EmployeeoftheMonth Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Enjoy your first round exits do you? Oh thank god I thought it was just the political threads in off topic where you made incredibly stupid and baseless comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I agree. If gillis is serious about making the Canucks a winning team again and hit the reset button, he should start by getting rid of the leader of the ol' boys club in Bieksa. That would send a clear message to the players that failing is no longer accepted and that no one player is bigger than the team. Hate to inform you, this team has proved to be a wiinning team and yes, this year was a bit of a bust but you don't get rid of a fairly reliable "winning" formula and risk something that falls short. I love this...people did this after Bieksa's injuries and while everyone was screaming to trade him, I went out and got his jersey. People flip flopped pretty quickly back then (too). Go play Big Yellow Taxi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bite me Burr Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I bet the new coach will make the Sedins go through Chara to score in game 7. Maybe he will even make them stop being punched in the face and stick up for themselves? He will probably even trade Luongo and Ballard and... I bet his centers arent AHL smurfs in checking roles. I look forward to this new, relaxed coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 the new coach will trade luongo book it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Much of what you say is correct but...KB's comments could also be the warning signs of a power struggle to come. The amount of freedom to rung "the room" these players have had is almost unprecedented and it failed miserably. Something has to change and while it was time for AV to move on, much of the blame for the team's failures falls directly on the core leaders and their inability to hold each other accountable for poor effort and bad habits. There's a reason new CEOs often make changes to senior personnel when they take on a new position. People who have had freedom, prestige influence and authority do not easily surrender it to someone else. Teams who's underperformance has lead to a coaching change and a turn around (Montreal, LA, Toronto etc) have all had success because they bought into the new coaches approach. That BK is already resisting change should be cause for concern. As a fan, I view KB's comments as whining. Maybe not in tone, but in content. The basic purpose of an NHL team is to win the Stanley Cup. Obviously it is not an attainable goal for each team, each year. However, with a team of skilled players like the Canucks have it has become obvious that a wall has been reached as far as successes under the current system. Had a Cup been won against Boston we would not be having this discussion, but that is a moot point as there was no Cup victory. The fact that he feels emboldened or entitled enough to comment upon who will lead the team from behind the bench IS part of the problem. Not necessarily Bieksa as a player, but his attitude. The team may need an overhaul of the dressing room culture. I stress may because I am not in the room. I am unaware of the dynamics behind closed doors. What it appears to be is something overridden with comfort. The last time we, as fans, saw the hold ourselves accountable approach work was after the players only meeting that saw Burrows snap a horrific losing streak. That is the last public memory I have of it. We are only able to speculate on the overall effectiveness of AVs approach to coaching this team, myself included. What we are presented with is the last 2 playoff exits being difficult to watch as barely any hockey was played by our team. Outcoached? Outperformed? Something else? Either way you look at it, the playoffs were unsuccessful. That much can be agreed upon. It is important to note that the specific question asked of Bieksa was whether a crack the whip coach was needed or not. If someone asked me if I would like my employers to become way more hardass than they currently are, I would definitely say no. That is obviously what many employees would say of their employers. The thing is, I don't view hockey players as employees as others might. The are highly paid professionals competing in the best league in the world. Occasionally there will be some cracking of the whip required. I am in no way a military person, but I look at a hockey club as a form of military brigade, and in no way should a team ever be leading his commanding officer. AV's laid back approach has not worked flawlessly. Gillis could have fired himself, but really, who would do that? He has convinced ownership that he has a plan and has been given a chance to enact it. I rather like what Gillis has done to improve this franchise off the ice. His on ice provisions are not up for debate in this thread, but I hope the new coach can adjust the mentality and performance of the current group. The players can, and should, continue holding themselves accountable. My wish is that the new coach holds them accountable first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Is anyone really surprised that country club Kevin is concerned that he might have to actually earn his ice time and role on the team with a coach who does not believe it is up to him and the Sedins to make decisions about