Torts was right.

[Chalky]

Basically he deserves props because he told the truth in a world and profession of liars when he had a lot to lose by doing it. The biggest thing is that he asked for help from the GM constantly and didn't get it. I don't really like guys that throw the team under the bus but in this extreme example of incompetence it was 100% warranted and the truth needed to be told ... from someone on the inside, and probably the only guy with enough balls and integrity to do it.

How many freaking times did we hear MG blab that he thinks his team was good enough while lying through his teeth? That was the biggest thing this team needed and we owe Torts a deep debt of gratitude. Moving forward the new management group now doesn't have the option to continue lying and sitting on their hands while we fans buck up for their rich lifestyles.

Probably a few too many times. I do recall hearing him say at the end that he knew the team wasn't good enough last season but we were winning early and he didn't want to make changes...or something to that effect.

[BenDrinkin]

I'm sure Torts could do well with a different bunch of players, but kudos to Aquaman for biting the bullet and not keeping him around any longer.

I couldn't understand why he was given a 5 year contract.

[Boudrias]

Well said Deb. I admit Torts obviously shares in the blame but he is one coach and there are 20 players, plus management, plus ownership that made some pretty glaring mistakes in the last couple years. I just find it pretty hard to believe that a multi million/billion dollar corporation went out and hired a guy for one of the most 30 coveted coaching positions on the planet and according to most people on this site hired a guy that was the equivalent of a homeless crack whore on Hastings street. As if the guy knows absolutely nothing about coaching a hockey team. C'mon now.

I also find it hard to believe that 14 years olds and people that have never picked up a hockey stick are heads and tails better and smarter than a guy that coached 900 NHL games and received a 5 year contract last year. I mean that's just ludicrous.

This team was a complete mess when he took over. From a goalie that didn't want to be here, to probably our best commodity not wanting to be here, to the GM screwing himself salary wise, to not getting a needed second liner, to contracts like Edler and NTC's making our team stagnant, and people want to blame all that on the new coach?

I think it's fair to assign some blame to Torts but if you want to look at the problems start with the GM and realize that's where this team went downhill. Now Torts didn't come in and be the hero but he certainly is not the primary point of the problem, that's all I'm trying to say. Trying to pretend this was a championship team with another coach is short-sighted to say the least. Changes needed to be made and Linden made the single biggest one when he relieved MG.

And I agree, I don't know why we always have to assign blame. Only one team wins every year. Sometimes you lose and sometimes you need to take a new approach like we are. Not even to lay all the blame on MG. The GM position has a shelf life and teams need to move in new directions continually. Sometimes people just need to admit to themselves that the entire group was not good enough.

I wonder if Buffalo fans are sitting back with 10 threads all dedicated to how Ted Nolan sucks primal butt and should never coach in the NHL again because he got even less out of his players. He should have adapted obviously like a good coach does instead of doing the same stupid things that don't work. A good coach would have adapted to the type of players he had and went to SCF. See how dumb that sounds?

said Deb. I admit Torts obviously shares in the blame but he is one coach and there are 20 players, plus management, plus ownership that made some pretty glaring mistakes in the last couple years. I just find it pretty hard to believe that a multi million/billion dollar corporation went out and hired a guy for one of the most 30 coveted coaching positions on the planet and according to most people on this site hired a guy that was the equivalent of a homeless crack whore on Hastings street. As if the guy knows absolutely nothing about coaching a hockey team. C'mon now.

I also find it hard to believe that 14 years olds and people that have never picked up a hockey stick are heads and tails better and smarter than a guy that coached 900 NHL games and received a 5 year contract last year. I mean that's just ludicrous.

This team was a complete mess when he took over. From a goalie that didn't want to be here, to probably our best commodity not wanting to be here, to the GM screwing himself salary wise, to not getting a needed second liner, to contracts like Edler and NTC's making our team stagnant, and people want to blame all that on the new coach?

I think it's fair to assign some blame to Torts but if you want to look at the problems start with the GM and realize that's where this team went downhill. Now Torts didn't come in and be the hero but he certainly is not the primary point of the problem, that's all I'm trying to say. Trying to pretend this was a championship team with another coach is short-sighted to say the least. Changes needed to be made and Linden made the single biggest one when he relieved MG.

And I agree, I don't know why we always have to assign blame. Only one team wins every year. Sometimes you lose and sometimes you need to take a new approach like we are. Not even to lay all the blame on MG. The GM position has a shelf life and teams need to move in new directions continually. Sometimes people just need to admit to themselves that the entire group was not good enough.

