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

[Boudrias]

The ideal coach. OK. none of us want to see a boring hockey team. However, most of us actually want our team to play smart defensively in their own end. See 2011 regular season.

We also want a team that is entertaining to watch and gets chances to score if not lots of goals. See 2011 regular season.

We want a coach that will motivate the team to actually play 60 minutes most nights. See 2011 regular season.

WE WANT THE CUP!!!. Best chance, 2011.

We had the right coach. The message wasn't getting through anymore. The question is. WHY?

So. Will a new coach actually have any better luck if the team is not listening?

Expect some trades people. BIG trades. Some players are leaving with a new coach. Then we will know who is and who is not listening.

If the Canucks actually play a full game. They are going to win on most nights. This team needs to be motivated. So, we need a bad ass that will make the play or someone that can convince them that his way = a championship.

Why are you assuming the players weren't listening to AV anymore? As I watched they were trying to execute the same puck possession game that they used in 2011. The dif being that they had no center who could win FO's consistently until Kesler returned. Fighting to regain puck possession when puck possession is your offensive game is pretty tough. Combine that with opposing teams who felt comfortable playing their d-core tighter in the neutral zone and turnovers resulted. All this increased pressure on Van's defense and made them look worse than they were. How many times did we see two deep forecheckers against Van this year? It became almost standard. Hank throwing the puck into the middle during a breakout, less than 2 minutes to go with a goal lead, against SJ 1st round, was standard Canucks. To me this meant AV had to go. Great regular season record but he never seemed to prepare this team to play real playoff hockey.

[elvis15]

The Rangers just got permission to talk to Eakins as well.

Mottau: Eakins could be 'breath of fresh air' for Rangers

One of the good points I took from the article was yet another player testimonial:

...

“I played for a number of coaches over the years and I can say Dallas is one of the best,” Mottau told The Post yesterday while at home in suburban Boston...

“He was able to look at certain guys and let them play to their strengths and work on their weaknesses,” Mottau said. “Other coaches promote themselves and their system, but he was looking at the betterment of the group. He was just a breath of fresh air for me.”

...

“He understands the pressure of the game, that sometimes [on the ice] you just don’t see things,” Mottau said. “For him to stay connected to that feeling — that every play is not going to be perfect, not every player is going to play great every game — he has a good sense of the reality of the game.

“As a player you just focus on one thing, that’s you, and trying to win the game. For him, he takes in every person and every ego and every player and still keeps an even keel as a coach. That was one of his biggest strengths.”

...

I think I'd mentioned this before, but Eakins' wife is an actress, Ingrid Kavelaars, who competed in the Miss Teen Canada competitions with her twin sister, Monique (apparently the only Canadian woman to ever with a match in epee fencing at an Olympic event!). Not to get sidetracked as I found that interesting, but the fact that she's an actress is relevant as it suggests she'd be more comfortable in a city with opportunity for acting. She's most recently appeared in XIII as 'Harriet Traymore' (10 episodes) so she's currently working.

So, what does that mean for Eakins and his search for a coaching job? Well, he'd find somewhere with a reasonably strong film and acting community appealing for his wife. The two main cities for that in Canada are Toronto and, you guessed it, Hollywood North. New York has Broadway and a large film industry, so that's a definite competitor, but Eakins has also interviewed in Dallas and Edmonton (as an assistant though) and neither of those cities is known for their film industry (although Austin, Texas is a smaller but strong city for film and is 3 hours away).

My guess of who we know he's interviewed with so far is Vancouver is somewhere he has ties with from a hockey standpoint and it makes sense for his wife's career as well. New York would be a reasonable choice as well if he has interest in the team, but other strong candidates in Vigneault, Messier and Gretzky are also interviewing there. Dallas would probably be a secondary choice, and Edmonton further back for him and his wife.

[RUPERTKBD]

He won a Calder Cup with a stacked team. Stevens wasn't that great in Philadelphia and because he coached there, he knows how to deal with the media. Coupled with the work he's done in LA as assistant on special teams. If Gillis is going to base hiring Stevens solely on that, then he's pretty clueless and not too bright.

Based on just those things you mentioned? I doubt that. If Stevens is ultimately interviewed, GIllis will be basing his decision whether or not to hire him on far more factors than the one you listed.

"Clueless" and "not too bright" doesn't get you the job as an NHL GM. It gets you on an internet forum.

I hope the pens lose so we may get a chance at bylsma.

People who expect Bylsma to be fired for losing in the conference finals are guilty of wishful thinking. It's only impatient fans and douchebag media-types who are ready to fire coaches after every series loss....

[CB007]

The ideal coach. OK. none of us want to see a boring hockey team.

I do if it means winning the Cup. I don't watch the games anyways just tell me the score and the injury report after the games.