that? Bieksa is a HUGE part of the problem here and should be the first to go imo. What's going to happen when next season Bieksa is still playing top 4 minutes under another coach? Bieksa is a huge part of the success this team has had. First to go should and will be Ballard but if we're talking about guys who have clear roles on the team Edler should be the first to go. Calm and cool Bieksa will still be playing top 4 minutes on this team next year. The reason is because he has value on the ice. He gets into situations that make him look bad but that's a part of hockey. If guys didn't take risks (and I'm ready for the calculated risks argument that is to come :D ) we'd miss the playoffs because we'd have very little scoring from the back end. He's not the best D in the league, hell he's not the best D on the team but to say he's a huge part of the problem is false. You just don't care for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Fair enough..and hard to argue the point. But I still firmly believe that no amount of leadership or accountability will ever make the Sedins effective playoff performers. You could put Scotty Bowman behind the bench with Babcock and Robinson assisting and the result would be the same....broken cycle vanishing act. If this core stays same it won't make a bit of difference how accountable the players hold themselves to be...no goals is still no goals. The right coach can probably get more out of the Sedins though. The issue with them is not their desire to get better as players or their hockey intelligence. Both are off the charts by all accounts. Maybe they are just stale The cycle game can still be very effective but the key for them I think will be how effective they can mix in some other trick People here keep using the buzzphrase "held accountable" like it's clear in definition and applicability Held accountable for what? Bieksa is not to blame for the team's regular collapses, and he cannot be held accountable for the treatment of Ballard, because it's not him doing the treatment. So, what exactly are you saying? Bench Kevin Bieksa when he gets caught on a pinch or in the wrong zone, even though that's what the Canucks coaching staff ASKS of him? It is not a fool-proof strategy. Is Bieksa to be held accountable for Ballard's treatment? The whole team looked rotten this year, should they all have been benched? Are you going to bench a gritty right handed defenseman on a team that totally lacks both grit and a right handed shot? I am very glad you aren't the coach, your emotions dictate objectivity far too much Again, statistically Bieksa is not the problem. His playoff numbers are not good, but they are not bad. Compared to the rest of the team they ARE good. Saying "Bieksa is looking out for himself" and saying that he is "whining" is YOUR editorial and it's YOUR interpretation, it has absolutely nothing to do with his on-ice play or even his personality The team needs changes, I am the first to agree with that. I'm by no means in Deb territory where I think the team does no wrong, but I do think removing a few weak pieces (a goalie, ballard, and a forward), bringing in a new coach and one or two supplement players would instantly put this team in the elite category again Bieksa is not held accountable FOR HIS OWN POOR PLAY. Even you seem to suggest his poor play was demanded by coaches....WTF? A bad pinch should never be the requirement for a benching. That should apply to Ballard as well though but does not. When a player like Bieksa plays like crap for a string of games though and does not lose a single second of ice time even though a guy like Ballard is outplaying him, there is a sense of entitlement that will eventually create issues. When that player is a leader it makes things even worse. He is also not held accountable - as a supposed leader on this team - for the fact that this team looks unmotivated and unprepared to go to the wall for their leadership - like you see on the best teams. If you think Ballard, a goalie, and a forward are the weak links on this team there is nothing I can say to help you actually understand just how much of sports is mental. And by the way, there are a lot of great coaches who can manage a team without a right handed dman. That is a huge weakness and proof of AV's inability to adjust based on his personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I disagree with Juice, I think the team needs a kick in the butt sometimes. That being said, tons of Bieksa hate on this thread... I'll defend Juice. Sure he didn't have a great season, but he's the guy who plays against the team's top players night in and night out and he's one of the true leaders on this team. And he's MEAN--a trait most Canucks don't have. This guy is pissed all the time and isn't afraid to be a bit dirty when clearing the crease. I'm glad he's on our team. He can improve on his turnovers and such, but overall, he's a great defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Hate to inform you, this team has proved to be a wiinning team and yes, this year was a bit of a bust but you don't get rid of a fairly reliable "winning" formula and risk something that falls short. I love this...people did this after Bieksa's injuries and while everyone was screaming to trade him, I went out and got his jersey. People flip flopped pretty quickly back then (too). Go play Big Yellow Taxi. Come on deb, I hate to inform