I wonder if Buffalo fans are sitting back with 10 threads all dedicated to how Ted Nolan sucks primal butt and should never coach in the NHL again because he got even less out of his players. He should have adapted obviously like a good coach does instead of doing the same stupid things that don't work. A good coach would have adapted to the type of players he had and went to SCF. See how dumb that sounds?

Pretty bang on!

If the Canucks bomb this season does this mean Benning/Desjardin become obvious weak sisters? It is

highly that could be the scenario as the roster has many questions about it. Yes, Gillis was not able to acquire what was needed post 2011 to take this group over the top. Is he totally at fault? I don't

know my secret recorder in his office was discovered. I do know that many of the young players I am excited about today are from the Gillis era. I did agree with Gillis's 'It is a process' comment. There only can be one winner and there are no gurantees.

All this aside I am more than happy that Linden is running the club. It surely looks like Benning/Desjardin are good hockey people. Hopefully Benning can convert aging vets into prospects and picks and that

the Canucks can be contenders again. It might take 3-5 years but I have waited for over 40 years already

so I have plenty of practice.

[Zedlee]

Props to Torts for being so honest is his last interview with the Canucks. He knew he was going to get fired. He just decided to be brutally honest.

Props? Being brutally honest is easy when you have a guaranteed contract.

[amitriptyline]

Torts was right about some of the things he said, like the roster being stale etc etc... but I'm glad he's gone. He's not the type of coach for this team. I don't want his defense first style being played here. Not only did it kill the offense, it piled up the bodies on the meat wagon like crazy. The Canucks do need to be a fast paced puck possession team. Also he had some really stupid ideas like using the Sedin's on the PK, and riding the top players to the point of complete exhaustion and not rolling the lines. He doesn't modify his style to fit the team one iota. He just shoves the whole thing into his cookie cutter model. His angry outbursts and yelling didn't help much either.

[D-Money]

Torts was excellent at press conferences. Behind the bench though? ...Not so much.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

I could very easily make another thread titled "Gillis was right" using a point-by-point dissection of MG's comments from his end-of-season interview with Team 1040. But what's the point?

Torts and Gillis were both "right" about a lot of things in their year end pressers. And they both told several "truths."

But ultimately, Torts was just the wrong coach for this group and Gillis had become (pretty much after 2011) the wrong GM for the Vancouver Canucks.

And as far as "honesty" goes, I actually think Gillis, for all his faults, was (and is) a more honest person than Tortorella. Sure Torts said a few things that rang true, but there was a lot of sleight of hand to his "honesty." It was basic evasion and avoidance, and the press ate it up. Everyone celebrated good ol' "Honest" John Tortorella for "calling it like it is."

The funny thing is that Torts was always quick to talk about the things he couldn't control (like the lack of depth and having a "stale" core) but he was never willing to really talk about the things that he did control (like systems, strategy, approach, methodology, etc).

I'm still waiting for that "round table discussion" Torts promised everyone where he was going to actually talk about how he was coaching the team and what his systems really were. Yeah, like that was ever gonna happen...

At least Gillis said this:

"The running of this team is my responsibility and I feel that the last few seasons we have been chasing goal posts that have been moving and got away from our core principles of how I want this team to play and how we want to perform and the tempo we want to play with.

"People want someone to blame but the reality is that as an organization we have deviated from things that have been successful and I know will be successful. We will get back to those levels and that style of play that we started six years ago and we have the personnel to do it."

People might take issue with the last part of the above quote ("we have the personnel..."), but if you look at what Linden and Benning have done, they clearly agree with MG.

"I think everybody is open for evaluation," he said. "We've had players who have severely underperformed. Our team has underperformed. I think that we're all open for evaluation and deserve evaluation and that's what's going to come. We'll go through a thorough evalutation of what occurred this year. We'll go through a thorough plan of where we see we have to go and they'll make a decision about what route they'll choose."

"We had a plan six years to do it and we got as close as we could get. We learned a lot of lessons from that and I'm tired of chasing a moving target. We are going to get back to the fundamentals and the principles that I believe in and that's how we're going to play. Like I said, if people don't want to comply, and we did this six years ago, we made hard choices. Those hard choices are going to come again if we don't see people get on the same page."

None of that stuff makes for the same kind of delicious sound bites that we got from Torts, but inside those comments is a hell of a lot more honesty and accountability (at least when you know how to properly translate "Gillis-speak") than anything we saw from Tortorella during his entire run with Vancouver.

[nuck nit]

The Rangers players were fed up with Torts and had him canned.

Essentially,the same thing happened here only one year later.

NHL players have spoken.

Some confused fans have yet to figure it out.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

Torts: team is stale, youth needs to be infused around the veterans and work up that way.

