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

oldnews

Members
  • Posts

    53,830
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    186

Everything posted by oldnews

  1. Can always count on Gallagher to dumb it down. "Judging by how little it takes to get Tortorella to act like an immature goof who doesn’t seem to realize that dealing with the media is part of his job, some guys could set him off without even trying. Now, writing a column to say that Joe Schmoe, or in this case Tortorella, shouldn’t get the coaching job in Vancouver is pretty goofy in itself. We admit that, right here and now."
  2. These beaten to death keywords - "motivation" and "accountability", as well as the professed ability to divine/witness it through your Samsung flatscreen should be given a serious time out - it's been beaten to death. The most absurd aspect imo is the suggestion that players like the Sedins lack motivation or accountability. They are considered among the best conditioned athletes in the NHL. That has been regularly evidenced over the years with their ability to outlast and dominate many opponents, particularly on lengthly shifts and in the second half of games. Their conditioning would suggest the exact opposite of a lack of motivation - what it indicates are players that work hard every single day, regular or offseason (no doubt a significant aspect of the edge they have gained), to keep in tremendous shape. To be an ironman, as Henrik has been, despite the regular abuse and attention that is constantly directed at the Sedins, is no small feat in itself. He was runover by Dustin Brown and returned to dominate the late stages of that playoff game. He has taken a slapshot off his ankle, limped off the ice, returned the next shift and set up two goals later in that game, was in a walking boot between games, and returned to the lineup the next game. Vigneault said: “It shows how effective, durable and demanding Hank is on himself. Hopefully, the streak will continue.” “It says a lot about him,” Roberto Luongo said. “Not only that, he gets a couple of points right away. That’s what leadership is all about right there. A play like that, most guys would have gone into the locker room and packed it in for the rest of the game. He just flied through that thing, and then contributed in a big way.” Sounds like the leader of a "country club" to me. Spare me the pretentious armchair judgements.
  3. this sounds an awful lot like a particular Botchford article....
  4. You make claims like this a lot - AV made 'counterintuitive' decisions - but you don't offer much in the way of examples to backup what you are claiming. You also keep singing the bad contract song, but the three bad contracts are overplayed here more than cookie cutter Nickelback albums. Not many teams are without a few 'bad contracts'. What does 'hemmed in' mean anyway? That too is overplayed. I can think of a lot of factors around the league as a whole that made cutting deals difficult. There was very little player movement around the entire league. Ray Shero may be considered a genius by some, but if the Pens fail, the cost of all the futures spent on rentals may not look the same in the near future. In addition the cap drop will necesarily effect player valuation. Compact schedule, combined with fatigue and short recovery times = teams sustained a lot of injuries and moveable roster players were fewer and at a premium. A short season with no training camp and little practice time gave advantage to teams already composed, known quantities, as opposed to rolling the dice on significant and numerous changes. The new CBA made it difficult and more complicated for GMs - at least a dozen teams in the NHL are facing significant cap and roster challenges - for the few with cap space, the incentive to deal was not there as conditions will only improve for them at season's end. The shortened season resulted in very few teams being out of the playoff races at the trade deadline. The buyer/seller balance was lopsided.
  5. There's no doubt being swept by the Pharts in the first round ultimately cost AV his job. How much of that lands squarely on his shoulders is debatable, but who can argue that that kind of result in back to back years is likely to cost a coach his job regardless of what the mitigating circumstances might be. It's a challenge for every team (not named the Penguins) to score in the playoffs, but when it came to having that extra measure of scoring creativity to push the team over the top, the Canucks came up short. Despite the disappointing end, I have to say I was pretty impressed with what AV managed this season - to that point. I realize alot of people had microquestions like why Ebbett or Alberts were playing (in both cases I think Schroeder's repeated shoulder injuries and Ballard's groin played a role) but leaving particular roster decisions or line matches aside, there were some other things that I think really defined an excellent season for AV. First, he started the season without much of a camp (yes, all coaches did) and he had a pair of his top four just recovering from back and groin injuries. The blueline had to be made-shift on the go. Garrison was coming off a groin injury and joining a new team, Bieksa (the only right side veteran) was in and out of the lineup, Tanev had a very impressive rookie season but was absent in the end, Ballard