elvis15

He has so far in prospects camp. From Tyson Guiriato yesterday, the Canucks prospects guy:

When you can spell his name right I'll consider that you have any idea of the true value of each player. Just like most people, I wanted more than just a 1st back for Schneider but it's hard to complain about a top 10 pick in a deep draft. Since we aren't in on the talks Gillis had with other teams we'll never know if he could have gotten more. But for Horvat, I was happy we went for him, and would have picked him over Nichushkin myself. I did really want a prospect that projects as a 1st line offensive talent, but with the reviews likely underrating Horvat as a 2nd/3rd line center I think we'll find Horvat fits the bill if we can surround him with wingers to do the job as well. Perhaps Gaunce and Jensen will be those guys, or Kassian and Shinkaruk make a case for themselves as well.

Well, that's a pretty narrow view to think there is no other team in the NHL that would hire a head coach straight out of the AHL. If he's good enough, he'll get offers from someone with a head coach vacancy rather than let another team get him as an assistant and promote him when they fire their head coach a few years later. EDIT: and this just in:

They likely would have talked with Lundqvist as well I assume, since the top Swedes are all pretty aware of each other from time on the national team. There's also Freddy Modin who played on the 2006 gold medal winning team with the twins but played as well for Tampa when they won the Stanley Cup. And that's just a couple of Swedes that have been coached by Torts, never mind anyone else they know well enough to ask that have been involved with him. Or Stevens, or Eakins, or Gultzan... But I guess Ruff was, so there's that. If he's RT Dreger, he usually says so. He's moving closer and closer to retirement from hockey broadcasting so he's making less of an effort to be a news breaker than he has been.

Tell that to Dallas Eakins. And both Blashill and Eakins had worked as assistant coaches prior to becoming head coaches in the AHL, so there's that.

Yeah, it's not like we need a CDC thread to aggregate his tweets more than Twitter already does. If people want to hear about what he's tweeting, they'll get Twitter and follow him.

I was definitely referring to the Rangers, as this year both Richards and [brian] Boyle were demoted and sat at times this year after not producing.

Gillis and AV certainly talked enough about the roster, so there shouldn't have been any miscommunication about who to bring in or what was needed. I'll agree that Torts is a good coach who has shown he can play different styles, I just am not as convinced of if he'll be the right choice. I did say I'd defer to the choice Gillis and Co. make since obviously they're in the position they are and have the detail of the interview process so Torts must have impressed them. Heck, the majority of the first interview was about handling the media. If Gillis thinks he's the right choice I'll absolutely give him the chance to prove it too us rather than cut him down before he's even coached a practice. He loves the players who can contribute offence though as well, and Edler does a fair amount of that. He didn't bench Richards or Boyle for their defensive gaffes, he did it when they failed to contribute offensively. Since it sounds like this is all but done (with Gillis going on Team1040 at 3:15 today), the next question is assistant coaches.

Boom.

Consider the user picture of that twitter account, perhaps it's an astrologer? What are the planets looking like right now, are they aligned or anything? Is the moon in Venus' shadow or something? Easier said than done. Perhaps the offers for Schneider haven't been that compelling. Perhaps the other GMs were tentative about trading for Luongo leading up to the lockout not knowing what the new CBA would hold. Everyone makes it sound like it'd be so easy to get around these things, like we have New Jersey sitting by the phone waiting to give us Adam Larsson or something if we finally agree to trade Schneider. Gillis has been getting calls for both goalies and he's stated he'll listen to any offer that improves our team. That's worth bolding since so few seem to understand it. If an offer came along for Schneider that was markedly better than ones we've been getting for Luongo, he'd approach Lu and ask if he'd stay if Schneider was moved instead. Perhaps he already knows the answer to that, or it's different now than it was before, but again it's not as simple as just deciding to move our other goalie. And Gillis isn't about to forge a bill of sale on Manny just to get an asset back when he genuinely cares about him as a person enough to think about his health first.

It means you're following the wrong people on Twitter.

I can agree that it's on Gillis to make the right roster moves to put us over the top and be legitimate contenders, but can you honestly say the team he's helped build is worth only one playoff win in their last two years after getting to game 7 of the SCF? A lot of that is on the coach. Gillis has made some moves that haven't worked out, but he's also made some that have. More particularly I think he's made ones that will work out as the core built by Burke and Nonis moves on and it'll be on Gillis to find a way to get top end talent to fill in despite being a top team in the NHL year after year. No easy task, but if the team does falter we would get some better draft pics to build back into that top team at least. There's no guarantee any other available GM (we can't just poach Ken Holland and Mike Babcock from Detroit while they're still employed) would be able to do the same, never mind better.

Considering the recent theme of the discussion I don't know if it got mentioned, but when HNIC was talking about Torts and another coaching candidate have the most interest, a number of people were speculating it was Ruff as the unnamed second. Well, in Elliotte Friedman's 30 thoughts today, he says it's likely Stevens. I added in the previous thought about Torts, since it's also relevant. Interesting point to note about how a lot of time was spent on how he'll handle the media. The second interview may be to discuss more about what he sees the team becoming and how he'll coach them, but it's pretty clear Gillis and Co. are getting the elephant in the room out of the way so they can concentrate on if he'll be a good fit to coach the team (and the players on it).