Jeez, why didn't you keep Horvat and/or Shink for 9 nine games to see what they could do, specially with Burrows out early? Or bring Jensen up earlier and have more confidence/patience with Kassian.

Torts: Eddie played more games than he should have and isn't ready for it.

Yeah, because you played him at the winter classic instead of Lou, he would have finished the year with us at least.

Torts: some of the core/veterans have to go, they've been together for too long.

Maybe if you would have played Jensen, Shink, Horvat, Kassian, Corrado more that would have forced Gllis to replace some veteran

Torts: team lacks depth, why he couldn't role 4 lines on the bench during games.

Lots of injuries and no confidence in young players created that problems, If Kesler and the Sedins could have played in net Torts would have made them.

Torts: couldn't get to Edler.

Try not yelling at him like a freaking moron would've helped.

Horvat too young and Shink needs to beef up a little and learn the more physical parts of the game in Utica so he does not get crushed. Corrado is just barely good enough to make the roster.

Hind sight is always 20-20 but last year was going to happen sooner or later. I am glad it is behind us. The future is bright and there is a ton of work to do. Lets all focus on Willie and his system and see where it leads the team.

[thema]

Well that's partly untrue - if players under that coach are failing to perform he does share the blame in that - afterall, he has the power to decide who plays, etc. How he responds to that (players under performing) is his deal. How he utilizes his roster.

You want to lump this into an easy argument, but it's not.

Not sure why we always look back in order to assign "blame" anyhow...it's pointless and can't be proven with so many cooks in the kitchen. Hindsight is only useful if you learn from it and I believe the team tries to take away what they can from failures and successes.

I think Torts was a smart, passionate hockey man (still do). I believe when you come into a situation and are counted on as "the answer" you're set up for a hero/zero situation and that's what's happening here.

A good team that fell short started to flounder and it's a combination of things. Some of Tort's decisions were questionable and backfired (shot blocking, not playing Lu in the HC, losing it)...doesn't mean he was a complete failure.

I believe it was the right thing to move away from him as it seemingly didn't work. But he definitely wasn't "right" on everything - any coach would love a checklist of things that could/should be changed but it isn't always possible...you're given the roster you have and it's your responsibility to do what you can with it.

I don't think Torts said anything that wasn't already known...it's how to work around it that's at question here and he wasn't too successful in that. So, holds some of the blame. Our core is aging and we need to infuse some youth in but that's too easy to deflect to. Edmonton did that and it's a combination of things that make a team click (some that can be controlled, some just luck and timing). Momentum and confidence are huge elements and when those start to go south it can unravel. Of course, you have to have players capable of turning things around but it's such a complex thing and people want to dumb it down to this or that. So many things come into play. You have age and speed (or lack thereof) - but, experience can offset that to some degree with positioning, etc. You have injury and rust. You have confidence. You have some who are unhappy/want to move - that becomes a distraction.

Don't faint or anything but... I agree with you 100%!

I'm sick of reading posts by people who think he was responsible for everything, even the rash of injuries we had. He's a good coach, just not the right one for this team at this time.

[nuck nit]

...I agree with you 100%!

I'm sick of reading posts by people who think he was responsible for everything, even the rash of injuries we had.

He's a good coach....

Let's hear from arguably the best coach in Canucks history with his views on the dearly departed:

Why did the Canucks perform so badly this year?

Thoughts on divvying up playing time:

“During the first part of the year, (the Canucks) played (their) veterans until their noses were bleeding, and then we started to hit the injuries. I talked to (team doctor) Mike Bernstein and he said the injuries are terrible. He said so many of them are coming from the blocked shots and they’re fractures, and they’re not easily healed.”

On using everyone on the bench (including fourth liners):

“I think you don’t leave half your bench. I wanted all of our bench to play. I wanted everyone to be involved.”

“I knew that Mats (Sundin) was at the top of his game if he played about 20 minutes… I think that’s the same with these players here. There comes a point where your play will drop off, whether it’s in the third period or whether you coast a little bit so you reserve energy in the third period, you’re not at the maximum you can bring each night… That’s why I knew in ’94 we were going to beat Toronto, because they wore Gilmore out. He could hardly play against us in the semi finals.”

“The players want to play. They love being out there. I know when I used to play I wanted to be out there every shift… I like the way Detroit approaches it, Chicago approaches it, Boston approaches it – everybody gets used. The better players get to play more, but everybody gets used.”

His thoughts on bringing in Tortorella to coach the team in the first place:

“I know this: you don’t get confidence sitting on the bench and watching the play go on or getting two minutes of play, or being sent out because it gets rough out there. I don’t buy that style of coaching, and yet it exists.”

