73 Percent Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Exactly, and this is why you pick either the Detroit model or the Boston model for style of play AND STICK TO IT instead of trying to change it all after getting to Game 7 of the SCF and losing. What you CANNOT do is have a team the fits the Detroit model and try and make it play to the Boston model or vice-versa. That's just asking for things to go wrong, and I fear it's what MG is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Again, what if the Twins look at him and decide to walk away from the city not wanting to play for a coach that splits them up or constantly benches them for not doing exactly what he wants? They are up for a contract soon, remember how they played under Crow? While younger they still had all that talent but he kept doing silly things like that as well and where did that get him? Will you still be saying it is worth having Torts when players just don't want to sign in Vancouver anymore or out veterans are tuning him out and we are tanking in the standings because of it? How will Jensen Gaunce and the like react to a coach that is so far and away from what they had in Juniors or on the Wolves? How many of you hated the rotating lines looking for chemistry AV did on a nightly basis? Get used to that again. Those of you who are so desperate to get Tortorella as Head Coach haven't seen enough of his work and when you finally do it will be to late because the draft pick we really want is next year in Connor Macdavid, not Sean Day. And yes I really am saying I expect this team to suffer under Torts like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Yea, and the same thing could be said about the Canucks. What seperates the Hawks and the Canucks though is their blistering offense which comes from their attack style game. The Canucks are a team that is built like the Hawks and Wings, yet are trying to play like the Blues and Kings. It's all about employing a style of play that utilizes a teams personnel. AV's style of coaching was not doing that this year or last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 In all fairness to the quite talented players we have here in Canuck-land.... they are not at the same level of the Blackhawks. We arguably have had a bit better depth (particularly on D and in net) but we don't have the same ceiling of raw, pure talent that they have on that roster. As we've seen, that can go either way in a given game against them but... He's recognized we need to play a tough, grinding, defensively responsible and punishing style while retaining enough skill and speed to quickly transition to offense when opportunities arise. That's todays NHL and that's the personnel and style we're moving towards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Well they did have that talent 2 years ago, the stats speak for themselves. But since then the talent level of this team has only deteriorated, and the toughness level has only improved marginally. You're describing having a perfectly balanced team; that's easier said then done. That's not just today's NHL, that's the type of team that has always won in the playoffs. So saying that we have to move towards that just shows that Gillis hasn't recognized the key elements of pretty much every cup winner. Right now this team is closer to being a skilled team than it is to being a big defensive grind it out team. And the more Gillis tries to move towards that, the less skill this team has, and the less likely it is to win. They're basically in the middle, where they're not skilled enough and not tough enough. This team has shown it can make it to the dance with skill, and right now they're closer to being the 2011 Canucks, then they are to being the 2011 or 2013 Bruins. That's why it's time to add more skill to the roster, and give this team some depth scoring. People that think that if we just add some big bruising players, that we'll somehow make it over the hump are naive. Toughness doesn't win in the playoffs contrary to popular belief. Depth scoring and great goaltending wins, and right now we only have one of those (arguably). It's time to shake the demons of 2 years ago and realize that team was good enough to win. Then they can start playing their style of hockey, and not trying to copycat other teams that have won. Constantly trying to chase a different model of how a team is built will never bring this team success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 But besides depth scoring and goaltending, good team defense is also VERY important for the playoffs. Also, since starting in 2011, each year the officiating has increasingly favoured "grind" over offense. You can't ignore either and your line of thinking tells me you think we could simply score our way out of trouble if we aquired the appropriate talent (not a given with the shrinking cap). I don't believe that to be true. I believe we need to need to either acquire through trade or a prospect stepping up, a bonafide 2nd liner AND get tougher to play against. A puck moving D would be helpful too but that's starting to become an unreasonably long wish list given cap/roster realities and a limited talent pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Of course defense is important, but goaltending often steals series more than defense. For the Canucks to win a cup with the D they have, it's going to take Schneider winning the Conn Smythe IMO. You don't have to score your way out of trouble when your goaltender is standing on their head. The last two cup winners relied heavily on goaltending to win, and I don't see that trend changing. Being able to score 3 or 4 goals a game as opposed to the 1 that this team has been scoring, obviously increases their chance of winning. And a huge part of that comes