Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Nikita Tryamkin says "why not" for a return to Canucks for the 2020-21


ChuckNORRIS4Cup

Do you want Nikita Tryamkin back?  

380 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Just now, kingofsurrey said:

I thought tryamkin had a clause in his contract 

 

he did not have to accept assignment to ahl 

 

it was his call.   He made it 

 

i like the fact that he knew what he wanted   He practised against the canucks. And eventually earned his spot 

 

canucks should have given him more responsibilities as the season was a bust anyways 

He should have and early on it showed, yes he adjusted by the end of the season but I think he would have been playing sooner had he started in Utica. 

 

I’m also a firm believer in players earning their spot on the team not via a stupid contract clause that no player with zero NHL games under their belt should have. 

 

The call to play in the NHL should be on the Coaching Staff and Management collectively not the player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

They used that 2 game stretch to re-focus his conditioning and gee golly it worked. Maybe Fans in Vancouver or Canada in general should let their coaches and teams do their job instead of micro-scrutinizing from their couches...

Maybe the fans would if they weren't rookies all the time! But hey guess what you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, end of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Maybe the fans would if they weren't rookies all the time! But hey guess what you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, end of story.

Torterella was our most proven and worst coach since Keenan, even rookie Willie took almost the exact team to a playoff spot.

 

TG and the staff seem to know what they're doing will be refreshing to see the PP adjustments now too with no Sedin crutch to lean on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

I wish Tryamkin had have taken the Utica assignment missing a big chunk of the season refusing to go down I feel stunted him a bit. Chalk it up to youthful stubborness. But he was a force once he got in shape.

So do I at least we can agree on something :lol:, but like King said it was a stipulation in his contract he did have the final say, so hard to knock him when it's in his contract. But yes I do wish he went down and not taken it as an insult to him from the team, the other question is was this all his decision or was someone else involved in helping him make this decision... I would think someone would be helping him sometimes in what to do in certain situations, as this was all new to him especially coming from another country and being young. And yes he was a force once he was in shape, it's really to bad he left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

Torterella was our most proven and worst coach since Keenan, even rookie Willie took almost the exact team to a playoff spot.

 

TG and the staff seem to know what they're doing will be refreshing to see the PP adjustments now too with no Sedin crutch to lean on. 

I'm old school so I like Torterella and he even came out and said what this team needed to do because he saw the picture rebuild already, just show's how much experience he has that he saw what this team needed, so his point was proved. Imo he was only looked at as a bad coach because the team he was coaching was to soft and babied under AV to get away with whatever they wanted, and now they couldn't handle a coach pushing them to their limits and they all cried to management in their exit interviews. It's to bad because he's a good coach but I was glad he came here because I always felt those guys needed someone to finally be a little hard on them. Keenan hated him though.

 

That Sedin crutch definitely set up Brock a lot on the PP not going to be easy to replace that lol, and those Sedins had the NHL experience of patience to set up a PP going to be very interesting to see what happens this year, I think it's going to take some time to figure out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-08-02 at 7:37 AM, dpn1 said:

The Tyanman and the Jett (Woo) may make an interesting D-paring. :) 

If Tram plays a physics game like Woo, that would be the scariest defensive pair to go up against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Pete M said:

Shouldn't be hard to do if they are given a real opportunity...similar to what Phillip got.

 

Seen it before though, when a player outplays a vet, they still go with the vet (i.e., Archie, Stecher. etc)...not to mention the limited minutes the young guys get vs the vets; they're starting to come around though...when they finally realize it's a young man's game, we will be back in business and climbing out of the cellar back to the top.

I'm a believer in earning it. But there's a fine line there of balancing depth and going with who should be here. In Stecher's case it a Tryamkin that should have been sent down. Not being able to do that made Stecher the victim of his clause. Archie is a career AHL'er. and decent call up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Yah, Willie did a great job with Try and all the players . / team   - 69 pts  -  29th overall 

Yah, TG did great last year with all the players / team 82 pts   26th overall  /    is quite an accomplishment.

 

Canucks have had great coaching.  That much is clear.  Do you think Canuck coaching should have won the Jack Adams Award the last 2 years.....

First you slam the coaching for not playing younger players but then slam the point totals when they play younger players.    

 

How on earth where the Canucks are in their development cycle has anything to do with how a coach is up for a Jack Adams award?    Name a Jack Adams award winner from a non-playoff team in the past history of the award - it will be a small list of zero names.        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

First you slam the coaching for not playing younger players but then slam the point totals when they play younger players.    

 

How on earth where the Canucks are in their development cycle has anything to do with how a coach is up for a Jack Adams award?    Name a Jack Adams award winner from a non-playoff team in the past history of the award - it will be a small list of zero names.        

whoooosh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Baggins said:

I'm a believer in earning it. But there's a fine line there of balancing depth and going with who should be here. In Stecher's case it a Tryamkin that should have been sent down. Not being able to do that made Stecher the victim of his clause. Archie is a career AHL'er. and decent call up.

Stetcher over Tryamkin....   yeah right....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would absolutely love it if Tryamkin came back. What I worry about is if he expects lots of play time, just like his tenure under Willie D.

 

I'm not sure if he'd be willing to work for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Qwags said:

I would absolutely love it if Tryamkin came back. What I worry about is if he expects lots of play time, just like his tenure under Willie D.