“To assess your team like you need a hammer – now we need the tough guy – well it’s like bringing Mike Keenan in… to pull the whip out and play the tough guy with them didn’t seem the right way to approach this group of players.”

Conclusion: Linden basically said if Tortorella doesn’t admit to and agree he made huge mistakes, he’s gone, while Quinn compared him to Mike Keenan and disagrees with everything he’s ever done…

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/04/canucks-post-game-sixpack-quinn-linden/

[hockeyville88]

Torts has the right ideas about what this team needed. Mainly it was because he was not part of the Stanley Cup finals run in 2011 so he wasn't hung up on it like the rest of management was.

I just think that his outbursts and off-ice persona, coupled with the fact that he had no relationship with his players and staff made him too hard to keep around.

[Peaches]

Yep pretty mutch

Worst coach ever. Glad is gone what a awful season with a awful coaching style

Hope the damage was not fore ever

[Ghostsof1915]

Let's hear from arguably the best coach in Canucks history with his views on the dearly departed:

Why did the Canucks perform so badly this year?

Thoughts on divvying up playing time:

“During the first part of the year, (the Canucks) played (their) veterans until their noses were bleeding, and then we started to hit the injuries. I talked to (team doctor) Mike Bernstein and he said the injuries are terrible. He said so many of them are coming from the blocked shots and they’re fractures, and they’re not easily healed.”

On using everyone on the bench (including fourth liners):

“I think you don’t leave half your bench. I wanted all of our bench to play. I wanted everyone to be involved.”

“I knew that Mats (Sundin) was at the top of his game if he played about 20 minutes… I think that’s the same with these players here. There comes a point where your play will drop off, whether it’s in the third period or whether you coast a little bit so you reserve energy in the third period, you’re not at the maximum you can bring each night… That’s why I knew in ’94 we were going to beat Toronto, because they wore Gilmore out. He could hardly play against us in the semi finals.”

“The players want to play. They love being out there. I know when I used to play I wanted to be out there every shift… I like the way Detroit approaches it, Chicago approaches it, Boston approaches it – everybody gets used. The better players get to play more, but everybody gets used.”

His thoughts on bringing in Tortorella to coach the team in the first place:

“I know this: you don’t get confidence sitting on the bench and watching the play go on or getting two minutes of play, or being sent out because it gets rough out there. I don’t buy that style of coaching, and yet it exists.”

“To assess your team like you need a hammer – now we need the tough guy – well it’s like bringing Mike Keenan in… to pull the whip out and play the tough guy with them didn’t seem the right way to approach this group of players.”

Conclusion: Linden basically said if Tortorella doesn’t admit to and agree he made huge mistakes, he’s gone, while Quinn compared him to Mike Keenan and disagrees with everything he’s ever done…

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/04/canucks-post-game-sixpack-quinn-linden/

This is why I love Pat Quinn as a coach. As a GM, well drafting was definitely not his strong suit.

[Hockey Fever]

Players have immunity and never have to pay the price for under performing, they just go to a different team or go overseas and make even more money. The coach on the other hand always pays the price and may never coach again. It's always been unfair but so is the world. Look at the twins, they rarely rise to the occasion when push comes to shove (cough *Boston*). But they keep getting top dollar because they have great regular seasons. The staff and fans keep believing if they can get that messiah to play with them then the cup is assured. I wouldn't be too sure ? Don't get me wrong, i like the guys, their great role models but i just don't think they have the cojones ? I hope i'm wrong.

[hearditall]

Torts was a ??? (had a stanley cup ring) try but Willie D. will be the right fit.

We are in much better hands now. Regardless of every one's opinions Gillis is not equal to Linden,Benning,TC Carling & John Weisbrod put together. (never mind 1vs1).

Linden & Benning are very much respected in the NHL world compared to what Mr.Gillis was.

MG definitely said & wanted to do the right things but was not able to achieve those goals.

With the new management in place I have no doubt we'll get to what The Canucks have always wanted.(Mr. Stanley)(eventually)

The Canucks had lost a lot of respect amongst their peers in this league in the past few years for whatever reasons... MG had to go & with a very well respected Linden as Prez & another well respected GM & (top notch SCOUT) Mr. J.Benning as the back bone we are solid & ready to move forward. (like MG somewhat tried & wanted to do but was not successful in doing)...

Once J.Virtanen, J.McCann, Demkos, Horvats, start to contribute look out. Oh yah we still have Hunter, Gaunce, Fox, Tryamkin, Corrado, Jensen, etc. Plus the deep 2015 draft. Hope we move a few(1-3) more vets for some nice draft picks in 2015...

