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

kloubek

Members
  • Posts

    5,665
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kloubek

  1. You may be right. While I don't have any proof they were interviewing, do you have any proof they were not?
  2. So, I'm an employee at a business. Been there for several years. I've done my best, but I made a few mistakes along the way as most people do when they are learning a new role. Overall, most can see the value in my work. I've done some really good things! Vocal people complain to my boss that I'm not doing a good job. In fact, some people are complaining that most of my coworkers suck too, and I hear my boss may may have them on the chopping block as well. One guy is clearly amazing at his job, but even he may get the axe despite being universally loved by all. Eventually, my boss starts to look elsewhere for our replacements. It seems almost inevitable I'm going to be fired, along with my coworkers. But in the end, he decides to give me one last chance to be the "perfect employee". I'm still unsure about my coworkers, who may or may not be around in a few months. Now - I ask you all - is this a working environment you would be comfortable working in? If ownership were considering canning Benning, they should have just done it. This wishy washy crap is making this org look like fools with a foundation made of sponge.
  3. I am sure Courtnall would have the passion and would be a good addition. I say absolutely bring him in - but he said himself he's not cut out for a high level position so it would be more of a consultant role. I think if we are doing a management change here, it is highly beneficial to have some guys who are inherently loyal to the club from the beginning. Kinda like the Trevor Linden thing - with a better end result...
  4. You're absolutely right - though I can understand the team's desire to move on. Problem is, we haven't found that guy yet. I don't mind Hamonic for what he brings, but he isn't gelling with Hughes the same way Tanev did. I don't necessarily think we need a guy who plays a "simple" game, but we do need a guy who can anticipate what Hughes will do, and be a steady defensive cushion should it all not work out as planned. We also need a guy who can cycle the puck at a high level. Quick, strong passes and an effective saucer pass. A heavy shot as an option wouldn't hurt either...
  5. In his rookie season, I felt Hughes was ok defensively. Obviously he has small size to his detriment, but he seemed to be able to catch up with guys if he made an error, and generally seemed pretty defensively aware. This season though, he looks to have regressed. Overall he still seems to have the mobility, but, dare I say, he just doesn't look as fast out there as he did last year, and his plays seem not quite as confident. I have little doubt he will be the best defensemen we've ever had, but I've been surprised to see what I consider to be a sophmore slump. (And I'm also talking pre-covid, though post-covid it has been most apparent). Guess the entire team didn't exactly hit it out of the park this season...
  6. While I do agree, perhaps not being one of the only guys willing to make hits will help.
  7. I'd take a wild guess and suggest covid and a compressed schedule may have played a tiny part.... ..and yes, Benning does spend up to the cap. As this team normally does. And most do. Keen observation.
  8. I like Green. The players play hard for him and he seems to care about the franchise and the players. ...but is he the coach to bring us the cup? This team plays with little defensive structure, with constant giveaways... and while I'm inclined to blame the assistants, as head coach he is ultimately responsible for that. If he hasn't figured it out by now, hard to believe he ever will. Either that, or it's the players themselves who can't find a way to play d. Losing Tanev certainly didn't help, but we were broken with him here too. I just gotta think that even without him, we should be much better and not leave our goalies needing nightly Vezina performances to win games.
  9. Surprised the coverage didn't focus more on that puck and get a good closeup reeled up during the long play afterward. Looked SO close to being over.
  10. Good content. Would read again.
  11. Yeah me too - I'm still waiting for the grand explanation for that one. Almost as if he couldn't accept Virtanen was a big mistake and it might just send him out the door as a result. I would have loved to have TT back, and his contract would have been very reasonable and controlled.
  12. I think Vesey is "ok". As you said, he tends to float around too much for my liking and doesn't play a particularly gritty game by my eye. Highmore may never score much, but I like his energy and speed. I too could see him working out well along with Motte as the wings on the 4th. Lind doesn't exactly have the same kind of speed as either, but I expect him to make an impression at camp and he *could* be a decent fit there.
  13. I imagine our more veteran players are the very best ones to rate Green's performance as opposed to an owner or others looking into the locker room from afar. The owner makes the decision but getting input even one on one from the players is useful. Lots of businesses give surveys to employees to rate their managers. Don't see why, although maybe unconventional, it couldn't work here. If we lose Green then figure out it wasn't him at all, it could set this rebuild back further and nobody wants that. Perhaps this is the perfect time to think outside the box.
  14. Media feeds the people and ultimately the people pay and make the owners money. Or don't. If negativity swirls around the org, it breeds problems. Look at Buffalo.
  15. ...and if that's true, then it shouldn't be a question. Hire him before the second guessing causes more problems. Coach and players will have to find a way to work it out. If nothing else, I have no idea why Ian Clark isn't signed yet. No point in squabbling over pay or anything when your roster payroll is 80+ million...
  16. I know this is a ridiculous thought, but what would happen if ownership/Benning called a player only meeting and did an anonymous vote as to opinions of the players? At least the vets know damn well what this team's issues are, and I would hate to break up what appears to be a very good coach/players chemistry if it isn't going to help. Either way, a decision has to be made asap. The media are getting restless and starting to make a big deal out of it, which isn't what this team needs.
  17. As others have said, I think we just don't have the assets to get someone the calibre of Sam. The only players they would probably want in return are either one of our core players, or sure-fire assets like Hogs or Podz... none of which I would want to see us give up. Could a 2022 1st, 2021 3rd, Rafferty, DiPietro and a b-level prospect do it? Still, if we could pull off anything like this I would expect a lot of scoring sooner than later... Hoglander - Pettersson - Boeser - I believe Hoglander WILL be a top 3 winger, and if so, why not pair him with our best forward - who also happens to be Swedish. Pearson - Horvat - Reinhart - Finally gives Bo his top-end winger. Horvat has the capability to score at a decent 1st line level, and I think with these wingers he would. If Pearson returns to last year's form like management expects, this is an excellent 2nd line. Gadjovich - Miller - Podkolzin - I really like the idea of moving Miller to the 3rd, then giving him PP time, etc. If Gadjovich can translate his game to the NHL, and Podz turns up as hoped, this may be the best 3rd we've ever had. Motte Lind Highmore - Lots of speed on the wing - Lind will have to work on his skating to keep up, but I think he can and will. Hawryluk ...then sign Savard as a UFA. Hughes Savard Juolevi Schmidt Rathbone Myers Now, I might be wrong but to me that is a balanced team with scoring ability, size, speed, and youth.
  18. Nope. While I do think it is important to be a big team still and that you have to keep the opponents honest, there is simply no room for a guy who cannot contribute anything but muscle. Instead, I think it needs to be done by committee these days and we do (and *will*) have guys who can step up to the plate in that regard if required.
  19. Hard to say what his ceiling truly is. But he sure passes the eye test. Green himself says Hoggy has a lot to learn still- and that's a good thing.
  20. IF the org decides to move on from Green, it ought to be in order to bring in an established guy who has a history of coaching a team in a manner they feel is lacking in Green. ..like a guy who can actually draw up systems that work, perhaps. I actually think Green is a good coach in many ways, and there's always a risk involved.
  21. Now that the Tryamkin experiment is over, I'm less keen on losing Myers. We need size on the backend and he's the guy now. I'm not sure if we want to go forward with both Juolevi and Rathbone on the right side. If not, I can see a scenario where one gets packaged and we re-sign Edler for another year on the cheap.
  22. I didn't see this earlier. Yeah, I can see what they are looking at there now. Still, there has to be some consistency. Cherry picking which teams to punish isn't working well.
×
×
  • Create New...