[CB007]

The Rangers just got permission to talk to Eakins as well.

Rangers obtain permission to interview Eakins for coaching gig

One of the good points I took from the article was yet another player testimonial:

Yeah that scores more points for me than anything else. With AV it's always system system process process. Lets use what we've got to the fullest rather than sticking to ideologies.

Now I would be happy to have him over Boucher.

[aGENT]

Ruff is better then Stevens, Eakins and Boucher. Ruff has been to the finals and plays the run and gun, which would be upgrade over the defensive garbage AV had them playing the past 2 years. Stevens has a career playoff record of just under .500. Eakins has no NHL experience. To say either of them, especially Eakins is better then Ruff is just moronic. Boucher runs that stupid 1-3-1. That alone is reason enough not to give him any consideration. Also, I can't see them hiring a second straight francophone coach.

I totally disagree this team does need someone to crack the whipe, pull no punches or BS. If Keenan was available, he should be interviewed as well. One of the naysayers brought up when he (Keenan) was here before. If it wasn't for Keenan, Naslund doesn't become the all-star player he was. Keenan was so awful yet he managed to win the Cup in 1994. Remember that. You or someone else's comeback will be he had a stacked/HOF team.

Country Club lifestyle this team has been getting away must stop as it's unacceptable. If you bring in a rookie coach with no NHL experience like Eakins, the players will just continue on business as usual. Hiring Stevens or Eakins essentially is just hiring AV 2.0. Robots with the media. Stevens might be slightly better with the media, but you can't put alot of stock into that in hiring him.

1) I never said they were better. I basically said Ruff wasn't appreciably better and on top of that, IMO he lacks creativity and adaptability. He does certainly have experience on his side though. My guess is that Gillis and co. are going to narrow it down to an experienced, older guy and a younger guy with a fresh/different perspective and unless one is head and shoulders above the other, make a call from there on which direction to head. Also, have you been watching the playoffs at all? Good D wins championships. Look at all the firepower Pits has that's being neutralized. Boston plays VERY good D and is opportunist on hopping on ANY mistake you make. I think Boston has shown there's such a thing as playing a dynamic, up tempo defensive game. I think Boucher's a good fit for that. YMMV.

2) "Whip cracking" is short term thinking IMO. It may work temporarily but personally I think consummate professionals like the twins would be put off by being treated like and seeing team mates treated like, garbage. They're professionals, so I'm sure they'd do their part but I think it would effect whether they re-sign and/or for how much $$. I just don't see Tort's style fitting here. I think they team tunes him out in short order...where does that leave us? You can motivate, lead and push guys without resorting to being a loudmouthed a-hole. THAT is what we need. Firm but understanding leadership.

[DeNiro]

The more I read up on Eakins the more he sounds like the coach this team needs.

They need a coach that actually talks to his players (not at them), and can motivate them individually, and as a group.

From the sounds of it, AV never really talked to any of his players one on one, and simply preached things like "the system" and "the process". Cliche words that don't have a whole lot of meaning, especially for young players trying to find their place on a team.

Systems and processes are great, but something tells me if that's the only leadership you get from a coach, eventually players are gonna lose interest in what they have to say. A coach needs to be able to talk to his players man to man, find out what makes them tick, create roles for them on the team, understand the dynamic of the group, and not give up on players when they have a few bad games.

Winning is important, but so is looking ahead at what's best for the group. To me this was one of AV's biggest downfalls. He had tunnel vision, and was so focused on his "one game at a time" approach, that he couldn't see problems that may arise in the future. Which I think explained his inability to adapt in a playoff series.

Eakins could bring the fresh approach to coaching that this group needs, and possibly get them playing passionate hockey again. From the ineterest this guy is getting around the league, I think it's only a matter of time before he's hired. I think the Canucks need to jump on him now.

[aGENT]

The more I read up on Eakins the more he sounds like the coach this team needs.

They need a coach that actually talks to his players (not at them), and can motivate them individually, and as a group.

From the sounds of it, AV never really talked to any of his players one on one, and simply preached things like "the system" and "the process". Cliche words that don't have a whole lot of meaning, especially for young players trying to find their place on a team.

Systems and processes are great, but something tells me if that's the only leadership you get from a coach, eventually players are gonna lose interest in what they have to say. A coach needs to be able to talk to his players man to man, find out what makes them tick, create roles for them on the team, understand the dynamic of the group, and not give up on players when they have a few bad games.

Winning is important, but so is looking ahead at what's best for the group. To me this was one of AV's biggest downfalls. He had tunnel vision, and was so focused on his "one game at a time" approach, that he couldn't see problems that may arise in the future. Which I think explained his inability to adapt in a playoff series.

