EmployeeoftheMonth

Speculation aside lets speculate some more here:D If bringing on a guy like Linden is a step in the right direction and a guy like Linden decides it's best to keep Torts on who are we to argue that? Given what you're saying about Linden here if Torts is still here and they are working together would you be willing to say you were maybe wrong about Torts?

Felt like I was.

This is exactly it. When I say give credit where it's due I'm not absolving the guy I'm simply saying that he's saying the right things. Hi btw.

While this is true it's also very cynical. Give the credit where it's due. We've gone from a coach that took no responsibility to one that's at least saying the right thing. If/when he's back next year we'll see if he puts his money where his mouth is. Not too many people complained about him or his system in 2013.

The thing is even Torts himself said he screwed up. He's taking responsibility for his part.

Oddly enough I read his post like Karl Pilkington.

em·pha·size [em-fuh-sahyz] Show IPA verb (used with object), em·pha·sized, em·pha·siz·ing. to give emphasis to; lay stress upon; stress: to emphasize a point So if he's emphasizing shots than shots would be the point?!? Yes. What else was he emphasizing? You've only brought up shots here as your main point to go after his system where you claim we out shoot the opponents 2:1. Torts system is more than just shoot and block. Also I never said they weren't playing poorly. I never said they didn't take low percentage shots. We're talking about what you're claiming Torts system to be.

So you never said his system was all about shots just that it emphasized shots. Yeah those are the same thing. Again. Pressure not shots. He wants pressure. He wants D to pinch and he wants forwards to be responsible defensively. He wants a system where in the offensive and defensive zone his team creates pressure for the opposition. Not "shoot from everywhere" which is what you said. The team wasn't putting up twice the amount of shots from their opponents which you also said. They averaged like 2 shots more a game than they had against. You're misrepresenting the system Torts implies either on purpose or because you don't understand it enough to think of it as anything but a shoot first system. I think you got onto this "shots" thing because something _Me said sarcastically to something Luongo101 said. I'm not sure you got that he was being sarcastic.

Facts say so. Well and you said so when you talked about torts system being all about shots.

And your implication is that's all because of the system Torts has them playing? A system btw that isn't about shots even though you keep saying it is.

Is this your first year watching hockey?

It's funny how the arguments change. Used to be shots shots shots was the mantra around here. People trying to make pretty plays and fans getting frustrated screaming for them to just shoot. You keep talking about Torts system but I'm not sure you understand what his system is. It's pressure not lots of shots. There's a world of difference. BTW the Canucks averaged 30.8 shots per game while allowing 28.4 shots against per game. Care to explain your point given those two numbers?

Winning is the sign of a bad system?

This thread is like the Alex Jones of hockey. Just with better spelling and grammar.

You very obviously didn't watch the press conference.

It says to me that nothing is going to happen. Torts will be back next season imo. Obviously it will also be up to whoever the new GM is but if TL or the owners wanted him gone he'd already be gone.

Without a second thought it was Rome on Horton

Yeah I dunno. It could just have slipped underneath her clothes.

That's not what you were saying at the start of the year. You kept going on about the team not scoring enough and not being able to beat the top teams.

Sure so we can say that prior to the new year the coaches coaching and the players playing were both getting the job done. We can argue (or agree) about the GM's GMing later but lets use this as the cornerstone of the discussion. Now I'd hate to imply this has anything to do with AV but in your list you stated that Torts used the Sedins more to kill penalties than Hansen. What's the problem with that? Also we're talking about an average of 10 seconds more per game. 10 seconds!!! Also I'm sorry to say but Hansen wasn't really earning it this season. I'd say the same for Hammer in the first quarter of the season but that's nothign to do with this. Using Edler as a shutdown D man is what he should be. He's either got to put up points or he's got to defend. Edlers problems didn't start this season, they've been here for a while. Whether he's used as a PMD or a shut down guy he's not up to where he should be for what he's being paid. AV tried to use him the same ways Torts did. He hasn't worked anywhere terribly well. I'm not one of those Edler sucks guys but I don't know what can be done with him. The Sedins ice time: You may want to take a look at the game logs before the new year. They had some bigger nights than they did Under AV but it's not that different overall and it certainly wasn't 24 minutes a night. In fact it only hit that mark 9 times before the new year for Dan. I assume it's similar for Henrik. Your 5th point I more or less agree with. Not completely but I think you make a good point there. Edler and Bieksa played together under AV as well but I also wouldn't have labelled those two as the shutdown pair on this team. I think you're misrepresenting what they were which was just a poor pairing. Hammer Tanev was usually the shutdown crew though weren't they?

Just answer the question in post 173 of this thread. For like the 5th time. Or don't but then don't bother responding again. It will just waste both our time. It's astounding the lengths you're going to not answer the question. I feel like I'm having a conversation with Smurf or Nino about Luongo at this point.

What's this? So you just don't want to answer the question and give context to your opinions? Are you the same oldnews that used to be here? That guy always seemed pretty thoughtful and willing to engage people like adults. Seems like you just want to stir the pot. Not really interested in that. If you're not going to answer the question that's fine. In itself that's an answer anyways. You want to know a good way to judge a coaches performance. Take all the information in and make an educated judgement. Not pick and choose what we want and make rash judgments based on misinformation and emotions.

Well you certainly seem to be avoiding that question.

This is getting silly Oldnews. Agreeing is not the cornerstone of a discussion. How about you go back and answer the question I asked you regarding the actual contet. You've seemingly done everything you can not to engage in that and get into the specifics here. Post #173

and... many of those things were explained weren't they? Some others I agree were mistakes on his part which he also takes the blame for. Most of what you wrote are kind of confirming my suspicion. Also you're 6th and 7th points are both incorrect completely. But this has nothing to do with AV right?