from a strong powerplay. The Canucks need alot of things right now, and like you said, it's gonna have to come from young talent. Which I have no problem with. We really don't know what kind of talent we have in the system until we give them a shot. It's easy to look at other teams young players and say that we don't have that kind of skill. But the reality is, alot of those players were nobodies before they were given a shot. Just look at Torey Krug in Boston. A 22 year old undrafted defenseman that came out of nowhere and is now a huge part of their success. Time to find out who our future young stars are going to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 If we can score, we can win. period. Look objectively at this last year, really the last year and a half since that meaningless regular season win in boston in 12: problem: we can't score. there are no other real problems. did we get roughed up in the SCF a bit? sure, but the real problems was we COULDN'T SCORE. Not that DS took a few punches to the face. WAKE UP about the toughness mumbo jumbo. We just can't score. no 2am pickup at the bar, no great deal on illicit substances, no great feeling at the end of the night. nothing So the coach needs to be an offensive genius of some sort, not a defensively minded AV clone. Defense wins championships, if you can score too. Scoring can win you a championship even if you can't defend. The best defense is a good offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 If we can score, we can win. period. Look objectively at this last year, really the last year and a half since that meaningless regular season win in boston in 12: problem: we can't score. there are no other real problems. did we get roughed up in the SCF a bit? sure, but the real problems was we COULDN'T SCORE. Not that DS took a few punches to the face. WAKE UP about the toughness mumbo jumbo. We just can't score. no 2am pickup at the bar, no great deal on illicit substances, no great feeling at the end of the night. nothing So the coach needs to be an offensive genius of some sort, not a defensively minded AV clone. Defense wins championships, if you can score too. Scoring can win you a championship even if you can't defend. The best defense is a good offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 So we lose 4-2 in 2011 game 7 instead of 4-0...? We need both and good offense starts with good team defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Exactly, and this is why you pick either the Detroit model or the Boston model for style of play AND STICK TO IT instead of trying to change it all after getting to Game 7 of the SCF and losing. What you CANNOT do is have a team the fits the Detroit model and try and make it play to the Boston model or vice-versa. That's just asking for things to go wrong, and I fear it's what MG is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckfanuk Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 please god no no no no no to Torts. Remember what happened last time had a Rangers coach? the ass nearly destroyed the franchise. that alone should be enough never to take anyone from NY again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your New Coach Mr. Tippett Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I vote for not Torts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 how about 4-4 and overtime? we already have good team defense, that hasn't been the problem. just saying the obvious: if we are looking at a new coach, we need one that can focus on fixing the problem this team has: scoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik Kesler Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 I think there's confusion over models. Gillis hasn't modelled us to be a carbon copy of Detroit on the ice, nor is he switching to model that same product after the Bruins after losing. He's adjusting his own model of on-ice play, while modelling our development structure after Detroit's, which has been one of if not the most successful in the NHL over the last decade plus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kassians_fist Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 if Torts comes here atleast he can let MG know that he stinks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 Again, what if the Twins look at him and decide to walk away from the city [....] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Please not Torts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 The way I see it, there is a sliding scale of how successful team is built. At one end, you have the "Detroit Model" which is a team with a plethora of skill and a bit of toughness and grit in the bottom six. At the other end is the "Boston Model" which relies skill players with size and outstanding defense. To me, you have to pick one or the other with a little bit of deviation, but not much. Anything in the middle of these two models is going to lead to utter disappointment as you will be neither skilled enough to outscore your opponent, nor big enough to wear them down. Where the Canucks currently are, is somewhere in the middle, hence the awful hockey that has been played the past year and a half. As for the Detroit model of player development, I agree 100% that that is the way to go, especially if you aren't drafting in the top 10 all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 That's pretty much my thoughts on it. We were weighted more heavily to skill, and appear to be trying to shift to bigger but still with skill to take advantage of a better mix. We just haven't been able to get enough skill out of the bigger lineup so it isn't as effective as we'd like. Hopefully that changes as our youth develops and Gillis finds the right mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.