So can we assume A V wasn't the problem?

[Baggins]

Yeah, that is why I qualified my statement by saying that we (well myself anyways, I suppose some know more than others...) don't know all that much about how a real pro level bench boss does things. All I am saying is that what is being observed now, as compared to then, is strikingly similar. I tend to believe there is a kernel of truth in such things and even though I have no doubt it is much overblown by the media, it is still there to some degree or another.

Personally, I think the main problem is simply that the Kings are a much better hockey club than the Rangers. This isn't much of a surprise to anyone though, and getting all the bounces, like you say, has certainly helped them pull ahead.

The only similarity is losing. The Rangers are losing due to puck luck. They outplayed LA the first two games and the start of the third game. The Rangers are relatively healthy while the Canucks in the finals were beat to crap. What the hell is a coach supposed to "adjust" to make up for six of his top nine forwards out or playing injured and five of his d-men out or playing injured? The only hope we had in those finals was Lou playing like a Vezina winning goalie every game. He did in 3 games and wasn't close in the other 4. I still believe that if we were just relatively healthy in that final we would have won. No amount of coaching can compensate for that number of injuries when the opposing goalie is playing like a Vezina winner in every game.

[alfstonker]

AV surely wasn't the sole reason. if he was last season under torts wouldn't have been as bad as it was. having said that, coaches have shelf lives and AV had come to the end of his. he is a great coach, obviously, but he needed a new room and new faces as much as the canucks need a new face and voice to lead them.

I don't believe "coaches have shelf lives"

A good coach should get better with age, providing he is properly supplied with reinforcements.

That was MG's end and imo he let AV down massively.

It will be interesting to see how Benning / Linden do and then it would be interesting to imagine how well AV might have done with some actual joined up thinking above him instead of a guy who chased a different style every morning he woke up.

In fact he was so busy imo chasing styles he forgot what a fine team (short of 2 or 3 players) he had in front of him.

A man who really did sweat the little things.

[alfstonker]

Yeh life's a bitch when your coach doesn't tell you how to avoid a puck deflecting into the net or when you come up against a goalie who is every bit as good as the best in the league or you get a call so bad it is almost actionable.

Go count the shots on goal.

We are such moaners on here. Ranger's coach is no more responsible for them being 3-0 down than he was responsible for the 2011 defeat. It's so childish to keep making up irrational reasons to fit your agenda.

Of course yet again he is in the final but he gets no credit it seems for getting to the playoffs OR getting to that final. No that is the players or the goalie or just luck.

Rangers should be winning this and we should have beaten Boston. That is the plain truth but it's sport. You improve you add the experience and you come back stronger next year.

That is what the Canucks should have done in 2012 if we had had a GM who wasn't a dithering -----

[Riviera82]

down 3-0 in the cup finals vs missing the playoffs

which one would you take

Missing the playoffs, losing in the SCF, the end result is the same, no cup. Personally I dont want the Canucks to be 4 time cup losers before they even win once.

[Baggins]

Missing the playoffs, losing in the SCF, the end result is the same, no cup. Personally I dont want the Canucks to be 4 time cup losers before they even win once.

I'd wager there's 28 teams would rather be in the Rangers position down 3 - 1 in the finals than where they are now.

[DefCon1]

The only similarity is losing. The Rangers are losing due to puck luck. They outplayed LA the first two games and the start of the third game. The Rangers are relatively healthy while the Canucks in the finals were beat to crap. What the hell is a coach supposed to "adjust" to make up for six of his top nine forwards out or playing injured and five of his d-men out or playing injured? The only hope we had in those finals was Lou playing like a Vezina winning goalie every game. He did in 3 games and wasn't close in the other 4. I still believe that if we were just relatively healthy in that final we would have won. No amount of coaching can compensate for that number of injuries when the opposing goalie is playing like a Vezina winner in every game.

I do believe we would've won against Boston if Hamhuis hadn't got injured and Rome wasn't suspended. When one of your best D-man is out, it obviously weakens the team and I don't care if people see it as some kind of excuse because I do believe we were better than Boston and had the ability to beat them during that time. Too bad the fans and the GM got too impatient and threw it all away because of the loss at the finals. If we kept some of the key players like Ehrhoff, Salo and others, I would think we would've gone into the finals the very next year. MG made a critical mistake of not trying to keep Ehrhoff and it went downhill from there. The Canucks fans also get way too emotional after a loss and want to trade everyone like it makes the team better somehow.

[DefCon1]

Missing the playoffs, losing in the SCF, the end result is the same, no cup. Personally I dont want the Canucks to be 4 time cup losers before they even win once.