Eakins could bring the fresh approach to coaching that this group needs, and possibly get them playing passionate hockey again. From the ineterest this guy is getting around the league, I think it's only a matter of time before he's hired. I think the Canucks need to jump on him now.

Yeah I was a bit iffy on him at the beginning. I really felt we needed someone veteran who'd "been there" to get in there and lead/motivate a mostly veteran group of players. Someone with the gravitas and experience level to be respected and followed.

But the more I read about the guy, the more I like the sounds of him and his approach.

[DeNiro]

Yeah I was a bit iffy on him at the beginning. I really felt we needed someone veteran who'd "been there" to get in there and lead/motivate a mostly veteran group of players. Someone with the gravitas and experience level to be respected and followed.

But the more I read about the guy, the more I like the sounds of him and his approach.

The thing is the team is likely going to be alot younger next season. There could be as many as 5 players who are 23 or younger on the team, possibly more.

They don't really have a choice but to go with youth with the way the cap is now. And with young players, we're gonna need a coach that is patient. If we bring a coach that benches young players every time they have a bad stretch of games, forget about development.

It's all about getting these young guys in the lineup while our core players are still playing at a high level. That way they can play with these guys and see what it takes to be a top player. And the idea is that eventually this new group of players will take over as the core group/ Much like the Sedins, Edler, Bieksa, Kesler, and Burrows took over from Naslund, Morrison, Bertuzzi, Jovanovski, and Ohlund.

[Henrik Kesler]

The thing is the team is likely going to be alot younger next season. There could be as many as 5 players who are 23 or younger on the team, possibly more.

They don't really have a choice but to go with youth with the way the cap is now. And with young players, we're gonna need a coach that is patient. If we bring a coach that benches young players every time they have a bad stretch of games, forget about development.

It's all about getting these young guys in the lineup while our core players are still playing at a high level. That way they can play with these guys and see what it takes to be a top player. And the idea is that eventually this new group of players will take over as the core group/ Much like the Sedins, Edler, Bieksa, Kesler, and Burrows took over from Naslund, Morrison, Bertuzzi, Jovanovski, and Ohlund.

Yep, and based of everything I've read it sounds like Eakins is the guy to do just this.

[aGENT]

And for those folk who want a "hard ass" coach...I thought this quote from an earlier Eakins interview was very interesting:

http://oilersnation.com/2012/2/16/dallas-eakins-2

...So I think I take a little bit from all of them. I think I'm probably a pretty good mix of a Roger Neilson who deeply cares about his players to a Mike Keenan who can be very hard on his guys. And I think I'm kind of right in the middle. My guys know that I'm 100 percent behind them. I encourage them. They know I want them to make it so badly, yet at the same time, they know not to cross the line with me. I demand a lot out of these young men because I know what the reward is at the end for them...

[higgyfan]

Veteran and 'star' players tune out guys like Torts. Just look at the lack of success he's had with NY.

Ruff is very similar to AV, in fact his coaching record is identical. I think you see more of the same with him. If you read the Buff board, you can see the same comments about Ruff as you do about AV on CDC.

I think the team needs new ideas and a fresher approach. I think Eakins would bring this. I agree with the previous poster that a more 'hands on' approach could have a positive effect on the younger players. It might also be more effective in preparing the team for big games, which seemed to be an issue of late.

Every NHL coach was a rookie at some point. If they have the skill set, they usually rise to the top very quickly.

[Boudrias]

Ruff is better then Stevens, Eakins and Boucher. Ruff has been to the finals and plays the run and gun, which would be upgrade over the defensive garbage AV had them playing the past 2 years. Stevens has a career playoff record of just under .500. Eakins has no NHL experience. To say either of them, especially Eakins is better then Ruff is just moronic. Boucher runs that stupid 1-3-1. That alone is reason enough not to give him any consideration. Also, I can't see them hiring a second straight francophone coach.

I totally disagree this team does need someone to crack the whipe, pull no punches or BS. If Keenan was available, he should be interviewed as well. One of the naysayers brought up when he (Keenan) was here before. If it wasn't for Keenan, Naslund doesn't become the all-star player he was. Keenan was so awful yet he managed to win the Cup in 1994. Remember that. You or someone else's comeback will be he had a stacked/HOF team.

Country Club lifestyle this team has been getting away must stop as it's unacceptable. If you bring in a rookie coach with no NHL experience like Eakins, the players will just continue on business as usual. Hiring Stevens or Eakins essentially is just hiring AV 2.0. Robots with the media. Stevens might be slightly better with the media, but you can't put alot of stock into that in hiring him.

