The Case Against Travis Green

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

The Sedins have said Crawford had a lot of influence on building their confidence in the NHL which helped them a lot, Burrows also said basically the same thing when he went to Ottawa and praised Crawford, and all of this is when Crawford was a hot head as some posters like to put it, but that's how coaching was back then. Crawford has shown to be much more mellow now which is great for him, but even more reason to bring in a guy who has a proven record with helping younger players. Plus he coaches a offensive game what this team needs, and having a #1 goalie(Miller if he signs) you need to trust your goalie in which he can to allow him to coach an offensive game. From what I heard Green coaches a defensive game and as a fan I'm tired of this style of coaching, and I believe a lot of fans feel the same and want some excitement back, but your not going to get that with Green.

[coastal.view]

52 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

 

No, it is not about being experienced or inexperienced.  After all, every coach that entered in the league was once inexperienced in so many ways gained experienced with bad or mediocre teams but the cup contender teams never hire inexperienced coach.   I do not think that this is the cup contender in any shape or form.  So hiring the experienced coach may not be the way to go at their current state for now and I would give Green a chance. 

 

I do not believe that Green is playing the exactly same system as Willie and he has its own system or develop his own once he is given an opportunity to coach this team.   He is only following the order under Linden/Benning mandate to play a similar system in Utica with some variables in the system, giving him flexible to develop guys his own way while playing Willie's system.  Even if Baertschi played under Green on the Calder Cup run, he still was benched by Willie when he made the team so I still think that both of them has two different system and Willie is more rigid in his ways than Green as evidenced by the late season despite ordered by the management team to play the young more.    Willie was not satisfy with his on-ice performance despite being developed and regained his confidence by Green.  

 

Once Green becomes the coach, the AHL coach will follow and play similar system to Green's, that way, when any prospect is called up, he is ready to step in and play to Green's system.   I prefer that philosophy than two different league, with two different systems.   I do not believe that Green likes Willie's defensive system but follows the management's order.  I would bet you that it is too late to change the system with 3 games left but he will be granted an interview and ask questions about how he would change the system and if the management likes Green's philosophy, they will hire him and enter into the training camp with completely different system and whoever the Canucks hire for AHL, they will follow whatever system the Canucks is running.

i am not really so big on this continuity argument

i think utica systems are similar to the canucks systems

green implemented systems he was told to put in place

we saw call ups from utica fill in rather seamlessly

we ended up in 29th place anyway

 

sure it is a bad mix of oldish players and raw rookies the sewered this team

but i sure am open to a new coach with new ideas and systems

 

i particularly want a new approach to special teams

and a better tactic in how our team breaks out of the defensive zone

say what you will about the sedins decline

they had little help from the backend

and were forced to play to their weakness... puck pursuit.. when they are puck possession players

[b3.]

I want a coach that kills Edlers drop pass zone entry on every single PP.

[WTG]

Compare Travis Green to Todd Nelson a fellow young up-in-coming coach, I don't understand how you can not see that Todd is clearly the better option.

[oldnews]

14 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I think the disqualifying factor (that supporters use as a positive for him) is that he knows the system. Guess what? The system sucks and is a huge part of the problem.

Define what the 'system' is.

[Gaudette Celly]

17 hours ago, 6string said:

Excellent article, I strongly oppose his candidacy and have often posted here by mentioning we are going down the Dallas Eakin road of Edmonton with a decision like this.

 

Sutter is the obvious choice ( If he is interested ) as a proven champion with popularity and respect from players anywhere he has played and coached

So that's why the Kings players locked him out of the dressing room?  If you want a coach who will burn a team out in a couple years, why not just bring back Keenan?

 

Like Hitchcock, it's no thanks to Sutter.

[nuck7635]

1 hour ago, coolboarder said:

 

No, it is not about being experienced or inexperienced.  After all, every coach that entered in the league was once inexperienced in so many ways gained experienced with bad or mediocre teams but the cup contender teams never hire inexperienced coach.   I do not think that this is the cup contender in any shape or form.  So hiring the experienced coach may not be the way to go at their current state for now and I would give Green a chance. 

