Is it time for a new coach?

[CanucksJay]

It's awesome, Rupert is a proponent of AV yet his arguments actually support those that dislike AV

1) He said the Canucks have played well in the past 8 games by firing 35 shots on goal (actual stats is 31.5)

Yet, the only game where the Canucks actually looked good (Nashville, they only had 21 shots)

We were terrible yesterday but then we fired 36 shots which in Rupert's mind means a good game right?

That means 2 of 8 examples ARE COMPLETLEY opposite of what you said. (25% of your "sample")

We can then look at the other 6 games but I'm sure it wont help your cause much...

2) When Wallstreet brought up Ottawa and I brought up Montreal as good examples of effective coaching change, he brought up Florida.

Again, thanks for supporting us buddy and reinforcing our points.

Florida replaced DeBoer with Dineen last season and they had one of their best seasons with a 3rd place Conference finish after finishing in LAST place the season prior.

THANKS BUDDY!!!

[wallstreetamigo]

The problem with the above is that the coach can only do so much. When the team loses, the coach gets too much blame, just as when the team wins, the coach (in cases other than Vancouver, at least) gets too much credit.

Vigneault has his system in place. There are very set responsibilities for all players at every position as to what to do defensively. Offense starts with good defense. Once the defensive responsibilities are taken seriously by the players, then the players are given reign to create offensively.

AV has stated many times over the years that he allows the Sedins to create offense however they see fit. But the Sedins don't get enough credit for their defense. It's not great because they're not the biggest or fastest guys on the ice, and they take too many impulsive Dzone penalties. But they're smart, and good positionally, and know when to clear the zone when absolutely necessary.

Kassian, though, still makes dangerous, and at times blind, cross-ice passes at his own blue line. He also has a bad habit of standing still on the half-boards in his own zone, then when he gets the puck, just chipping it ahead instead of pausing and looking for an open man. There are other nuances to his D game that need improving. I'm not dumping on him at all since he's raw, and needs lots of development time. The good thing is he seems intelligent enough to "get it", but it's a process, not an instant success story. But the only way for Kassian to develop is to focus on this first. From there, the "fun stuff", the offensive creativity and preferences, the offensive team work with linemates, can develop from there. But again, without the defensive habits first, the offensive development means nothing. You then get a Grabner (when he was here, at least), or a Joffrey Lupul.

IMO, the defensive problems the Canucks are currently experiencing are not primarily the fault of the Dcore or the forwards. They can be placed largely on the shoulders of both players in the crease.

[Barry_Wilkins]

I strongly disagree that the goaltending is the main reason for the team's defensive struggles. They can undoubtedly be better but all season long the defensive coverage (by what is supposedly the deepest D in the NHL) is appalling and would not hold up even in the AHL let alone the NHL.

Kassian is a young player. Young players around the league usually are not expected to carry their line defensively. That is why they are placed with veterans. Tarasenko with Steen in St Louis is a good example of that. So why is Kassian expected to be the defensive conscience of whatever line he is on? And benching him for trying to create offense is helpful how?

If he is playing with the Sedins they should be the ones who are leading the defensive play of their line.....unfortunately they are just average defensively and actually float a lot on the defensive side of things. AV knows this so he expects whoever is with them to carry the mail defensively and that is why Burrows is generally a good fit there defensively.

I have seen all the vets on this team - the Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler, etc. - make absolutely boneheaded defensive decisions on an almost nightly basis. Or trying stupid cutesy offensive passes and plays that lead to an odd man rush against. Blaming certain guys when they do it and others getting a free pass is exactly the point of why AV needs to go.

[canucksnhl]

Keep AV but bring in Lindy Ruff for his perspective.

[Tortorella's Rant]

Debatable. But now is not the time anyway. It will make NO difference. What I said in a different thread:

And replace him with who?

Because Lindy Ruff is going to fair so much better with a bottom six of Lapierre, Pinnizotto, Ebbett, Weise, Schroeder and Sestito.

Furthermore, Hansen is generally not a top six winger. Nor is Higgins. And both of them are playing in those roles.

Daniel's complete inability to score is not the fault of AV.

A change may be in order eventually, but:

1) Now is not the time

2) Given AV's record and resume with this team, you must give him the chance to turn it around with a healthy line up.

[Red Light Racicot]

No, I wouldn't. However, you can't prove this to be your case. In the last 8 games the Canucks have averaged almost 35 shots/game. Of those games, I would say that Bob(twice), Niemi and Howard played outstanding against them.

The two games against Minny and the Calgary game were just solid goaltending performances. Nashville was admittedly poor.

It's easy to say that they were just "perimeter" shots, but I don't buy it.