You go to SCF for a chance to win but you need everything to go your way. Even Boston, who was the best team in the NHL lost to Montreal this year. To destroy a team and trade everyone due to the SCF loss was the critical mistake, yet you seem to think that is the right way to do it. Missing the playoffs is much different than a SCF loss. The team that goes to the finals could perhaps make it there again if everything is intact. The Canucks lost key players like Ehrhoff yet still managed to win another presidents trophy despite their personnel losses. A team that misses the playoffs like the Oilers, might still miss it for the next 10 years. One team is much superior than the other and one team has a greater chance of winning the cup than the other. I will let you figure that one out for yourself.

[DefCon1]

I'd wager there's 28 teams would rather be in the Rangers position down 3 - 1 in the finals than where they are now.

Its Canucks fans impatience that annoys me. A team going to the SCF is still a great accomplishment win or lose. Obviously all the teams in the NHL compete for the cup but only one team can win it. To win the cup, it requires luck aside from speed, skill, finesse, grit, heart etc. NYR have played great but because of some bad bounces and luck, they are down 3-1. They should've been tied 2-2 or even be up 3-1 instead of being down 3-1.

[alfstonker]

Its Canucks fans impatience that annoys me. A team going to the SCF is still a great accomplishment win or lose. Obviously all the teams in the NHL compete for the cup but only one team can win it. To win the cup, it requires luck aside from speed, skill, finesse, grit, heart etc. NYR have played great but because of some bad bounces and luck, they are down 3-1. They should've been tied 2-2 or even be up 3-1 instead of being down 3-1.

Not only getting to the final but the way we played. I often think our fans have let their disappointment wipe from their memories just how good the Canucks were.

We played a far better style of hockey than the Bruins and yet Gillis ignored the injuries list and decided to emulate the Bruins. Does anyone seriously think that if that Canucks team had stayed fit we would have lost a best of 7 like that.

Gillis forgot that Boston got away with stuff we would never have been allowed to get away with. We know that because we tried it in the following two years and were swamped with penalties.

I'm sorry, I don't like to play scapegoats but I will never forgive Gillis for throwing away 3 golden years this team should have had. 3 years where the Sedins, if they had been given some reinforcements, would have taken us to the Finals again.

He disrespected that team with the players he added and how he upset the chemistry imo

[RUPERTKBD]

I do believe we would've won against Boston if Hamhuis hadn't got injured and Rome wasn't suspended. When one of your best D-man is out, it obviously weakens the team and I don't care if people see it as some kind of excuse because I do believe we were better than Boston and had the ability to beat them during that time. Too bad the fans and the GM got too impatient and threw it all away because of the loss at the finals. If we kept some of the key players like Ehrhoff, Salo and others, I would think we would've gone into the finals the very next year. MG made a critical mistake of not trying to keep Ehrhoff and it went downhill from there. The Canucks fans also get way too emotional after a loss and want to trade everyone like it makes the team better somehow.

The injury to Hammer was a huge loss (and the Rome suspension didn't help) but I think it goes deeper than that.

As someone already pointed out, the 6 of the Canucks top 9 were playing injured, as were Bieksa, Ehrhoff and Edler. Now teams play through injuries all the time, but as we saw, it took Kesler two years to get back into form and Edler has never gotten back to where he was.

The real clincher was the powerplay. People like to lament the fact that the Bruins bullied their way to the Cup, but they didn't do things much differently than teams had been doing to Vancouver all season. The difference was, by the time the finals came along, the Canucks' skilled guys were unable to make the Bruins pay for all the time they were shorthanded.

[Baggins]

The injury to Hammer was a huge loss (and the Rome suspension didn't help) but I think it goes deeper than that.

As someone already pointed out, the 6 of the Canucks top 9 were playing injured, as were Bieksa, Ehrhoff and Edler. Now teams play through injuries all the time, but as we saw, it took Kesler two years to get back into form and Edler has never gotten back to where he was.

The real clincher was the powerplay. People like to lament the fact that the Bruins bullied their way to the Cup, but they didn't do things much differently than teams had been doing to Vancouver all season. The difference was, by the time the finals came along, the Canucks' skilled guys were unable to make the Bruins pay for all the time they were shorthanded.

The tally was:

Henrik back

Samuelsson out

Raymond out

Kesler groin and shoulder

Malhotra eye

Higgins broken foot

Edler broken fingers

Ehrhoff shoulder

Bieksa knee (bruised acl)

Hamhuis out

Rome out

[TimberWolf]

We are such moaners on here. Ranger's coach is no more responsible for them being 3-0 down than he was responsible for the 2011 defeat. It's so childish to keep making up irrational reasons to fit your agenda.