 

I do not believe that Green is playing the exactly same system as Willie and he has its own system or develop his own once he is given an opportunity to coach this team.   He is only following the order under Linden/Benning mandate to play a similar system in Utica with some variables in the system, giving him flexible to develop guys his own way while playing Willie's system.  Even if Baertschi played under Green on the Calder Cup run, he still was benched by Willie when he made the team so I still think that both of them has two different system and Willie is more rigid in his ways than Green as evidenced by the late season despite ordered by the management team to play the young more.    Willie was not satisfy with his on-ice performance despite being developed and regained his confidence by Green.  

 

Once Green becomes the coach, the AHL coach will follow and play similar system to Green's, that way, when any prospect is called up, he is ready to step in and play to Green's system.   I prefer that philosophy than two different league, with two different systems.   I do not believe that Green likes Willie's defensive system but follows the management's order.  I would bet you that it is too late to change the system with 3 games left but he will be granted an interview and ask questions about how he would change the system and if the management likes Green's philosophy, they will hire him and enter into the training camp with completely different system and whoever the Canucks hire for AHL, they will follow whatever system the Canucks is running.

 

How do we know his own system is going to be successful if he hasn't even been able to employ it in the AHL?

If Green was indeed following Willie's system, you can bet money the Cashquilinis are taking my question into consideration when looking at Green.

 

At the end of the day, their goal is to make the Canucks a profitable business again. If hiring someone like Crawford who has shown he can coach an exciting brand of hockey can give them a better shot at that than someone like Green, why wouldn't they? Sure, maybe there is in fact truth to their claim that they're "fans first" but just look at the way they're treating season ticket holders and the fan base here. It screams business first. 

 

[mll]

5 hours ago, coastal.view said:

i am not really so big on this continuity argument

i think utica systems are similar to the canucks systems

green implemented systems he was told to put in place

we saw call ups from utica fill in rather seamlessly

we ended up in 29th place anyway

 

sure it is a bad mix of oldish players and raw rookies the sewered this team

but i sure am open to a new coach with new ideas and systems

 

i particularly want a new approach to special teams

and a better tactic in how our team breaks out of the defensive zone

say what you will about the sedins decline

they had little help from the backend

and were forced to play to their weakness... puck pursuit.. when they are puck possession players

Fwiw Baer was asked about the difference with the Adirondack system.  He said with the Flames it's North-South with a lot of grind in the game.  In Utica it's about finding a way to get into the o-zone without turning the puck over and without chipping it in.

 

Baer likes to criss-cross and just roam around with the puck trying to create plays.  He looked like he did in Portland.  Not everyone got that freedom re question of skills.  

[cbdoubleu]

I think it'll be Green because we are not in the stage of the rebuild to be hiring a Crow or AV. We're in the Tom Renney phase of the rebuild. We still will get worse before we get better. Green might surprise and get something out these kids with a different system than Willie Desjardins, but his track record isn't as lengthy as Desjardins' was, and I think that's the point. The next coach of this team should be here to make sure we can win meaningful games 3 years from now, not next season. Even if he's not around to be that coach.

 

We're not bringing in a guy to win, we're bringing in the guy that is going to teach these kids what it takes to win. No gifted minutes. Treat your star prospects like anyone else. Make them earn it, and if they can't (like Cassels) then that's on them for not being able to make it. I don't want to see a culture on this team where Bo Horvat and Boeser and Goldobin are just gifted prime minutes and zone starts so they can put 50-60 points a season while being -45 on a losing team, just so they can get paid like elite producing forwards. I don't expect all of our prospects to be on the team 3 years from now. Hard decisions will have to be made, some kids just won't cut it. You might trade a guy that ends up getting it somewhere else and it looks bad on you, but that's how bad young teams become good teams.

 

I want to see Boeser or Goldobin benched or scratched when they deserve to be, and have management behind that 100%.

 

[coolboarder]

1 hour ago, nuck7635 said:

 

How do we know his own system is going to be successful if he hasn't even been able to employ it in the AHL?

If Green was indeed following Willie's system, you can bet money the Cashquilinis are taking my question into consideration when looking at Green.

 

At the end of the day, their goal is to make the Canucks a profitable business again. If hiring someone like Crawford who has shown he can coach an exciting brand of hockey can give them a better shot at that than someone like Green, why wouldn't they? Sure, maybe there is in fact truth to their claim that they're "fans first" but just look at the way they're treating season ticket holders and the fan base here. It screams business first. 

