[Official] Canucks coach talk. Keep all talk here.

[wai_lai416]

I'd like to see a defense oriented coach. Guy Boucher perhaps

no thx, i don't want to see another team counter the trap by standing behind their net refusing to play

[Smiley2051]

...

[RUPERTKBD]

For all of you dismissing Tortorella so easily.

And im pointing a finger at Tony Gallagher and anyone who thinks they need to agree with that tripe.

That artcle has personal bias written all over it. Its an individual giving his biased opinion and nothing else.

I can come up with just as many reasons why Torts would be a GOOD fit in this city.

I also would like to INFORM the unaware, Tortorella was not always like this, you all know him from what you see on Youtube and highlights where hes passionately telling the media to frack off.

Most of his time in Tampa, was very tame and calm.

Anyone who was a fan of Torts before his first Media backlash with Brooksie will understand and agree with me. He will adjust to what the locker room needs, and hes not going to scare away the Sedins.

Please stop thinking we need to caudle our players...

For those of you that only know Torts from Youtube... You simply have no knowledge of the coach.

Back to that Gallagher Article, it starts by calling Torts and Immature Goof, then goes onto speak his opinions and comparisons of VAN and NY, and AV and Torts. Then calls him a goof again. If you need to flame in your article, your adding spice to something that tastes like crap without the spice....

Apples and Oranges Tony...

Tony's opinion is Torts is a bad fit in Vancouver. My opinion is Tony is a terrible fit for The Province.

It's funny that you would call others "unaware", but you somehow missed the fact that Torts publicly ripped his captain (and best player at the time) Vinny Lecavalier in the press.

You're probably aware of the old saying about a Leopard and his spots, n'est pas?

Could quenville or Babcock be available after this series?

Funny that you mention Babcock. (and no, he won't be available)

Last night in the 2nd intermission, Elliotte Friedman brought up the fact that he had to that point in the series, tried 8 different line combinations for Zetterberg.

Line juggling. Every coach does it. A lot.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

...

was that from when he was with the Manitoba Moose ?

[Dilly Canuck]

was that from when he was with the Manitoba Moose ?

Yup.

[Boudrias]

You watched the team that long, you oughta know it could be a lot worse than it's been the last couple decades, a LOT worse. The West Coast Express teams with Crawford, and the Sedin/Luongo teams with Vigneault have been the only legitimate contenders we've had other than '94. I've been a fan ever since I figured how to work the radio back in the 80s, and I say we are doing alright. It'd be a shame if this demanding fanbase and media environment, and the excessively high expectations in this city, tore apart another solid team like happened after '94. All's we can ask as fans is to have a good shot at playoff success every season, there are so many factors that contribute to going after a Cup, if you have a good team every year and get a shot at it, eventually it'll pay out. You don't want to go all-in and end up spending a decade recovering, just be getting in the playoffs and maybe the team can put together a run some year.

I have followed the Canucks from the beginning. You are right that there have been many sorry years prior to the current group. Poor owners, poor GM's, poor coaches and yes many poor players. Van fans stuck thru a lot of those times until attendance started to fall prior to Burkie's arrival.

The current ownership and management under Gillis is pretty solid. There is no guarantee of CUP success. The likely hood of a Canadian west coast CUP is even less likely as I am sure the NHL would consider it a lost season as they try to build revenue and acceptance of the game in the USA. With every game it becomes more obvious that the game is 'managed'.

Canuck history has always been a story of hanging on to fading stars to long and not converting their last years into younger assets. Vancouver has never done a 'rebuild' in 43 years IMHO. They have always retooled. Their prospect depth has always been non-existant until 6 - 7 years ago and even today is not great. So even as I tell this sad story I jump in and say this roster is 3 players away from CUP contention. 2nd line RW, 3C and 1pairing RD. Saying that I am assuming a new coach can right the Edler ship on LD.

[longsuffering]

The commentary on Torts was that he favoured a defensive shot-blocking style and then his team could not score! Is that what we want in Vancouver?

