whytelight Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 The more I read, listen to, and interpret information regarding our current Canucks, the more I'm noticing a trend in our player development. Firstly, I believe that MG and his team are looking for a specific type of talent. I believe they are looking good people that are teachable and willing to buy into a team system of play. I don't they are looking just at stats and numbers. They are looking for quality people that buy into a system, will take the time to learn, and will support one another towards a common goal. As much as we might be thinking, "..OMG, Burrows must be in tatters because he's been demoted to the 2nd or 3rd line...", I think Burrows is thinking "..damn, this Kassian kid is giving our TEAM a chance win every night....he is doing things that I can't do. If I can make my line more productive and we're winning hockey games, I'm happy..." I believe these are the guys that MG and AV are focused on. Our players don't look at line changes as demotions.....neither should we. Hockey is much like a game of chance. AV has said it before that he'll ice a line up that he thinks will give his team a CHANCE to win on any given night. Based on his calculations and observations, he ices the team most likely to win. It really is a game of chance. Sometimes he is right, and sometimes he is wrong. I believe he has learned a lot and is continuing to improve is decision making. In conclusion, I believe that we have a great group of people working for our team. A group of people that supports each other and have the same mindset. That is why he got rid of CH and kept JS. JS is a better person......period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaramel MacKhiato Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I never thought once that "Burrows must be in tatters" I don't think i've ever thought anyone was in tatters I don't think that i've ever used the word tatters... Unless you mean: http://t.qkme.me/3p1z9b.jpg then it still doesn't make sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 NBA comparison: Greg Popovich-coached San Antonio Spurs, where Tim Duncan is treated the same way the guy on the bench is. Common theme? A coach who believes in his system and team leaders, and a team leader who holds all accountable. Same thing here in Vancouver - Sedins do not get special treatment by the organization or the coach by any means, and the Sedins would be the first to say everyone should be treated the same and held accountable this way. Key is accountability and it comes from leadership on down. I give a lot of the credit to AV for letting the core leadership group hold everyone accountable for their play - even themselves. I give a lot of credit to the Sedins for holding everyone else accountable, while allowing everyone else on the team, even guys like Volpatti, Ebbett, etc, to hold the Sedins themselves accountable if they don't perform. This isn't possible without the change of culture brought by AV and the Sedins who bought into the system and accepted the responsibility to be leaders. And kudos for Luongo for being the ultimate teammate and accepting the accountability that everyone is subject to. He could have whined and put forth his superstar status, demanding a trade, but we now all see Luongo's true character as a ultimate teammate and player. We definitely do not need a guy like Hodgson, no matter the talent, because on this team, no one's better than another and everyone earns their ice time. I mean, just look down the bench - every single player work for their ice time. Schroeder understands that, and I agree that's why he's a better fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicNuckleHead09 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 We have a team full of leaders or those who are being taught to be leaders. Big things from this team for years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckrelevantname Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 And kudos for Luongo for being the ultimate teammate and accepting the accountability that everyone is subject to. He could have whined and put forth his superstar status, demanding a trade, but we now all see Luongo's true character as a ultimate teammate and player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 NBA comparison: Greg Popovich-coached San Antonio Spurs, where Tim Duncan is treated the same way the guy on the bench is. Common theme? A coach who believes in his system and team leaders, and a team leader who holds all accountable. Same thing here in Vancouver - Sedins do not get special treatment by the organization or the coach by any means, and the Sedins would be the first to say everyone should be treated the same and held accountable this way. Key is accountability and it comes from leadership on down. I give a lot of the credit to AV for letting the core leadership group hold everyone accountable for their play - even themselves. I give a lot of credit to the Sedins for holding everyone else accountable, while allowing everyone else on the team, even guys like Volpatti, Ebbett, etc, to hold the Sedins themselves accountable if they don't perform. This isn't possible without the change of culture brought by AV and the Sedins who bought into the system and accepted the responsibility to be leaders. And kudos for Luongo for being the ultimate teammate and accepting the accountability that everyone is subject to. He could have whined and put forth his superstar status, demanding a trade, but we now all see Luongo's true character as a ultimate teammate and player. We definitely do not need a guy like Hodgson, no matter the talent, because on this team, no one's better than another and everyone earns their ice time. I mean, just look down the bench - every single player work for their ice time. Schroeder understands that, and I agree that's why he's a better fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 This is why we traded Shane O'Brien away, but we still tried to give him a chance rather than bury him in the minors. You could argue this is why we moved Ehrhoff and let Torres go rather than re-sign them. Maybe even why Hodgson was moved, as underneath the requests for ice time, it points to him not following those ideals and being willing to buy into the system. Gillis has said it before, when he started with us, and then again recently. He's about quality individuals as much as he is about quality players. It's about building a team, not a roster. It might mean you go for a player who doesn't have as obvious talent as another player, and you give up a little in immediate on ice return, but it is a better long term plan as you weed out the ones that don't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 We lose, no thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahf149 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I agree with you 100% But he has kept Kesler and he is by far the least team player on the team. I actually think this team is better off without Kesler and his piss poor attitude. Id rather trade Kesler for another quality centre. Umberger? HA HA HA HA HA HA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotesMagotes Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 Agreed. This is the way it has to be. You cannot create a continuous winning atmosphere when you have guys in the locker room who aren't willing to sacrifice. We may not understand certain trades or player movement but in reality we don't know these players in person where coaches management and other players do. Their personalities and attitudes are usually a big part of how this organization grades a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred65 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I believe you're right about drafting character as much as skill, hopefully both components. That aside I believe another factor that Gillis has looked at is this. With continued success the man understand that he is not going to have many early picks in the draft. The early drafts generally result in the high end talent. So rather than bemoan the fact I think they're heading in another direction for the post Sedin team. Yes they will try and draft as much skill as possible but when every thing else is equal I think he's moving towards character and size. This team in 4-5 years is going to be big. All indications are he is building a big team with character, I agree, and hopefully skill as well but big big big. The team in 5 years time will not look like today's model. There's a much better odds you can get big players than high end skill players in the draft. MG recognizes this and will change the drafting philosophy accordingly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etsen3 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I think every team wants good character guys who will do anything for the team to win, not just a Canucks thing (although some teams may not be as rigid about it and will sign selfish players once in a while). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spencer Drew Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I agree with you 100% But he has kept Kesler and he is by far the least team player on the team. I actually think this team is better off without Kesler and his piss poor attitude. Id rather trade Kesler for another quality centre. Umberger? HA HA HA HA HA HA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.