so many more accomplished and skilled coaches available right now with better track records including: Sutter, Maclean, Gallant, Ruff, and Crawford. 

There were a number of comments others have made about Green that I would like to dispel:

1. Travis Green has done a great job developing our players.

I would challenge this position greatly. The players that have developed the best in the last few years spent little to no time in the AHL. This list includes Horvat, Tryamkin, Hutton, Stetcher, and to a lesser degree Boeser.

Sven Baertschi spent a total of only 15 games with the Comets. Sven did not adjust very well when he joined the Canucks the next season full time and took a significant amount of games to adjust and score points at the NHL.

The Canuck players Green has had the most involvement with include Subban, Cassels, Gaunce, Pedan, and Virtanen. Thus far, Subban has regularly been one of the first cuts at training camp. After coming out of the OHL scoring roughly at a 2.0 ppg rate, Cassels is currently trending to not become an NHL player IMO. Pedan has regressed from his earlier seasons. Gaunce has not produced very well in the AHL and has been only 4th line material thus far in the NHL despite already being 23 years old. Virtanen is currently one of the worst performing 1st rounders of his draft year. Although one could still point to improvements in everyone's game, they have, IMO, been only incremental. 

I would not credit a head coach for the development of Markstrom and Demko which has been the duty of the goalie coach, Rollie Melanson. Rollie has been the one constant with our goalies for at least the last half decade and transformed Vancouver from a goalie graveyard to a goalie factory. He has had a significant hand in developing the games of Luongo, Schneider, Lack, Markstrom, and now Demko. 

One could argue that the Canucks have not given much to Green to work with but it still doesn't give us much positive evidence that he has done a great job developing players.

2. Travis Green is like AV when he was our farm team coach. He deserves a promotion + similar to the situation that AV was in many years ago. 

Giving someone a promotion because they are next in line is silly. Our next head coach should be selected because he is the best person for the job. Period. If we went by this logic we would never bring in people outside of our system. Also, this would have been a terrible line of thought considering after Nonis was fired, Steve Tambellini was next in line. 

Another similarity brought up is that AV "grew up" with a number of our important prospects with the Moose and that let to an overall positive development of these players when they reached the NHL with AV. I have heard AV credited for developing on the Moose Burrows, Kesler, Bieksa, and Raymond. The only player that was a regular roster player when AV coached the Moose was Burrows. That's it. Furthermore, there isn't a single player that Green has developed better for the Canucks over 4 seasons as a Comets coach than AV did with just Burrows that one Moose season. 

Also, Green's situation is nothing like AV's before he was promoted. AV was already a Jack Adams runner-up and coached the Montreal Canadiens for a couple years. 
 

3)Travis Green was a former player.

I've seen this a few times and I find this reasoning silly. I genuinely have not seen any sort of correlation to how many NHL games an NHL coach has played and their ability to coach. Scotty Bowman is generally regarded as one of, if not the best coach in NHL history and he never played as a player. In current times, Mike Babcock is generally ranked as the best coach and he also was never an NHL player. On the flip side, Wayne Gretzky is considered one of the worst coaches in modern NHL history. 

With all that being said, I fully suspect he will become our head coach due to having a cheaper contract than other coaches and the Canuck owner rumoured to be trying to sell the team (less overhead cost). 

I agree with every single point you have outlined - all valid.

 

All signs point to this being yet another poor choice for our team's brain trust.

 

Prepare yourself for a rocky 1-3 years. Hopefully we get lucky and take home a generational talent that makes this pain all worth it.

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

Now that an announcement is imminent, let's keep the conversation both for and against Travis Green on this thread: