Torts was right.

[nuck nit]

Canucks were 9th best in puck possession. You don't have the puck if you're playing defence.

PP and even strength goals categories tell the story.

[aqua59]

In the end Torts was here for the money, thems the optics to me!

[CanucksSayEh]

I think people expecting all these players to suddenly bounce back with a new coach are in for a rude awakening. These are the same guys that were poor under AV the year before, or were flat out just never that good. Coaching was far from our biggest problem.

[Dogbyte]

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:

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.

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.

Well I bet your version would be longer.

I love reading your posts but I disagree on this one.

It's just personal preference but I would rather be friends with Torts then Gillis. He may be correct in a court of verbal law but he's always hiding or misdirecting something and I don't know why you downgrade Torts because the media eats his shtick up. I'm also not sure why you would think it's the coaches responsibility to release his game plans either. Just so you can pick it apart, I don't know any coach that does that?

The quote you provided is exactly why Gillis is a douche and a bad GM IMO.

"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."

He starts by pretending to take accountability and right away shifts blame on to the changing goalposts. Just an utter cop-out. Well that's how hockey works buddy, sorry you're the GM and you're paid to adapt. It's the immediate shift of blame that bugs me. And then he goes on to list a bunch of other things that went wrong for which he is he is the person in charge. Never once does he say sorry or admit to a mistake though. cough cough douche

[alfstonker]

Torts was a disaster for this team and Gillis's in his last 3 seasons was worse. Torts said so many things covering his ass that he was bound to get something right, in fact it was what he said when he first got here that counted.

It is easy to bitch and blame the team when you have screwed up.

Benning got rid of Kesler because he wanted to go. Garrison wasn't old, neither was Santorelli, Welsh, or Dalpe. We still have (I'd imagine) all the same veterans we had when Tortorella was here. Yes Benning has brought in Bonino and Vey (he also brought in a veteran named Vbrata) but they were the result of the Kesler deal.

Tortorella was a hideous by product of Gillis's meltdown. What we have now is nothing to do with Tortorella's comments it is a GM who has a plan, knows a player and acts decisively.

[grandmaster]

Torts screwed over this team by doing the following:

1) lost his mind in that Calgary game resulting in a long suspension, showing poor control (God knows how he was with his players in the dressing room)

2) failed to take make this team competitive. No playoffs, no offence and no defence. The team turned ugly

3) insulted and embarrassed Lui by throwing in an unproven rookie back up during the Heritage game (that Lui was excited to play in). Way to treat the greatest goalie in Canuck history and one who was begged to come back and promised to be a starter by ownership/management.

[BanTSN]

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).

However, lack of depth and a stale core equates to not being able to have your system, strategy, approach, methodology, etc. being implemented, no matter what it is.

There were several moments last season when upon being scored on, Torts looked as if he was thinking 'I was brought here to win... With this??'

Him being fired was merciful.

The team is in a rebuild phase, so there's that. Change is coming. But in the meantime we can forget about riding the Sedins into the ice and start giving them some more sheltered, high o-zone deployment again, like they've had for their entire careers. But even with that we're going to need to reduce their qualcomp by quite a bit if we want their old offense back. Can Desjardins figure out how to do that with this group? We'll see.

[William_Clarkson]

But even with that we're going to need to reduce their qualcomp by quite a bit if we want their old offense back. Can Desjardins figure out how to do that with this group?

How would you do that? Why would any coach ever give their shutdown pairing a shift against any other line on the Canucks?

[Dogbyte]

However, lack of depth and a stale core equates to not being able to have your system, strategy, approach, methodology, etc. being implemented, no matter what it is.

There were several moments last season when upon being scored on, Torts looked as if he was thinking 'I was brought here to win... With this??'

That's the funniest part, some people think that you can win no matter what, even with a horrible team. If the team sucks and you don't make moves to get better it's over. It's not like drama club where if you try everyone wins.

We sucked and Torts told them what was wrong and they didn't fix it. It's not rocket science. Sure he could have pulled out all the stops and made a closer push but we wouldn't have got Virtanen and the team still sucked balls. I would have been pissed to be brought in to watch a GM air cushioned out of the door while my team faltered and flipped around on the ice like a bunch of wounded orcas.