 

Well, judging the CDC preference, it seems to be different opinion on who is better coach but so far, it seems to be that the majority of posters prefers Green and Gallant seems to be their second choice and Crawford the third choice.   I like Gallant but I do not want Crawford even if he would open up the game but it seems to me that we do not have personnel to be able to play run and gun hockey under Crawford.   I do not care for entertainment but as long as we win the hockey game, it's entertaining in itself.   Winning the cup should be the goal, not the entertainment as other posters who vouched for Crow wants that.   He tried with other team and it didn't work.  You got to balance things, offensive and defensive.   We do have some tool where we can score goals with good playmaker from our youth when they are not stifled under Willie.  Our strength is defence and goaltender so let's use that to our advantage and scoring will come in a right timing. 

 

Edit:

Oh, one more thing, that's what the interview is for, I'm sure that Linden/Benning will ask questions for more ideas and Green might present his case with ideas on many different type of how he would be different from Willie and if they agrees to Green's its own philosophy and he will then be given a chance to make this work.   Looking at the farm system in last 3 years, we do not even have a full cupboard of prospects where they might be able to dominate the league so instead, they dominated defensively with strong goaltender behind is what we need going forward.  If Green had Boeser, Goldy, Dahlen in the system, we might be able to take a peek on how he uses them properly but he doesn't have that chance to work with them all at once at the same time so he had Baertschi and he is their only offensive player during the Calder Cup run and we already know what type of coach when he gives him freedom to play with the puck.  Imagine if he had forward talents, he would give them freedom to be creative within the system as he did for Baertschi as long as they don't cost us a goal against.

 

Until then, they will not hire Green if it is contrary to their plans on what a team should look like.   I mean, they may only have one shot at their own coach unless the owner agrees that this team needs more time to develop before hiring an experience coach and give Benning two more chances at hiring two head coaches down the road, one for now and one for an experienced coach when they are further developed before canning Benning.    If the owner does not agree that this team needs time to develop then Benning will have no choice but to hire experienced coach now as it's his only chance for his own man of his choice.   Benning is not hired to maintain the roster but hired to find young players while giving them time to develop a blueprint for next core with his scouting background. The next core being fully developed requires 5-7 years before it has enough depth to make a run for the Cup.   We are in year 3 so he needs 3-4 more years to see this through.  

[VanGnome]

Here's the thing about Green, in 301 games coached in Utica so far, he hasn't exactly been outstanding.

 

301: 154-108-27-12 (W-L-OTL-SOL) If you discount the one year that Markstrom was down there the entire season (best goaltender in the league, by far) his record is even less impressive: 225: 107-88-20-10 (W-L-OTL-SOL) which I think is more indicative of his coaching ability given the teams he's had to work with. The roster for that 2014-2015 season where they went to the finals for the Calder Cup was by AHL standards, heavily veteran laden. 

For me, it's a hard pass on Green as the head coach in Vancouver. If he wants to be an associate coach and learn from someone with experience, fine by all accounts I'm good with that. But if he's going to be a stick in the mud and not accept anything less, he can Dallas Eakins his career elsewhere.

 

IMO, it's Crow, Gallant or bust. Thing that sucks is we have to wait for Ottawa to wrap up their playoffs before we can ask permission to talk to Crow, Gallant is effectively a free agent at this point, so if we wait to talk to Crow, we may lose out on Gallant by a team looking to make a move. I'd be thrilled with Crow, but lets say Ottawa doesn't give permission, or Crow declines to (for some reason) interview for the open vacancy AND Gallant gets poached.

TL and JB might be forced to make a decision they're ultimately not happy with... I think they should just hire Gallant and be done with it. He's not ultra up-tempo or high offense, but he does employ an entertaining enough style and is good with young players as evidenced in Florida before the $&!#stain Rowe rocked the boat.

[nuck7635]

14 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

Well, judging the CDC preference, it seems to be different opinion on who is better coach but so far, it seems to be that the majority of posters prefers Green and Gallant seems to be their second choice and Crawford the third choice.   I like Gallant but I do not want Crawford even if he would open up the game but it seems to me that we do not have personnel to be able to play run and gun hockey under Crawford.   I do not care for entertainment but as long as we win the hockey game, it's entertaining in itself.   Winning the cup should be the goal, not the entertainment as other posters who vouched for Crow wants that.   He tried with other team and it didn't work.  You got to balance things, offensive and defensive.   We do have some tool where we can score goals with good playmaker from our youth when they are not stifled under Willie.  Our strength is defence and goaltender so let's use that to our advantage and scoring will come in a right timing. 