[wallstreetamigo]

I didn't say that Kassian has to "carry" his line defensively. You have a disturbing penchant for attributing statements to me (and others) that were never made. I said he has to be responsible for his own duties.

There's a huge difference between making boneheaded plays ala Sedins or Edler, and making fundamental defensive blunders, as in positional play (Ballard and Kassian). The former kind are made by anybody and everybody. The latter kind are primarily made by players who don't have a clue, and generally get your team worse results.

[Kryten]

Edler's play has been so bad, I am having trouble finding any positives. His giveaways, his positioning, his inability to win a puck battle are indicative of a player who has zero confidence. All of our defence with the exception of Tanev, seemed to have taken a major step backwards. How does the coaching not catch hell for this?

And yes, the "chances" against Minnesota were a joke. It isn't exactly new to hear that our team makes opposing goalies look good.

[kamaole]

My two cents for what it's worth.....

Brown has to go. Zero for 36 PP is atrocious. However, I am starting to think it's the GM who we need to put pressure on. Wrong players assembled with little chemistry and no clear style/identity. We are not defensive, not offensive, not gritty & in your face, not European finesse, not anything. The coach must be frustrated himself but when the guys won't skate, they won't skate. It's like leading a horse to water.....

I must say that the "optional skate/practice" thing has not exactly inspired the players to have some urgency, but other than that, it seems that the team is a forced experiment; nothing seems natural.

In the early 90's, we had the Linden, Momesso, Odjick thing that worked well. Then, two years ago, we had our window of opportunity with the Sedins, our solid defence with Ehrhoff & Salo, combined with some grit in Torres and Glass. On paper: maybe not perfect but the chemistry was there and we let it slip away.

Now, it looks like a bad date going worse.....no chemistry and trying desperately to make friends who set you up....happy.

[Salmonberries]

Come on Mike.

Do your job.

PULL THAT TRIGGER!!!

[Italia2006]

Who's fault was it for the Canucks play in the 3rd? Lets protect our 3goal lead, oh wait it's a 2 goal game now, holy crap they're catching up it's only a 1 goal game.

Seriously it's a joke.

[Dragonfruits]

Come on Mike.

Do your job.

PULL THAT TRIGGER!!!

[Italia2006]

First its not his job to pull the trigger to please panicky fans because they think a panic trade will fix the team which is what most of you are looking for

also we won the game the blues played better and deserved the 2 goals they got it happens to quite a few teams if you watch hockey outside of the canucks

[Ballisticsports.]

First its not his job to pull the trigger to please panicky fans because they think a panic trade will fix the team which is what most of you are looking for

also we won the game the blues played better and deserved the 2 goals they got it happens to quite a few teams if you watch hockey outside of the canucks

[wallstreetamigo]

First its not his job to pull the trigger to please panicky fans because they think a panic trade will fix the team which is what most of you are looking for

also we won the game the blues played better and deserved the 2 goals they got it happens to quite a few teams if you watch hockey outside of the canucks

[Dragonfruits]

Yes, I watch lots of hockey and when you sit on a lead you typically lose. They were lucky they had a pp that killed 2 minutes of time otherwise we could be in overtime right now.

[Dragonfruits]

I remember when it was the Canucks down 2-3 goals 2 years ago and You just knew they were going to win

Now, it seems reversed

[winthecup]

Debatable. But now is not the time anyway. It will make NO difference. What I said in a different thread:

And replace him with who?

Because Lindy Ruff is going to fair so much better with a bottom six of Lapierre, Pinnizotto, Ebbett, Weise, Schroeder and Sestito.

Furthermore, Hansen is generally not a top six winger. Nor is Higgins. And both of them are playing in those roles.

Daniel's complete inability to score is not the fault of AV.

A change may be in order eventually, but:

1) Now is not the time

2) Given AV's record and resume with this team, you must give him the chance to turn it around with a healthy line up.

[wallstreetamigo]

exactly my thoughts.

wait until the offseason to evaluate because I dont think bringing in a new coach at this point in the season will be an improvement of what we have.

[MoneypuckOverlord]

There is a study that suggests a change in coach mid-season produces at least a short term improvement of team performance. I can't remember the name of the study, but it is discovered that the players experience a type of shock, or surprise that jolts them into a state of relief that the focus is off of them. The whole team experiences, in times of poor performance, a feeling of being responsible for the poor performance. When the coach is the one replaced, the team feels relief that things may change, and hope that things will change. Plus they feel compelled to prove themselves to the new coach, thus improving their performance, unconsciously.

I wish I could remember where I read this, but unfortunately I cannot site it.