[Regnecek]

There's been plenty of criticism thrown at Torts before his firing and after the fact, but given the months that have passed, and the moves that the Canucks have made (management and otherwise) show that the organization knows that changes were needed. Kesler being moved is something that not many would have seen coming a season or two ago, but with the Canucks' failures since 2011, it was obvious that a change like that was needed. Kesler may still be a talented player, but it just wasn't working out here any more. It just comes down to the fact that keeping fan favourites and a core from 3 years ago doesn't guarantee another run like 2011. Changes are needed and Torts laid it out there whether people wanted to hear it or not. It rang true. I personally don't think it's about rebuilding but re-vamping what the team has with fresh faces (coaching and players alike). Let's hope this season fairs far better than the last two.

[Sneezy]

There's been plenty of criticism thrown at Torts before his firing and after the fact, but given the months that have passed, and the moves that the Canucks have made (management and otherwise) show that the organization knows that changes were needed. Kesler being moved is something that not many would have seen coming a season or two ago, but with the Canucks' failures since 2011, it was obvious that a change like that was needed. Kesler may still be a talented player, but it just wasn't working out here any more. It just comes down to the fact that keeping fan favourites and a core from 3 years ago doesn't guarantee another run like 2011. Changes are needed and Torts laid it out there whether people wanted to hear it or not. It rang true. I personally don't think it's about rebuilding but re-vamping what the team has with fresh faces (coaching and players alike). Let's hope this season fairs far better than the last two.

Statement is so true...I would even go so far as to say that keeping fan favorites and a core from 3 years ago is a sure-fire way to achieve mediocrity.

It's no secret that we aren't going to win the cup with a core made up of two aging Swedes, a 33 year old Czech who doesn't have too much left in the tank, and an aging French-Canadian agitator who is on a three year slide as our core forwards. We'll be competitive with this core until our prospects are ready for prime time (and a few emerge as the new core), but til then, it's most likely going to be a struggle to get to the playoffs and if in, it'll be one and out.

[nuck nit]

It's no secret that the Canucks are nowhere near a cup contender.

Gillis made multiple decisions that ended the run this team enjoyed that have been hashed out here for years.

Benning is charged with the task of putting the pieces of Gillis' failures back together again.

Torts should have kept his own advice and kept his trap shut.

He has zero credibility after he was exposed here and was flushed out and down the NHL relevant drain.

[viking mama]

In the end Torts was here for the money, thems the optics to me!

Yup! And with no leverage, he probably would have signed on here for 3 years... not 5. Ego-stroking & baiting cost the Aquilinis extra years of throwing good money after...a bad coach. The only positive was the extra few hundred season's tickets generated by the "Tortorella " name in the off-season,...yet everyone knew, sure as hell, that he wasn't gonna last anywhere near 5 years In VAN.

Just another one of Gillis' soul-zapping blunders. He was already a dead-GM walking.. as soon as the puck dropped to start the last season.

[2SKATES1STICK]

Statement is so true...I would even go so far as to say that keeping fan favorites and a core from 3 years ago is a sure-fire way to achieve mediocrity.

It's no secret that we aren't going to win the cup with a core made up of two aging Swedes, a 33 year old Czech who doesn't have too much left in the tank, and an aging French-Canadian agitator who is on a three year slide as our core forwards. We'll be competitive with this core until our prospects are ready for prime time (and a few emerge as the new core), but til then, it's most likely going to be a struggle to get to the playoffs and if in, it'll be one and out.

easy bud

[hockeywoot]

I think people expecting all these players to suddenly bounce back with a new coach are in for a rude awakening. These are the same guys that were poor under AV the year before, or were flat out just never that good. Coaching was far from our biggest problem.

Really? Some production decline is age-related, I'll give you that.However, coaching was a big problem last year.

Unless you think its some massive coincidence that the majority of the team saw a massive dip in production....

Tort's coaching methods are archaic. His system isn't a bad one per se, but ill-fitted for this roster. (and most rosters in the league for that matter)

[Absent Canuck]

I think there are 2 prevailing views, both predicated on how we view the future of the team.

1) Canucks are a good team . Torts came in and ruined the team. He tried to 'Ranger' the Canucks . He played the Sedins too much. He ignored the 4th line . He yelled at Edler too much. Etc etc......

2) He was brought in to win the Cup with the team Gillis gave him. He tried to squeeze blood from a stone. He put the best face on the team and it worked for a while. Injuries, age and lack of talent all converged to collapse the team and they never recovered.