again had injury (groin) problems, Hamhius had an uncharacteristic slow start - AV was not without his challenges piecing that group together. The second line as everyone knows was absent. In addition to Kesler's injuries, there was the loss of Malhotra, and Schroeder was unavailable at the tail end of the season - piecework up the middle - as well as injuries to depth forwards like Weise and Pinizotto. Every decision AV made regarding goaltending was national news. A new time zone was created - Luongo-time. There were times when the lineup wasn't very impressive - perhaps average - and with the revolving door, there was also virtually no time to practice. Under the circumstances, I thought the fact that AV pieced that together pretty much on the fly, and pulled another Northwest title out of it was a pretty respectable result. There's talk that he managed this because of a weak NW division (which many prematurely projected to be much stronger this year) - but AV managed this largely on the strength of a 9-2 record against the Central division, probably the NHL's strongest division. Their 3rd seeding wasn't an artificial result - without the division wining seed, they would still have finished 4th, a point out of that 3rd seed. While he may not have found a way to push that offensive production over the top in the playoffs, what he certainly showed was the ability to sustain their competitiveness despite a constantly depleted roster. I think he deserves credit for that - as opposed to the notion that any monkey could have gotten them into the position where a playoff loss is actually a disappointing result (as opposed to a playoff birth being an utter relief).
  6. I think you're wrong about one part there. Global warming. That softens the ice slightly, making it easier for AV to defend the 0-0 tie.
  7. got a good laugh out of this one. not sure if serious, but I like Ferraro - nevertheless, for some reason have a hard time seeing him behind the bench. Would hate to see him behind the bench, but would absolutely love to see him fielding questions from Botchford, Gallagher, etc. Those idiots would drive him mad. Between their ignorance of hockey and their arrogant posturing, he would have at them on a regular basis. It would be epic. I think Vancouver boasts even denser media types than NY. The material would be fruitful.
  8. He could re-sign with them, but you don't really know that - and even if he doesn't re-sign, there will be a hell of a lot of competition to sign him. Edmonton, Colorado, Dallas, and a handful of other teams will be interested...
  9. This bolded part in particular struck me as ironic. Perhaps you should read the article (it sounds like you're responding to a sound bite) - what he said, in context, hardly comes across as "spouting off".
  10. Yeah he is, but he' slated to be a 'free agent' if the Yotes don't manage to resign him by June 30.
  11. Kuzma is far and away the cream of the crop at the Province. Actually readable - his articles are almost always about the team or players - and not simply an overbearing dump of crass opinion. His peers should take a cue.
  12. I think it's easier to assess an actual coach than a characterization.. If the whip cracker is Keenan or Tortorella...no thanks. But a guy like Quenneville I would welcome, because he's also a hell of a tactician imo (even if Babcock is getting the best of him). On the other hand, coaches like Babcock and Tippett probably aren't what would be considered whip-crackers - but imo both are outstanding coaches who consistently get the best out of their players. In the end I personally prefer the latter - I think the Babcock and Tippett types get better consistency and enjoy more longevity because of their approaches - they treat their players like men, yet they command respect - and they get results.
  13. Should be some interesting reads in the local scribble. Wont' be surprised if Gallagher, Botchford etc have a halfwit feeding frenzy over this one.
  14. Bieksa is the only veteran right side defenseman on the roster. Tanev and Corrado may move into the top four in the future, but without another top 4 right side coming back, moving Bieksa is not a great idea.
  15. Good point. There are always a pair of factors involved where humans and systems are concerned. There is structure and there is agency - and they interplay - they both effect determination. To suggest that Bieksa was 'made' by a system, or that a system is responsible for his success, is reductive.
  16. I realize the angry crowd only gets more angry when facts are raised that contradict their opinions, but I'm going to do it anyway. A little stat was raised on a number of telecasts this year...the Canucks record with Bieksa in the lineup vs their record without. People can deny his "heart", they can pretend he has a "country club" attitude, they can even suggest that he's not a very good hockey player, but you're talking about a guy who has been a +50 over the past three years, playing in large part a shutdown role, with a majority of dzone starts. Yes, he has benefitted from playing the Hamhius. No, he's not perfect. But to question his "heart" is pretty off base, and to suggest that he has no right to offer his opinion on the type of coach he thinks would benefit the team most....with all due respect to you folks, I value his opinion more than yours. He's been in the room the whole time, he knows his team-mates, he wants to win, and I doubt his primary concern is a fear of working hard. The idea that you simply 'crack the whip' and winning is the result is exceedingly simplistic.