I haven't read anything that states what specifically it was, they just say stress related. Posting it for a third time doesn't mean it's a reliable source or will come true. I wondered about Gulutzan as an assistant, but it's possible he takes Arniel's job and Arniel moves up to an assistant with the team.

Using the 2006/07 stats is hugely unfair and not wholly his fault. He also took them to the Eastern Conference Finals in 2007/08 but you've only concentrated on the bad. Here's my post earlier in this thread on Stevens: I've bolded the directly relevant parts, but being an NHL assistant for the first time then being handed the reigns of a team after Hitchcock was fired 8 games into the season was a recipe for disaster. Add to that the Philly roster in his first two years had: 4 goalies playing games in 2006/07 (Mike Leighton, Marty Biron, Robert Esche and Anterro Nittymaki) - none of which had a save % over 900 a bad to terrible defence with only Timonen and Coburn being any good in 2007/08 with Rory Fitzpatrick (18 games), Jim Vandermeer (28 games) and Ryan Parent (22 games) also seeing major action, Jason Smith and Derian Hatcher were there as well but at the end of their careers That's a tough roster to win with, but he still managed to get them to the playoffs in 2007/08 (the Eastern Conference Finals to be exact) where they lost to the Penguins. That was the year they had the 10 consecutive losses in Feb 2008. The next season, they got back to the playoffs again but lost to the Penguins again (who went on to win that year after being in the finals the year before). The Flyers still haven't fixed their goaltending and they're still looking for defencemen, so that should put Steven's role in their record that year in perspective. It's pretty unfair to judge him completely on that, especially his first NHL coaching year when he was thrown into the head coach role as a replacement. EDIT: +1 to mbal23 for having the same idea and beating me to it.

He wasn't even interested in the assistant job apart from his daughter lives in California and it was a chance to be closer to her. He doesn't want the stress of a head coach job for sure as he had health related problems and took a step back for that reason.

From Canucks Army: COACHING CANDIDATE PROFILES: JOHN STEVENS Posted earlier I'm sure but as you obviously hadn't seen it here it is again. EDIT: almost... marginal NHL defender but had a great AHL career (he's in the AHL Hall of Fame) took a puck to the eye (wear your visors kids) which ended his career but stepped in the the Flyers AHL team as an assistant role from there became head coach of the Phantoms after ~2 seasons, stayed for 6 his record: 230-181 (with 33 ties and 16 OT losses), 30-18 in the playoffs with a Calder Cup to show for it (won 6 of 9 series they played in) promoted to assistant coach in 06/07 for the Flyers behind Hitchcock, who was then fired 8 games into the season and Stevens became head coach had terrible goaltending and poor defensive depth (what's new Flyers fans?) but made the playoffs in his second and third year (ECF, 1st round, both losses to the Penguins) Flyers struggled in his 4th season as HC, and he was fired after a 13-12-1 start improved 5 on 5 play and top 10 for PP and PK during his tenure, had a 120-109-34 overall record hired as an assistant by LA, became interim coach until Sutter was hired as well initially ran both the defence and PK, Sutter changed PK to shared role when he was hired credited with improving the play of Doughty, Muzzin and Voyanov while in LA described as "specific, detailed, analytical, well thought out and articulate" He's one of if not my top candidate of the currently available coaches. He has great experience having been in the West (particularly the Pacific division, who we'll now be matched up with in the new realignment) the last several years. He's been an assistant and head coach at the AHL and NHL level, winning a Calder Cup as an AHL head coach, and a Stanley Cup as an NHL assistant coach. He also has a reputation as a player coach and a proven ability to work with younger players, particularly ones who have struggled in areas. Kassian and Edler spring to mind for many people but we have young players coming up who could use the support as well. And he likes kittens:

Since I really don't think Tippett or Bylsma will become available, I'd put Stevens at the head of my list for available coaches. If he impresses during the interviews I can see them not waiting on anyone else.

Just to play devil's advocate, there are many things that can contribute to success. In the case of the Rangers, perhaps there were good systems in place and good quality players to run them, but they'd done so out of their own will to win rather than due to any loyalty to Torts. If they weren't the type of players to ask out when they didn't like the coach and his message anymore, they'd have to put up with it. Well, they got their option to speak freely after this year and let the management know how they felt. That meant Torts not getting fired quickly turned into the opposite and now they're looking for someone to replace him. The new coach isn't likely to be the confrontational style as a matter of change, so they're bound to get someone who can put systems in place that are similarly good (or maybe better) but also work with the players to make sure they're on board with implementing them and doing it for better reasons than just being hockey players. Perhaps an extreme example, but it will illustrate my point nicely: If you're an eco-friendly company looking to make a significant economic gain and have an opening for a CEO, would you look at every CEO who has been at the head of a Fortune 500 company? You'd maybe start with that list and have your own choices as well who could also do the role, but you aren't likely to do an in depth interview process including CEO's who have been heads of companies guilty of pollution or negative genetic engineering (i.e. Monsanto). You can pretty effectively weed those people out - pun intended - and give more time and consideration to people that may fit the role and company you have better. Most of the coaches out there have a pretty public resume. Torts is no exception, and hockey minds involved at the level Gillis and Co. are would know pretty quickly if he has anything that would take his resume off the list. If there are any red flags that go against what they're looking for, then they move on to the next guy - even if that guy hasn't won a Stanley Cup or been a head coach in the NHL before. So long as the resume fits what the team is going for and will work with the players, they'll get interviewed (assuming they're available to do so). If it doesn't, then they won't bother.

