wallstreetamigo

Exactly. And it is actually widely stated that head coaching experience in the AHL is at least on the same level - and probably higher actually - than assistant coaching experience at the NHL level in getting prepared for an NHL head coaching job. Both Eakins and Blashill made sure they had both and that seems to be the way coaches looking for an opportunity are going.

It almost seems like the Wings wanted him to go down and get head coaching experience perhaps grooming him to eventually replace Babcock. I would not be too surprised if that were the case.

The Canucks have taken advantage of Keenan' boner for Bertuzzi twice now. And once was when he was a GM of the other team. If they hired Keenan as GM you KNOW Messier would become our coach. And actually, I like Av a lot more now that he fracked mr entitled Messier out of a coaching gig in NY.

The problem with this is that you have no real idea of how much "beating it out of them" is done. From all I have seen, Tortorella's use of that tactic generally comes about when he believes that the work ethic is not there for a given player or the team in general. There is nothing to suggest that he does not instruct players to help them improve in more positive ways. The focus only goes on the yelling. Free agents not wanting to come here because he is the coach is a non issue. New York did not have an issue signing guys nor getting players to waive NTC to join them. Travel, opportunity, league reputation of the team, money, and term on their contracts are likely much bigger issues for free agents considering Vancouver, just like they would be with any other team. Have we not seen now that no matter what the Canucks do the refs will do things their way anyway? I mean, he might get a few more bench minors for mouthing off but that is worth it in the long run because at least he is not afraid to call them out publicly for it. It will happen to the Canucks anyway so I would rather have a coach who gets pissed off about it when it does. Maybe like the schoolyard bully they will eventually move on from their Vancouver bias or maybe not. Either way everyone will know just how ridiculous it has become.

Minnesota is thrilled to get Jake under contract at what we feel is a reasonable cap hit for the next 3 years. Jake is full of promise and we fully expect him to both benefit from a mentoring relationship with Martin Brodeur and also to challenge Marty for the starting job at the same time. This fills a massive hole in our organization. Thanks to Mike as always. Please place Jake on our active roster as our backup goalie at this time.

Ramsay also served the very important role of being "good cop" so to speak. He acted as a buffer between the rough edges of Tors and the players, at least if you believe what you read about the situation in TB. I think he would be a great addition for that aspect. I still think they need a special teams specialist too though. Someone that can really get the PP and PK back to an elite level. We have the personnel, we just need the strategy and the adjustments that Brown could not bring at the end.

The choice of assistant coaches will be a huge factor imo. They need a special teams wizard and a "good cop". Both may be the same guy or may not but both will make a huge difference in how this all plays out if you ask me.

Yansomeone asked Gillis about it and he answered something about a process and that he would announce when he could.......

That could be too. Although I have a feeling Kesler and Torts will have a "media moment" on a few occasions.

Let me guess: Ballard, Kassian, Hansen, Sedins (because they no longer have to run the team) - all excited Hamhuis, Garrison, Kesler, Booth - expecting the worst Bieksa, Edler - crying while hugging each other

Okay, let's not go too crazy here........ And actually, MacLean having gotten a job as a GM is the one thing that keeps my dream alive of becoming an NHL GM. I mean, WTF, just WTF.

Agreed. Does anyone else wonder just how this guy was an NHL GM? No wonder his team sucked. I mean, do some basic research man. CDC does better than that and we all know how ???? sad that is.

I have a feeling he will call out whoever he wants to right when they need to be. And considering the players on this team thought every game they played last season was a good effort, etc. they may not be the best judges of where their own effort level is, let alone other guys on the team.

When you get a chance c2x, I am missing Thomas Hickey on my active roster.

Why people are scared to have a coach who HATES losing is beyond me. He may not be the perfect fit but players will know where they stand and even when they screw up today they will know they can earn that trust and opportunity back tomorrow with Torts. The only players who right off the hop would hate this move are ones who know they get opportunity here without really earning it every day.

Again, what evidence does anyone have that all he does is yell? I have seen several videos where he talks to the players saying the same things he yells at them. I think people fail to understand that being emotional does not mean you are "acting" or not able to effectively coach. If there is one thing this entire team could use, it is some ???? emotion.

I never said they reflected poorly on any of the players actually. I simply provided a basis for comparison that took ice time out of the equation which skews things when attempting to rank the players using only a per game comparison. And the stats are what they are and only that. But for what they are they are not skewed. I in no way attempted to suggest anything such as who was better defensively using their stick or angling guys off, etc. so your point there is moot based on the point I was making. And the guys who play with the Sedins also get the bulk of the PK time so they benefit on both sides of the equation that way.

And what have you seen from the Canucks over that same time period?

No one really knows how much he actually yells at the players though. When they play like crap they deserve to be yelled at though. There will probably be a lot of yelling in the Canucks dressing room the first little while. I think one thing that can be said is that Tortorella did for the most part turn them into a team that consistently worked hard.

It certainly did not seem like Gillis and AV were on the same page much of the time regarding the players that were brought in and how they could make the team better. One or two cases you can shrug off or blame the player for not fitting in. But when it happens that often it has to be traced back at least partially to the coach and the GM not really understanding what the other is doing.

For as much as people comment about his media exploits, I will say this: if it lets the players focus on playing without having to answer the same 5 questions all the time, I am all for it. We need the players to focus everything on the game. Someone else can talk to the media, explain why things are going well/going poorly, and put up with the constant distraction of the media. And boy will it be nice to hear someone call a spade a spade when our team plays like crap. Even when he benched Richards he defended him to the media afterward..........

I could absolutely see this particular trait about Edler irritating him.

I think Tortorella as a coach can adapt to the type of roster he has. He expects all players to work hard which will not hurt this team. This will only work if Gillis and Tortorella are on the same page about the type of players they bring in and the type of style they want to play though. Too many times we saw Gillis go out and get players who AV simply did not trust much or who did not have the style of game that AV liked. I hope Gillis has learned that his job is also to know the coach and understand his preferences so he can get the coach the type of players he can be successful with. That is just as important as the coach's responsibility to get the most out of the players he has to work with. When both are on the same page things go much smoother.

I would agree. Many do not want "boring" defensive style hockey but if this team wants to win the ultimate prize it might be a necessity to some degree. It certainly has to be better at clamping down on leads than it has been the last year or two. I think in terms of asset management Ballard + the return for Edler + the cap space savings + the no NTC easily trumps keeping Edler + the minimal return for Ballard. I actually feel a similar way about Luongo and Schneider though as well. Both goalies are good enough to win us a cup when the team plays the way they should. One could bring in a good return and the other won't. There would certainly be a monetary element to that decision though but a few long playoff runs and a cup win would go a long way generating more revenue for the team too. I think in both cases it comes down to solid asset management in the face of cap constraints that will likely only last a year or two at most before the cap shoots back up. If Luongo wins a cup here and the cap goes up does anyone really believe other teams would not want to take him on at that point if the Canucks had to get rid of him? This is all predicated on Luongo actually wanting to stay as the #1 guy in Van which is anything but a sure things at this point.

Welcome to the league!