 

I'm not sure if he'd be willing to work for it.

I think it's a vastly different team now that is looking for players to step up and grab the opportunity. I think Green would give Tryamkin the opportunity to do so, but Nikita would have to show that he belongs.

 

Desjardins, on the other hand, didn't increase Tryamkin's ice time when it was clear that he was good enough to garner more minutes. The icing on the cake was when Wilfred was critical of Tryamkin for not neutralizing Marchand in a game against Boston. Instead of spreading it around he laid into Nik only for Marchand recording a multi-point night. Bad form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think it's a vastly different team now that is looking for players to step up and grab the opportunity. I think Green would give Tryamkin the opportunity to do so, but Nikita would have to show that he belongs.

 

Desjardins, on the other hand, didn't increase Tryamkin's ice time when it was clear that he was good enough to garner more minutes. The icing on the cake was when Wilfred was critical of Tryamkin for not neutralizing Marchand in a game against Boston. Instead of spreading it around he laid into Nik only for Marchand recording a multi-point night. Bad form.

Yeh 'cause we couldn't expect a 6'-7" 240lb D to neutralise a little rat bag who has haunted this team for years. It just wouldn't be right. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think it's a vastly different team now that is looking for players to step up and grab the opportunity. I think Green would give Tryamkin the opportunity to do so, but Nikita would have to show that he belongs.

 

Desjardins, on the other hand, didn't increase Tryamkin's ice time when it was clear that he was good enough to garner more minutes. The icing on the cake was when Wilfred was critical of Tryamkin for not neutralizing Marchand in a game against Boston. Instead of spreading it around he laid into Nik only for Marchand recording a multi-point night. Bad form.

It’s eveidently clear that “King Willie” was a terrible coach for guys like Nikita.  Willie’s pension for playing certain guys ahead of those who were clearly better hurt our team.  Seriously, Vey, Megma, and Phillip friggin’ Larsen!  :sick:.  King Willie needed to get off the throne!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think it's a vastly different team now that is looking for players to step up and grab the opportunity. I think Green would give Tryamkin the opportunity to do so, but Nikita would have to show that he belongs.

 

Desjardins, on the other hand, didn't increase Tryamkin's ice time when it was clear that he was good enough to garner more minutes. The icing on the cake was when Wilfred was critical of Tryamkin for not neutralizing Marchand in a game against Boston. Instead of spreading it around he laid into Nik only for Marchand recording a multi-point night. Bad form.

Really don't think it was bad as you make it sound. IMHO Willie was not that bad a coach. You can view Tryamkin's TOI in a lot of different ways. Desjardin was know more for sheltering his young players than for picking favorites. Tryamkin came to camp overwieght and likely loss some cred doing so. The Marchand TKO theme is over worked. My take was that Desjardin was looking for a more consistent physical game not necessarily fisticuffs. A player like Tryamkin has the potential to dominate a game physically just by finishing his checks and playing tough in front of the net. 

 

By the end of the season I thought Tryamkin was getting top 4 TOI and was actually moving he puck up ice quite nicely. IMHO his rookie season was solid and he finished the year playing a steadily improving game. My only caveat would be that he did not get any PP time and considering the season was toast, he could have. For whatever reason Tryamkin went back to Russia it was all his reasoning not the coaching. I fully expected him to challenge for a top 4 role the following fall.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfstonker said:

Yeh 'cause we couldn't expect a 6'-7" 240lb D to neutralise a little rat bag who has haunted this team for years. It just wouldn't be right. :lol:

Considering that Tryamkin was a first year rookie, and Marchand, for all his scumbaggery, was and still is a gifted offensive minded player with skill and speed to burn, I think Willie was mistaken not so much in expecting it, but in complaining about it in the post game media scrum. 

 

Desjardins had a habit of making dumb statements to the press that should have been made to the player after the game. 

 

Keep defending him all you want, but he's not employed at the head coach level in the NHL for a reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Really don't think it was bad as you make it sound. IMHO Willie was not that bad a coach. You can view Tryamkin's TOI in a lot of different ways. Desjardin was know more for sheltering his young players than for picking favorites. Tryamkin came to camp overwieght and likely loss some cred doing so. The Marchand TKO theme is over worked. My take was that Desjardin was looking for a more consistent physical game not necessarily fisticuffs. A player like Tryamkin has the potential to dominate a game physically just by finishing his checks and playing tough in front of the net. 

 

By the end of the season I thought Tryamkin was getting top 4 TOI and was actually moving he puck up ice quite nicely. IMHO his rookie season was solid and he finished the year playing a steadily improving game. My only caveat would be that he did not get any PP time and considering the season was toast, he could have. For whatever reason Tryamkin went back to Russia it was all his reasoning not the coaching. I fully expected him to challenge for a top 4 role the following fall.     

Desjardins wasn't a horrible coach at all, but he did make some very questionable decisions and did share too much with reporters in this city who he had no reason sharing info with. He had the roster he had, and I don't fault him for icing it to the best of his ability. 

 

Time will tell hope his legacy is cemented in hockey, but seeing as how there have been quite a few head coach vacancies at the NHL level, and he's not been considered for any of them, he might just not be head coach material in this league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...