[Noseforthenet]

You know, I see alot of people ripping on the idea of Guy Boucher becoming the new coach. I think it would be silly not to hire him! I don't know if anybody noticed, but he obviously wasn't the reason Tampa hasn't done so well. It's their goaltending and lack of depth on defense. We have both of them. We need to reinvigorate our powerplay...he can do that, we need to still be defensively responsible and smart with our play *cough*Edler*cough*...he can do that too. And all around, he can invigorate an offense very VERY well. His team scored alot of goals against Boston a couple years ago. Something that we actually had trouble with. Fighting thru Boston's checking. Or as a matter of fact any checking like that since!!!!

If you look at Tampa's offense, they had 8 players that were on pace for a .4 or .5 ppg at least! By comparison, we had 8 as well, but two of them were defensemen. And you can say they have Stamkos and St Louis til you are blue in the face, but we still have the Sedins and Kesler. Last time I checked, they are pretty good players. Motivating them to be the upper echelon players that they should be, should be our top priority. I mean, right?!

This guy also gives young players a chance to shine and play to their strengths. He helped PK Subban develop into the premier defenseman he is today and the callup depleted Hamilton Bulldogs did very well under Boucher in 2010 as well!

All in all, handing the reigns over to a guy who could actually do more with us than he did with Tampa should be the exactly what we are looking to do!

[CB007]

I'd like to see a defense oriented coach. Guy Boucher perhaps

He is not a defense oriented coach... most of the ppl here are basing his coaching style from one youtube clip... and it would've been a nothing clip if the Flyers would just advance the puck like all other teams would.

Boucher is the smartest, most creative of the bunch, I believe. That's what we didn't have in AV, creativity.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

He's quick to put everyone down and even resort to name calling. Yet, he won't say who he would accept as coach.

http://www.theprovin...1774/story.html

http://www2.canada.c...2a-9f17a08575e9

Now I want Tortorella just to piss off the cryptkeeper.

[CB007]

was that from when he was with the Manitoba Moose ?

I remember hearing his name here and there as a player... that wasn't so long ago. Funny how things go.

Baummer would probably shoot for a head coach job somewhere in the future.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

I remember hearing his name here and there as a player... that wasn't so long ago. Funny how things go.

Baummer would probably shoot for a head coach job somewhere in the future.

I still remember Eakins from NHLPA '94, he was a depth D man for Winnipeg.

I probably played that game a little too much

[wallstreetamigo]

He is not a defense oriented coach... most of the ppl here are basing his coaching style from one youtube clip... and it would've been a nothing clip if the Flyers would just advance the puck like all other teams would.

Boucher is the smartest, most creative of the bunch, I believe. That's what we didn't have in AV, creativity.

I think I would prefer Boucher over Eakins to be honest.

[Angry Goose]

Was doing a bit of due diligence on John Stevens as I really know nothing about him.

If he is being considered for the job, I find it interesting and a bit ironic that he was fired as Flyers head coach on December 4, 2009, the day after his team was blanked on home ice by our Vancouver Canucks.

Here's a sampling of comments across from fans and sports reporters in Philly at the time that may give a bit of context on who he is:

• It's a knee jerk reaction that will come back to haunt them.
  

• Bad news that Stevens is the one paying for lack luster play.
  

• Looks like a decent coach and will most probably show up elsewhere sooner than later.
  

• I truly feel for Stevens he seemed like a great coach and if there is any justice in this world he will get another shot at an NHL job.
  

• In Philly a lot of people didn't like Stevens because they thought he didn't show enough emotion; heard this all the time from friends and sports radio here in Philly.
  

• The club displayed a total lack of committment in losing 3-0 to the visiting Vancouver Canucks. I think Stevens was simply too conservative, too laid back and might have even become more of a player's friend than a player's coach.
  

• Inconsistencies continue to plague Stevens and his players. And we're not talking about big name players going in and out of the lineup with injuries. We're talking about just about the entire squad falling asleep for 1-2 periods at a time, and then suddenly waking up in time to muster a late 3rd period effort that still falls short.
  

• It's called a "60 minute effort", and Stevens has yet to show that he can get that concept across to his team.
  

• The Flyers love playing for the hardworking Stevens, but the fact of the matter is -- and we all know it -- that this team has been unacceptably inconsistent since the start of last season and even before then. John Stevens has been the coach the entire time. But Mike Richards has also been captain the entire time. And Jeff Carter has been his wing man. And Kimmo Timonen has been an assistant captain. And... well, you get the point.
  