Gillis wouldn't confirm who, but plans to interview 4-5 more coaches for our position. Eakins, Gulutzan and Arneil of course are already known. Would be prepared to wait for coaches not yet available if they think it's the right person. Still doesn't have a set time frame and would be prepared to go into free agency without a coach - but doesn't think that'll be the case. Figured I'd put the Gillis interview on Team1040 here for people to listen to if they missed it: http://www.teamradio.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/GM-Mike-Gillis-w-Sekeres.mp3

The Rangers just got permission to talk to Eakins as well. Mottau: Eakins could be 'breath of fresh air' for Rangers One of the good points I took from the article was yet another player testimonial: I think I'd mentioned this before, but Eakins' wife is an actress, Ingrid Kavelaars, who competed in the Miss Teen Canada competitions with her twin sister, Monique (apparently the only Canadian woman to ever with a match in epee fencing at an Olympic event!). Not to get sidetracked as I found that interesting, but the fact that she's an actress is relevant as it suggests she'd be more comfortable in a city with opportunity for acting. She's most recently appeared in XIII as 'Harriet Traymore' (10 episodes) so she's currently working. So, what does that mean for Eakins and his search for a coaching job? Well, he'd find somewhere with a reasonably strong film and acting community appealing for his wife. The two main cities for that in Canada are Toronto and, you guessed it, Hollywood North. New York has Broadway and a large film industry, so that's a definite competitor, but Eakins has also interviewed in Dallas and Edmonton (as an assistant though) and neither of those cities is known for their film industry (although Austin, Texas is a smaller but strong city for film and is 3 hours away). My guess of who we know he's interviewed with so far is Vancouver is somewhere he has ties with from a hockey standpoint and it makes sense for his wife's career as well. New York would be a reasonable choice as well if he has interest in the team, but other strong candidates in Vigneault, Messier and Gretzky are also interviewing there. Dallas would probably be a secondary choice, and Edmonton further back for him and his wife.

If you look at the proposals forum, it certainly seems like that. But I never said a veteran coach would automatically be less of a fit, veteran core or not. I did say there's something to be said for fresh ideas a younger coach might provide versus a coach that has spent a significant amount of time coaching in the old NHL. My opinion is that Eakins or Stevens would have more of an impact than Ruff, so that holds as mch wieght as your opinion that Stevens would have trouble controlling our veterans or Eakins lack of NHL (head) coaching experience will be too much of a detriment. Tippett is one I would go for, I just don't think he'll be available so it'd be a risk to try and wait until the end of June to see what he wants to do. He has coached from an offensive perspective before as well it just that his current position dictates a defensive style considering the resources he has. I could care less about Torts and his media interactions - I just want the team to win - but the distraction and potential for negative impact when we've already had that to a lesser extent here is just too much. The debate on what style he'd coach and how effective he'd be at either takes a back seat to the chemistry he would have (or lack) with the players. Ruff, well, he's coached defensive and offensively as well. I don't see the upside to him with player deployment in the new NHL as much as other options, and that's illustrated to a point when you consider Thomas Vanek and Steve Ott had nearly the same offensive zone start rates. Compare that to Henrik and Lapierre (or Malhotra when he was playing). Someone like Babcock is such a good coach because he never stops learning and is always open to adjusting depending on what the team needs. No one here, including myself, would bat an eye at hiring Babcock if he came available, but that doesn't mean all veteran coaches are automatically better than the rookies. Gulutzan might fit as a good assistant, but Eakins and Stevens have both been NHL coaches (assistant for Eakins) and then had opportunity since to gain experience and improve. Eakins has taken his NHL experience and turned it into a successful AHL head coaching run. Stevens has by many accounts done wonders with the Kings as an assistant after some good and bad as a head coach with Philly. They all have their merits, rookies and veterans alike, but it'll be something I'm sure Gillis and Co. look very hard into and assess before making any decision.

None that we know about at this point. It doesn't mean they haven't spoken with any. I don't think Ruff is a better choice than Eakins or Stevens personally, and there's something to be said about fresh ideas versus a coach that had been with the same team for so long it included pre-lockout (the first one) hockey. I'm not a fan of Torts either, but if you have any other veteran suggestions that are available, I'd be interested see them. You do realize he discusses major decisions with the management group, including the owners? He still gets final say, but they're on board with the direction and plan he has for the Canucks.