Like most things in life, when you have two prevailing views, they are a combination of them both. In my view its half of both

1) He came in, tried to win a cup with a team not capable of winning a cup. His coaching method to accomplish it worked for a while but in the end made it worse.

He was the wrong coach for the teams personnel.

[thrago]

I think that Torts was brought in to teach the Canucks how to play Playoff hockey and he just didn't have the Horses to do it. IMO if we were in the same division in 2011 as we where in 2014 we would have never made the finals. Playing those California teams all year really took its toll on the Canucks physically. The Sedins are tough as nails but IMO if your team is consistently receiving more physical damage than they are doling out unless you are a far superior skilled team it will catch up to you.

Trying to compete with a bunch of 30 plus year olds just doesn't work. I know now that I'm 40 and I'm sure that anyone in my situation will agree that 25 yr old me would kick that crap out of 30 year old me and 30 yr old me would do the same to 35 yr old me even though I was probably strongest between 27-35 you just can't recover as fast and you lose endurance get hurt more take longer to heal etc.

I think Torts would have been a great coach for us if he had a team that was 5 years younger on average. He simply just had the wrong team.

[Ghostsof1915]

I think that Torts was brought in to teach the Canucks how to play Playoff hockey and he just didn't have the Horses to do it. IMO if we were in the same division in 2011 as we where in 2014 we would have never made the finals. Playing those California teams all year really took its toll on the Canucks physically. The Sedins are tough as nails but IMO if your team is consistently receiving more physical damage than they are doling out unless you are a far superior skilled team it will catch up to you.

Trying to compete with a bunch of 30 plus year olds just doesn't work. I know now that I'm 40 and I'm sure that anyone in my situation will agree that 25 yr old me would kick that crap out of 30 year old me and 30 yr old me would do the same to 35 yr old me even though I was probably strongest between 27-35 you just can't recover as fast and you lose endurance get hurt more take longer to heal etc.

I think Torts would have been a great coach for us if he had a team that was 5 years younger on average. He simply just had the wrong team.

You lose speed, strength and stamina as you age. But the more you maintain it, the less of a drop happens. And it's an individual thing on how it effects you. Selanne was 44 last season and still got 27 points. Alfredsson was 41 and got 49 points. Iginla 37, and 61 points. Chara got 40 points and he's also 37. And of course Jagr, 42 and he got 67 points.

Are you saying you wouldn't want any of those guys on your team? A good coach puts players in a position to use them the best.

Torts didn't do that. He basically overplayed the Sedins and Kesler, at the expense of our 4th line. This also shows he didn't bother to find out what kind of players he had on his team. And he had no faith in certain players. I honestly can't see Gillis is the one that offered the 5 years to Torts. That looks like ownership. The problem is Torts is a seat of the pants type coach, and in today's NHL you can't do that. He reminded me a lot of Keenan, where he overplayed Messier, because he didn't trust the rest of the players.

Had Tort's done some research, held and watched some practices, I'm pretty sure he would have had a better grip on what type of team he had. He just couldn't be bothered. I think he figured he had ownership in his corner and could do what he wanted.

[oldnews]

I don't agree that Tortorella was right, but even if he were, "even a broken clock is right twice a day" - not a bad analogy imo.

[Dogbyte]

You lose speed, strength and stamina as you age. But the more you maintain it, the less of a drop happens. And it's an individual thing on how it effects you. Selanne was 44 last season and still got 27 points. Alfredsson was 41 and got 49 points. Iginla 37, and 61 points. Chara got 40 points and he's also 37. And of course Jagr, 42 and he got 67 points.

Are you saying you wouldn't want any of those guys on your team? A good coach puts players in a position to use them the best.

Torts didn't do that. He basically overplayed the Sedins and Kesler, at the expense of our 4th line. This also shows he didn't bother to find out what kind of players he had on his team. And he had no faith in certain players. I honestly can't see Gillis is the one that offered the 5 years to Torts. That looks like ownership. The problem is Torts is a seat of the pants type coach, and in today's NHL you can't do that. He reminded me a lot of Keenan, where he overplayed Messier, because he didn't trust the rest of the players.

Had Tort's done some research, held and watched some practices, I'm pretty sure he would have had a better grip on what type of team he had. He just couldn't be bothered. I think he figured he had ownership in his corner and could do what he wanted.

He knew what type of players they were. Bad ones, that's why they didn't play.

He just couldn't be bothered? Some of the comments on here are very telling.