• Could it be the players, not the coach? At least one un-named player thinks so..."It's not Johnny," the player who asked not to be named told Seravalli. "We have a lot of problems right now. He's not one of them. His systems work. He is in our face when we're not doing what we're supposed to. He has a lot more fire than people know about. For whatever reason, we've let him down."
  

• The argument could be made, of course, that the inconsistency was there before the injuries and the recent struggles -- it's been here for years now. But who knows how much of that is truly Stevens fault. Could the team be too comfortable playing for Stevens? Could they need a shakeup in the so-calledleadership group? Could the front office be the real problem, not giving Stevens the proper tools he needs?
  

Of course we now know that the player leadership group (Richards and Carter at least) was in fact subsequently shipped out of town in what were considered shocking trades at the time, so it lends a bit of credence to those saying the problem wasn't necessarily Stevens. Having said this, a few of these comments sound eerily similar to ones we've heard about AV the last couple of years.

If you factor in his recent success with the Kings, it wouldn't be a surprise if he is near the top of MG's list of candidates.

Thanks for posting this- it was very illuminating example of what people have to say on the outside of things versus those in the know. Particularly like what the un-named player had to say.

I really don't think people have to worry about a coach who can light a fire under their ass. I think the Canucks are already motivated. Two very lacklustre playoffs will do that, especially knowing that if things dont change on the ice then roster changes are certainly coming.

What the Canucks need is a guy who can impliment systems that work for the players, and systems that get the most out of what the team has as a whole. Hearing that Stevens is a knowledgeable guy gives me the impression that perhaps he can bring in some fresh perspective post AV. And I don't think the players themselves want a guy who screams at them to get effort. What they want is effective direction and guidance. And perhaps AV had the right approach but what he tried to impliment wasn't enough.

[UFCanuck]

He is not a defense oriented coach... most of the ppl here are basing his coaching style from one youtube clip... and it would've been a nothing clip if the Flyers would just advance the puck like all other teams would.

Boucher is the smartest, most creative of the bunch, I believe. That's what we didn't have in AV, creativity.

I don't see much creativity from him. He played the same 1-3-1 neutral zone trap in Juniors that he brought with him to the AHL and NHL.

He was lucky to have Stamkos and St.Louis for his powerplay.

[wallstreetamigo]

Thanks for posting this- it was very illuminating example of what people have to say on the outside of things versus those in the know. Particularly like what the un-named player had to say.

I really don't think people have to worry about a coach who can light a fire under their ass. I think the Canucks are already motivated. Two very lacklustre playoffs will do that, especially knowing that if things dont change on the ice then roster changes are certainly coming.

What the Canucks need is a guy who can impliment systems that work for the players, and systems that get the most out of what the team has as a whole. Hearing that Stevens is a knowledgeable guy gives me the impression that perhaps he can bring in some fresh perspective post AV. And I don't think the players themselves want a guy who screams at them to get effort. What they want is effective direction and guidance. And perhaps AV had the right approach but what he tried to impliment wasn't enough.

I agree that building a system that takes advantage of the players strengths is a huge key to success for the next coaching staff.

But I also don't think the player-only motivational approach is working for this team either. Having a coach who can help increase the level of motivation, urgency, etc. on this team does not necessarily mean having a guy who screams at them or does that in a negative way. Actually, players are different and the ideal coach would be someone who can tailor his motivational approach to the individual player while not letting that impact each player's level of accountability within the team. All players need to be accountable equally to do their job and put forth their best effort consistently. But some players will respond better to different methods of motivation too so being aware of that and using it to their advantage will certainly make life easier on the new coach.

[oldnews]

Yada yada motivational approach blah blah motivation, yada yada motivational approach blah blah level of accountability blah blah accountable blah blah motivation.....

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.

[The Kassassin Train]

Why does anyone want Torts? What has he done to warrant this man crush on him?

After his ECF appearance he's been ousted twice in the 1st round, DNQ another year and made it to the 2nd roiund two years.

[oldnews]

He's quick to put everyone down and even resort to name calling. Yet, he won't say who he would accept as coach.

http://www.theprovin...1774/story.html

http://www2.canada.c...2a-9f17a08575e9

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."

[TOMapleLaughs]

While hiring Torts would signal the end of this group, i am a fan of hiring Torts as much as i'm not a fan of the media in this town. They'd get what they'd deserve.