  17. But, but I thought the tough guys here would like Bee-eska. Mr Cherry's got him going to the Olympics - definite heart and soul guy!!
  18. That "country club" thing is something I remember Neil McRae blabbering on about regarding the Trevor Linden era Canucks. Made me puke then and still does. One constant is a blabber mouthed media in Vancouver that do a collective super-crappy job themselves, calling for the whip to be cracked on the players. They're fortunate I'm not their editor - if that were the case, there'd definitely be a rebuild in the works. Blowhards who know nothing about hockey would be on the out - they can spare me their sentimental tough talk - resumes will be taken for scribes who will bring some substance to the table for a change.
  19. I agree - and Tippett is also a level-headed guy who will motivate without the Keenan v2.0 approach. Chest thumping doesn't necessarily prepare a team better. There are various ways of getting the best out of players (does anyone see Babcock blowing head gaskets behind the bench?) - imo a ranting coach is a misfit for this team. If you're going to go that route, you may as well follow through with step two, which is tear it apart and repopulate the roster. People can talk tough all they want and pretend they know what the motivation levels of this team were (they 'saw a lack of heart'), or simple mindedly assume that foaming at the mouth would help this team win games - or at least 'teach them a lesson' and 'give em what they deserve.' People can't see accountability from couches. I'd prefer to see them go with a calculated, intelligent, adaptable coach like Tippett - who imo is not entirely unlike AV - perhaps has a slightly more "serious" appearance, but imo a good option if he's a possibility. The simple process of a coach coming in and reopening the slate could do a lot for this team - as well as adding his particular expertise to their skillsets and mental approaches to the game. Bringing in a Tortorella would be a reactionary move that would backfire imo (let alone a style of hockey I would fall asleep watching).
  20. "He [Vigneault] wants me in the lineup," Mitchell said following Tuesday’s skate at the Pacific Coliseum. "He's a coach. He doesn't know how I feel, he doesn't feel my pain, he doesn't feel those things.But at the end of the day he knows if I'm out on the ice I'm going to help the team win, so he wants me out there." “You know what, he’s got doctor’s clearance,” Sutter told the LA Times. “He’s got trainers’ clearance. Coaches want him to clear himself. “So do it.” Is that terseness or bluntness from the bench boss? As for Mitchell — well, this isn’t the first time he’s been overly cautious about returning from injury. He suffered a concussion while playing in Vancouver and, after recovering, reflected on the pressure and stress he felt about returning to the ice. “Everywhere I’d walk: ‘How’s your head? How’s your head?” Mitchell told the Times back in January 2012. “That’s the last thing I wanted to talk about. I just wanted to disconnect from that. “So that’s what I did. I went to my place in the middle of nowhere in the forest and just chilled.” While he’s not living in wooded isolation this time around, Mitchell says he’ll still be coming back on his terms. “I don’t want to get out there and be a liability to my defense partner, to my teammates, to my coach,” he said. “When I come back I don’t want to come back, play the next couple of games and then [the knee] swells up and be out.” Seems like coaches in general tend to want their players back - especially a crucial guy like Willie - particularly when they are under pressure to win - while Mitchell stands by his right to play when he feels he is ready - and in reality he's the guy who actually knows best in that sense. I understand where they're both coming from. If I were Mitchell (or another player) I'd want to be careful with my body, mind and future as well - fully respect that he has put down boundaries where that is concerned. If I were a coach - I'd be constantly wondering where Willie is, when is he back... goddamn I need that guy...
  21. I'd agree that there's a chance he's one of the 'off the radar' options.... Although his only head coaching stint was slightly dismal, albeit with a terrible Blues roster at the time. But he's also small and he's 57. Gillis is looking to get bigger and younger. But seriously, I can't necessarily agree with 2). I don't think Gillis will make a decision based upon needing to go off the map to satisfy/qualify his ego. I don't disagree that Gillis is inclined to ignore what the "crowd" expects of him (the "crowd" isn't particularly convincing anyhow), but I think there's just as good a chance he goes with Tippett if he turns out to be a real option.
  22. If "smart" and "cerebral" are the kind of coaching Botchford and Gallagher want, they should stop offering their coaching advice, not than anyone's really listening. Botchford is one of those guys whose form never fails to trump his content. We all know that TSN loves to troll the Canucks - imo the fact they prop up Botchford as some kind of spokesperson for the market only confirms the fact.
×
×
  • Create New...