I'm really just using Crawford for the sake of comparison.

The argument that claims winning games = excitement sounds like the NHL's argument that said "more goals = more exciting" when really it's the events that lead up to the goal or how the goal was scored. Simply put: a goal that Bure scores vs a goal that Megna scores does not generate the same level of excitement. That being said, there's an important balance there as well because obviously you don't want to sacrifice a win for the sake of exciting hockey.

 

Also, the Canucks played defence-first hockey all year which involved forwards coming back down as far as the hash marks to help the defence and they still got lit up. Where does the idea that defence is their strength come from? The Canucks as of now have the tools to be somewhat successful offensively, they just need to be utilized properly. There were also so many times this season where if the defenseman just pinched, they would've kept the puck in and helped generate some offense but 95% of the time they'd retreat and the opposing team got a scoring chance. Horvat, Baertschi, D. Sedin, Granlund are all capable of scoring 20 goals but if you suffocate them in a defensive system that doesn't work and only tires them out, how well do you really expect them to do? 

[mll]

8 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

Here's the thing about Green, in 301 games coached in Utica so far, he hasn't exactly been outstanding.

 

301: 154-108-27-12 (W-L-OTL-SOL) If you discount the one year that Markstrom was down there the entire season (best goaltender in the league, by far) his record is even less impressive: 225: 107-88-20-10 (W-L-OTL-SOL) which I think is more indicative of his coaching ability given the teams he's had to work with. The roster for that 2014-2015 season where they went to the finals for the Calder Cup was by AHL standards, heavily veteran laden. 

For me, it's a hard pass on Green as the head coach in Vancouver. If he wants to be an associate coach and learn from someone with experience, fine by all accounts I'm good with that. But if he's going to be a stick in the mud and not accept anything less, he can Dallas Eakins his career elsewhere.

 

IMO, it's Crow, Gallant or bust. Thing that sucks is we have to wait for Ottawa to wrap up their playoffs before we can ask permission to talk to Crow, Gallant is effectively a free agent at this point, so if we wait to talk to Crow, we may lose out on Gallant by a team looking to make a move. I'd be thrilled with Crow, but lets say Ottawa doesn't give permission, or Crow declines to (for some reason) interview for the open vacancy AND Gallant gets poached.

TL and JB might be forced to make a decision they're ultimately not happy with... I think they should just hire Gallant and be done with it. He's not ultra up-tempo or high offense, but he does employ an entertaining enough style and is good with young players as evidenced in Florida before the $&!#stain Rowe rocked the boat.

Matt Murray was the best goaltender in 2014/15 - Markstrom 2nd though.

Last season they had 48 different players in the lineup.  At some point they had 9 players on a PTO at the same time.

All their best players were either up in Vancouver or injured.

Again this season - Chaput and Megna were supposed to anchor the Comets (dixit Linden).  There needs to be more depth signed in the off-season.  

In his 30 thoughts Friedman wrote today: Green did arguably his best coaching job there this past season. The Canucks were decimated by injuries, it affected his AHL roster and he still got it into the race. I’m told that internally Linden recognizes the NHL team did not provide enough support to its American League partner, and will change that.

[coolboarder]

1 minute ago, nuck7635 said:

I'm really just using Crawford for the sake of comparison.

The argument that claims winning games = excitement sounds like the NHL's argument that said "more goals = more exciting" when really it's the events that lead up to the goal or how the goal was scored. Simply put: a goal that Bure scores vs a goal that Megna scores does not generate the same level of excitement. That being said, there's an important balance there as well because obviously you don't want to sacrifice a win for the sake of exciting hockey.

 

Also, the Canucks played defence-first hockey all year which involved forwards coming back down as far as the hash marks to help the defence and they still got lit up. Where does the idea that defence is their strength come from? The Canucks as of now have the tools to be somewhat successful offensively, they just need to be utilized properly. There were also so many times this season where if the defenseman just pinched, they would've kept the puck in and helped generate some offense but 95% of the time they'd retreat and the opposing team got a scoring chance. Horvat, Baertschi, D. Sedin, Granlund are all capable of scoring 20 goals but if you suffocate them in a defensive system that doesn't work and only tires them out, how well do you really expect them to do? 