[Honky Cat]

Torts has the right ideas about what this team needed. Mainly it was because he was not part of the Stanley Cup finals run in 2011 so he wasn't hung up on it like the rest of management was.

I just think that his outbursts and off-ice persona, coupled with the fact that he had no relationship with his players and staff made him too hard to keep around.

Torts had the right ideas about what this team needed how..?...Please elaborate..

[William_Clarkson]

Torts had the right ideas about what this team needed how..?...Please elaborate..

It's fairly obvious. He said the team needed youth, the core is stale, and the team needs better depth. All three of those statements are obvious.

[Ray_Cathode]

Remember the end of the year presser Tortorella did? Yea, it was a gloomy situation for everyone considering how the season ended but John never put an act on. He went ino that presser as an honest man and spoke the truth. Didn't care about what he was putting on the line (his job), but he said what most fans wanted to hear from a a managerial point of view and when it was all said and done with him being fired, the last words he left us with gave hope and really, JB has just continued on from where Torts left off.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=W58cRP9kvD4

Torts: team is stale, youth needs to be infused around the veterans and work up that way.

Benning: brings in Linden Vey and Luca Sbisa. Has numerously said he'll make room on the roster for a youngster if he proves he belongs there.

Torts: Eddie played more games than he should have and isn't ready for it.

Benning: here's Miller, he's a proven starter and will help Lack until he's ready to become a starter.

Torts: some of the core/veterans have to go, they've been together for too long.

Benning: bye bye Garrison. Kesler doesn't want to play here any longer? See ya later as well. Booth? Yea, you no longer fit the needs of the team. Here's a buy out, we can't wait any longer, sayonara.

Torts: team lacks depth, why he couldn't role 4 lines on the bench during games.

Benning: here's Vrbata, Dorsett, Vey, Bonino. Oh, don't forget about the prospects that will be pushing for roster spots too. Will be no shortage of competition and players fighting for spots will want to be there giving it there all on every shift.

Torts: couldn't get to Edler.

Benning: welcome to Vancouver Desjardins. Desjardins: I ask players what parts of the game they excel at, parts that they don't. Using that as a basis, I will play certain players in certain situations where they will succeed and will not force them to do anything to far stretched outside of their limitations and comfort zone.

Thanks Torts...it's funny how things play out.

I'm trying to think if there is anything I can agree with here.

Well, Tortorella had the chance to keep some youth right at the beginning of the year - he could have kept Horvat, Shinkaruk, Jensen, Corrado, Archibald and Grenier - so that's a non-starter, he can't use that excuse.

Eddie played more games than he should have - well whose fault is that? He had Luongo and alienated him in the outdoor game - forced that trade. Then he could have played Markstrom or called up Eriksson, but he didn't - so whose fault is that?

The veterans have been together too long - so mix 'em up and bring in the youngsters - but he didn't do that.

Couldn't roll four lines - didn't roll four lines - whose fault is that?

Couldn't get to Edler? He had defense that other coaches had no problem with - the problem was he couldn't teach defense, or he couldn't adapt to the kind of defense he had. The is a defense built to join the rush and to have one forward supporting high in the offensive zone. Eighty percent of the time in the attacking zone, Torturella had three forwards behind the opposition's net, so that the defense was constantly isolated and the gap between O and D were almost always too wide. Teams in the west attack as units, and Torturella couldn't adapt.

Reports are that he was way to anxious to get home to Point Roberts each day, so the team hardly ever practiced. In summary, the guy is a right-off.

On the other hand, the team played so badly for him that we managed to get the GM fired and the Canucks's got two first rounders - again. I guess that's about the end of the good things I have to say about Torturella. Oh yeah, he did manage to get our talented players injured blocking shots - so I guess that's anther great benefit of having Torturella here.

[mpt]

Torts was right about some of the things he said, like the roster being stale etc etc... but I'm glad he's gone. He's not the type of coach for this team. I don't want his defense first style being played here. Not only did it kill the offense, it piled up the bodies on the meat wagon like crazy. The Canucks do need to be a fast paced puck possession team. Also he had some really stupid ideas like using the Sedin's on the PK, and riding the top players to the point of complete exhaustion and not rolling the lines. He doesn't modify his style to fit the team one iota. He just shoves the whole thing into his cookie cutter model. His angry outbursts and yelling didn't help much either.

Keep believing what the media tells you to believe. People who think we just played defence are full of it. Canucks were 9th best in puck possession. You don't have the puck if you're playing defence.