you, but I don't remember celebrating a Stanley Cup win recently. I wish I had. The last 2 years are evidence of a moderately successful formula. What good is a Presidents trophy without accompanying it with the Big Tamale? It was time for a change. And I am a Bieksa fan, I just don't like his comments here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bite me Burr Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Turn over machine Kevin should be gone. We all like his character, but he is a liability on the ice. His tough game, played at 200lbs, isn't enough to scare anybody and his D is known as sloppy. To deny this is to have contempt for thought. I think his statement is taken out of context as far as what professional hockey players in their primes need from the coaching staff by some of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 What's going to happen when next season Bieksa is still playing top 4 minutes under another coach? Bieksa is a huge part of the success this team has had. First to go should and will be Ballard but if we're talking about guys who have clear roles on the team Edler should be the first to go. Calm and cool Bieksa will still be playing top 4 minutes on this team next year. The reason is because he has value on the ice. He gets into situations that make him look bad but that's a part of hockey. If guys didn't take risks (and I'm ready for the calculated risks argument that is to come :D ) we'd miss the playoffs because we'd have very little scoring from the back end. He's not the best D in the league, hell he's not the best D on the team but to say he's a huge part of the problem is false. You just don't care for him. I never said anything about him not still being here. His NTC ensures that. He does have value on the ice but also needs to be held accountable when he plays like crap or mails it in, which happened far too often this season and especially in the playoffs the last two years. I HATE country club atmospheres on ANY sports team and no matter how much you talk and say the right things, the fact is that culture eventually shows through. It is not ONLY Bieksa. It is the culture of the team as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I agree with you that a aggressive coach that is gonna crack the whip on this team might not sit well with the older players. But that is exactly what this team needs, the canucks core including coaching staff got to comfortable with their jobs. It showed on the ice. The team needs to be less comfortable and more accountable for their mistakes and lack of effort. If Bieksa and others don't like it then like any other job they to need to go, really who is Bieksa saying what kind of coach he prefers, in no way has Bieksa accomplished anything in his career that would give him that right. If we were to trade him to another team and their coach was aggressive and held him accountable, would he cry? no, he would have to adjust or simply not play. It seems to me Bieksa is afraid that he and others will have to do some hard work, their cushy jobs could get put into jeperdy, but that's what happens in life. You had the freedom to motivate yourselves and it clearly didn't work. If you don't like the new coach and buy into his system GTFO. "Too comfortable on the ice" is one way of looking at it. My thinking is that the aftershock of the poorest officiating in history settled in and it's a transitional thing as they've had to adjust (and I feel they are/have). When you play your hearts out but have a concrete wall dropped in your path impeding further progress, it's a setback. They then tried to "behave" and it got them nowhere, so I believe they've resorted to a push back frame of mind, that leaves out the verbal and focuses more on a physical. It has been more of a state of limbo while they try to sort this mess of a league out in order to respond to it on the ice. How do you perform on the job if you give it your all but it isn't recognized, appreciated or rewarded? If some slickster who's friends with the boss has an advantage and gets the perks as a result of that relationship? Has an edge on you that gives an advantage? It's pretty obvious that you'd lose incentive and motivation and I believe that happened here...that they gave up for a period moreso than were comfortable with things I don't care/whine about the refs anymore because it's clearly a matter of it is what it is. And I think the team's caught in trying to contort to an everchanging set of rules....it's taken a toll and they've paid a price trying to figure out what the hell direction this league is traveling in. Instead of just being able to play the game, they've had this monkey on their backs. I can't blame anyone in that (even AV), except a bogus league (the real ol' boys club) that is slowing sucking the honesty and integrity out of it. Bieksa pulls no punches We need that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpcurtly Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I bet the new coach will make the Sedins go through Chara to score in game 7. Maybe he will even make them stop being punched in the face and stick up for themselves? He will probably even trade Luongo and Ballard and... I bet his centers arent AHL smurfs in checking roles. I look forward to this new, relaxed coach. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Tippett please. As Ferraro pointed out the other day on 1040, in his opinion, he is head and shoulders above the other coaches. Year after year he somehow make a terrible Coyotes team competitive. Many think he is too defensive but like Ferraro pointed out, what is he supposed to do with the Coyotes and Stars roster. He also said Babcock was considered very defensive before the Wings but once he got the right soldiers he was able to be more offensive. 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). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Bieksa is not held accountable FOR HIS OWN POOR PLAY. Even you seem to suggest his poor play was demanded by coaches....WTF? A bad pinch should never be the requirement for a benching. That should apply to Ballard as well though but does not. When a player like Bieksa plays like crap for a string of games though and does not lose a single second of ice time even though a guy like Ballard is outplaying him, there is a sense of entitlement that will eventually create issues. When that player is a leader it makes things even worse. He is also not held accountable - as a supposed leader on this team - for the fact that this team looks unmotivated and unprepared to go to the wall for their leadership - like you see on the best teams. If you think Ballard, a goalie, and a forward are the weak links on this team there is nothing I can say to help you actually understand just how much of sports is mental. And by the way, there are a lot of great coaches who can manage a team without a right handed dman. That is a huge weakness and proof of AV's inability to adjust based on his personnel. i didn't say his poor play was demanded by the coaches, i said the positions he put himself into were a byproduct of the role he is meant to play. as EotM said, Bieksa makes mistakes which sometimes look dramatic because the team takes chances. sometimes they pay off, sometimes they don't. lmao @ ballard outplaying bieksa. are you out of your mind? ballard had a string of good games at the start of the year, but he got progressively worse as the season went on. some of the mistakes he made towards the end of the year made me cringe and feel embarrassed for defending him for the last two years. he needs to go. again, check the statistics. bieksa was a very solid player this year, and in recent years. he was particularly solid in 5 on 5 situations. imagine that? a player on the canucks who doesn't pad his stats on the powerplay? the defencemen cannot be held accountable for the shortcomings and lack of scoring and adaptability of the top 6. those who failed time and time again to score goals when it most mattered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bite me Burr Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 with a team of skilled players like the Canucks have it has become obvious that a wall has been reached as far as successes under the current system. Had a Cup been won against Boston we would not be having this discussion, but that is a moot point as there was no Cup victory. The coach didnt get run out of the rink in that series... the country club did, this includes KB. This was not coaching. That was such an ace-kicking. Would a crack of the whip by a coach made the Canucks play like men in that series or the next against LA, another physically dominant team? Haha, no. So, KB is right to say these things. This is a roster issue. Gillis is responsible for the roster, he should be taking ALL the blame at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Bieksa is the first "core" player I would move .. vastly over-rated unless Hammy or someone carries his mail .. and when all else fails, perhaps a "drill" type approach can help shake the malaise .. move Bieksa to Ottawa for Gryba and a second .. I completely agree. I'm more comfortable with Tanev in the top 4 anyways. He could bring back a nice return so we should move him now while he has good value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bite me Burr Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 What's going to happen when next season Bieksa is still playing top 4 minutes under another coach? Bieksa is a huge part of the success this team has had. First to go should and will be Ballard but if we're talking about guys who have clear roles on the team Edler should be the first to go. Calm and cool Bieksa will still be playing top 4 minutes on this team next year. The reason is because he has value on the ice. He gets into situations that make him look bad but that's a part of hockey. If guys didn't take risks (and I'm ready for the calculated risks argument that is to come :D ) we'd miss the playoffs because we'd have very little scoring from the back end. He's not the best D in the league, hell he's not the best D on the team but to say he's a huge part of the problem is false. You just don't care for him. I agree, to an extent, but KB's success is also a result of AV's system. He might not look so good in Nashville, say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I completely agree. I'm more comfortable with Tanev in the top 4 anyways. He could bring back a nice return so we should move him now while he has good value. Replace an apple with an orange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I agree, to an extent, but KB's success is also a result of AV's system. He might not look so good in Nashville, say. irrelevant speculation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.