I doubt that it will be repeated as Willie was the only coach to use that system where forwards must be in the zone before leaving the zone once the puck is in our possession and they cannot get out until the puck is out of the zone first.   It's like a maze the way out of the zone by the puck possession and it doesn't work out well.   Green, Crawford, and Gallant, don't do that

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

I doubt that it will be repeated as Willie was the only coach to use that system where forwards must be in the zone before leaving the zone once the puck is in our possession and they cannot get out until the puck is out of the zone first.   It's like a maze the way out of the zone by the puck possession and it doesn't work out well.   Green, Crawford, and Gallant, don't do that

The thing is, we've tried someone who had no experience in the NHL in Willie. While I didn't think Willie should have been fired, I also think that, if we're going to have a new coach, it should be one with experience in the NHL this time. While Green may or may not have a similar style to Willie (I don't know enough about Green to really comment on that), I think someone like Gallant, who has experience in the NHL and evidently is good with youth, would be a safer choice.

 

To me, Green would be more of a risk simply because he doesn't have experience at the NHL level and there are a lot more unknowns as a result. Right now, I feel it's a delicate time for us and, if we aren't too careful, the wrong coach right now, when a lot of our roster is just developing, could set us back significantly.

[VanGnome]

1 minute ago, mll said:

Matt Murray was the best goaltender in 2014/15 - Markstrom 2nd though.

Last season they had 48 different players in the lineup.  At some point they had 9 players on a PTO at the same time.

All their best players were either up in Vancouver or injured.

Again this season - Chaput and Megna were supposed to anchor the Comets (dixit Linden).  There needs to be more depth signed in the off-season.  

In his 30 thoughts Friedman wrote today: Green did arguably his best coaching job there this past season. The Canucks were decimated by injuries, it affected his AHL roster and he still got it into the race. I’m told that internally Linden recognizes the NHL team did not provide enough support to its American League partner, and will change that.

Hmm interesting. Regardless, the optics of hiring another rookie coach straight from the AHL are not good, and unnecessarily put TL and JB up against the wall. Pretty much if they hire Green and he's a giant fail in his first year, chances are JB and TL are gone. I'm certain that if the rumours of FA trying to sell the team are true, then I imagine that he'd prefer as much stability as possible, thus I'm sure that TL and by extension JB are being advised to go with someone a little more senior. Hopefully not to the extreme that was done so (owner involvement) to acquire Torts.

[Honky Cat]

2 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

The Sedins have said Crawford had a lot of influence on building their confidence in the NHL which helped them a lot, Burrows also said basically the same thing when he went to Ottawa and praised Crawford, and all of this is when Crawford was a hot head as some posters like to put it, but that's how coaching was back then. Crawford has shown to be much more mellow now which is great for him, but even more reason to bring in a guy who has a proven record with helping younger players. Plus he coaches a offensive game what this team needs, and having a #1 goalie(Miller if he signs) you need to trust your goalie in which he can to allow him to coach an offensive game. From what I heard Green coaches a defensive game and as a fan I'm tired of this style of coaching, and I believe a lot of fans feel the same and want some excitement back.

I wouldn't be opposed to hiring Crow back....I don't really know too much about Greens coaching style,but I cannot for the life of me,imagine it more unimaginative than WD's.

 

[bad alice french]

I'm not liking some comments suggesting the next 2 -3 years will be a write off so don't sweat it. That's bulldhit. It starts now. Bring in a winner. I called in to team 1040 and got ridiculed for voting for Sutter. What a relief to find at least a few likeminded believers. This team needs a new attitude and a winning mindset. People are so intimidated by this guy and I love it. He would turn Horvat into Kopitar. 

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

4 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

I wouldn't be opposed to hiring Crow back....I don't really know too much about Greens coaching style,but I cannot for the life of me,imagine it more unimaginative than WD's.

 

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

9 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

I wouldn't be opposed to hiring Crow back....I don't really know too much about Greens coaching style,but I cannot for the life of me,imagine it more unimaginative than WD's.

 

Sorry double post this app won't allow me to remove quotes stupid sorry.

 

I don't know much about Green either, just learning from other posters who have seen his style. I want a coach who is willing to except mistakes and teach players to learn from them instead of benching them, and what I've read sounds like Green can be like this to a point sometimes. And that he prefers a defensive style of game another thing I'm sick and tired of here in Vancouver, let players play and score goals bring excitement back, let your goalie be a goalie. And also starting to hear he does like Veterans more then younger, to me all signs are leaning more to a similar style of WD and that's the last thing this team needs.