AV was playing a defensive game for the past 2years? Wow, that's news to me.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

according to Gillis there are a total of 7 or 8 candidates being interviewed

[elvis15]

Gillis wouldn't confirm who, but plans to interview 4-5 more coaches for our position. Eakins, Gulutzan and Arneil of course are already known. Would be prepared to wait for coaches not yet available if they think it's the right person. Still doesn't have a set time frame and would be prepared to go into free agency without a coach - but doesn't think that'll be the case.

Figured I'd put the Gillis interview on Team1040 here for people to listen to if they missed it:

http://www.teamradio.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/GM-Mike-Gillis-w-Sekeres.mp3

[stawns]

The more I read up on Eakins the more he sounds like the coach this team needs.

They need a coach that actually talks to his players (not at them), and can motivate them individually, and as a group.

From the sounds of it, AV never really talked to any of his players one on one, and simply preached things like "the system" and "the process". Cliche words that don't have a whole lot of meaning, especially for young players trying to find their place on a team.

Systems and processes are great, but something tells me if that's the only leadership you get from a coach, eventually players are gonna lose interest in what they have to say. A coach needs to be able to talk to his players man to man, find out what makes them tick, create roles for them on the team, understand the dynamic of the group, and not give up on players when they have a few bad games.

Winning is important, but so is looking ahead at what's best for the group. To me this was one of AV's biggest downfalls. He had tunnel vision, and was so focused on his "one game at a time" approach, that he couldn't see problems that may arise in the future. Which I think explained his inability to adapt in a playoff series.

Eakins could bring the fresh approach to coaching that this group needs, and possibly get them playing passionate hockey again. From the ineterest this guy is getting around the league, I think it's only a matter of time before he's hired. I think the Canucks need to jump on him now.

the problem is that approach doesn't usually sit well with a veteran team who probably know, or feel they know, as much or more than the coach that does that.

[Edlerberry]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/john-tortorella-pacing-around-penn-station-screami,32726/

John Tortorella Pacing Around Penn Station Screaming At Total Strangers To Clear Puck Into Neutral Zone

Sports News in Brief • sports • hockey • ISSUE 49•23 • Jun 7, 2013

NEW YORK—According to confused onlookers inside Penn Station, recently fired New York Rangers head coach John Tortorella is currently wandering around the major rail terminal yelling at complete strangers to clear the puck into the neutral zone. “C’mon! Cover the goddamn high slot and clear the zone!” said a disheveled and slightly off-balance Tortorella, who was reportedly screaming at an elderly couple about to board an Amtrak train to Boston. “Wake up and get the forecheck going right now! I don’t want to hear any excuses—just get out there and either crash the net or move the puck out to point and put some ???? shots on net!” At press time, eyewitnesses confirmed that Tortorella was shouting at travelers in the Grand Concourse to gather around him to talk about the team’s “pathetic penalty kill.”

UPDATE: Reports just confirmed that Tortorella is shouting at a New Jersey Transit employee for missing a blatant cross-checking penalty on the boards.

UPDATE: According to sources, Tortorella is now incoherently shrieking about “getting the third line off the ice” while frantically pacing around the Penn Station food court.

[DeNiro]

the problem is that approach doesn't usually sit well with a veteran team who probably know, or feel they know, as much or more than the coach that does that.

Yea, but the approach of yelling at these guys what to do probably works even less.

Like someone else said, look at the effect that Tortorella had with a group of veterans in New York. That team completely tuned him out. The only player that brought it every night was the goalie.

[DarthNinja]

Veteran and 'star' players tune out guys like Torts. Just look at the lack of success he's had with NY.

Ruff is very similar to AV, in fact his coaching record is identical. I think you see more of the same with him. If you read the Buff board, you can see the same comments about Ruff as you do about AV on CDC.

I think the team needs new ideas and a fresher approach. I think Eakins would bring this. I agree with the previous poster that a more 'hands on' approach could have a positive effect on the younger players. It might also be more effective in preparing the team for big games, which seemed to be an issue of late.

Every NHL coach was a rookie at some point. If they have the skill set, they usually rise to the top very quickly.

It depends on your definition of success. NY Rangers were 1st in the East last season and went on to the Conference Finals. Torts is also a Cup-winning coach and while at times his demeanor and comments leave much to be desired, he is extremely fair and treats all players equally based on merit and play.

I think he is a great coach and would be a very good short-term solution, which is probably why he will not be considered...but I think I would dislike the side-show that comes with him. Although as a general fan I look forward to it.

[DarthNinja]

Yea, but the approach of yelling at these guys what to do probably works even less.

Like someone else said, look at the effect that Tortorella had with a group of veterans in New York. That team completely tuned him out. The only player that brought it every night was the goalie.

I think it really needs to be a balance. Lay back when appropriate/warranted and tear into them when appropriate/warranted. Truly great coaches know exactly which buttons to push, along with when and how and they know how it impacts players and the team.