This would carry a bit more weight if you didn't use this thread as a platform to fulfill your own agenda to moan about Gillis.

[Bure010]

Missing the playoffs, losing in the SCF, the end result is the same, no cup. Personally I dont want the Canucks to be 4 time cup losers before they even win once.

so you would have rather missed the playoffs in 2011, got it

[Canada Hockey Place]

In 2011, BOS wanted the Cup more.. After the loss, the fans directed their frustration on their own team. Outside perception was the Canucks dived and whined their way into the finals.

In contrast the '94 run was a team fans considered to have wanted the cup equally or more than the Rangers. And after the loss, the frustration was directed at the opposition and the NHL. Outside perception was the Canucks fought their way into the finals.

The 2 runs will be remembered in different ways. A lot of fans look at 2011 fondly. I don't.

Gillis and Vigneault did what they were hired to do. And in 2011 they delivered. I can't say (in hindsight and only because they lost) that I was proud to support that team. It felt weird the whole run TBH.

[Bure010]

In 2011, BOS wanted the Cup more.. After the loss, the fans directed their frustration on their own team. Outside perception was the Canucks dived and whined their way into the finals.

In contrast the '94 run was a team fans considered to have wanted the cup equally or more than the Rangers. And after the loss, the frustration was directed at the opposition and the NHL. Outside perception was the Canucks fought their way into the finals.

also in 1994 we were the 7th seed and nobody was expecting us to go to the finals, in 2011 everyone was expecting the Canucks to be cup champs before the playoffs even began.

much more of a let down in 2011

[DarthNinja]

The only similarity is losing. The Rangers are losing due to puck luck. They outplayed LA the first two games and the start of the third game. The Rangers are relatively healthy while the Canucks in the finals were beat to crap. What the hell is a coach supposed to "adjust" to make up for six of his top nine forwards out or playing injured and five of his d-men out or playing injured? The only hope we had in those finals was Lou playing like a Vezina winning goalie every game. He did in 3 games and wasn't close in the other 4. I still believe that if we were just relatively healthy in that final we would have won. No amount of coaching can compensate for that number of injuries when the opposing goalie is playing like a Vezina winner in every game.

I don't think a team loses an entire series due to puck-luck. But I also don't buy the notion that AV is the sole issue but I do see issues.

Mainly, repeatedly blowing 2-goal leads and I also saw problems closing team out as well as not being able to come back from behind.

At the same time, it definitely does say something when a coach takes two different teams to the finals within three years.

[Drakrami]

The only similarity is losing. The Rangers are losing due to puck luck. They outplayed LA the first two games and the start of the third game. The Rangers are relatively healthy while the Canucks in the finals were beat to crap. What the hell is a coach supposed to "adjust" to make up for six of his top nine forwards out or playing injured and five of his d-men out or playing injured? The only hope we had in those finals was Lou playing like a Vezina winning goalie every game. He did in 3 games and wasn't close in the other 4. I still believe that if we were just relatively healthy in that final we would have won. No amount of coaching can compensate for that number of injuries when the opposing goalie is playing like a Vezina winner in every game.

by your logic, the rangers should be hoisting the game already.

You have funny logic.

[RUPERTKBD]

by your logic, the rangers should be hoisting the game already.

You have funny logic.

I think you have a misunderstanding of the word "logic". What he's saying is that the series could easily be 2-2, or 3-1 Rangers and it's silly to pin the 3-0 deficit on coaching.

Absolutely logical.

[alfstonker]

This would carry a bit more weight if you didn't use this thread as a platform to fulfill your own agenda to moan about Gillis.

Well it's not really moaning if it's true. It's more like a historical trip through Canuck disasters. But you are right, I shouldn't moan about the man who destroyed our team and used the coach as his last scapegoat. I'll try to restrain myself in future.

[CanAus8]

Watching the LA/NYR series reminds me of how my head used to explode watching the Canucks try to protect a one goal lead under AV, usually unsuccessfully.

As soon as the Rangers get the lead they fall back into a "one man forechecking, 4 men back" system and just let the Kings come at them wave after wave. The Rangers have been outshot 25 - 3 in the third period in the last couple of games. The Canucks under AV did the same thing.

Good teams keep the pressure on once they have a lead.

I still think the Canucks did the right thing letting AV go but did the wrong thing hiring Torts - and allowing Gillis to tie up their cap space with long term contracts.