ice orca Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 It's always there just under the surface in every thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Under Torts, or in spite of him? If Kassian got anything from the coaching staff, it certainly wasn't from Torts. Fixed that for you. Btw, it wasn't until late in the season that Kassian's game improved and I think that had more to do with increased ice time than the coach that didn't show up to practices. Zack had his best season as a Canuck last year and was showing flashes of why we ripped the Sabres off badly in that trade. That was all Gulutzan. Zero Torts. That's why he was the only coach retained. I thought this was common knowledge? I thought so as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhdlois Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Except Kassian flourished under Torts, last year he finally put things together and wasn't a total liability out there defensively like he was with AV I doubt this had anything to do with Torts....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 I doubt this had anything to do with Torts....... ^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Except Kassian flourished under Torts, last year he finally put things together and wasn't a total liability out there defensively like he was with AV That is a myth often repeated here but repetition doesn't make it true. Kassian had 44.2% offensive zone starts with 48.7% finishes againt as relative qoc of +.101 and had a corsi on of -4.01 playing under AV in 2012/13. Last year under Tortorella he had 43.5% offensive zone starts and 46.1% finishes agains a relative qoc of +0.144 and a corsi on of 1.41. Those are very comparable in all respects. Neither AV nor Tortorella sheltered Kassian - they both trusted him against decent quality of competition and in a high percentage of defensive zone starts. The reality is that Kassian is not and has not been a 'liability' defensively - neither his underlying numbers, nor his situational use by either coach indicates that. Kassian has had a relatively steady progression, as is expected with young power forwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Ehrhoff was long gone and the team's window was closing in part because he failed to bring in a reliable offensive d man. It's not about hating Gillis but rather the fact that he had no idea that Hodgson was his 'ace in the hole' to keep the window open. So,no,you don't get it. I have to agree here so here me out In 2012 we were presidents trophy and played LA first round now we traded Cody for Kass witch in the long term i think we win but at the time were defantely in a win now mode it was no time to trade a quickly offensely developeing centre who did great against tough ruged teams. We lost to kings in 5 but all games were close i think we had Cody we would of had enough offense to get by. Because after us the kings breezed by the competiton and i think we would of to. Dont get me wrong i love kass is one of my faves but was a bad timeing trade for him as he was quiet useless at that time of his game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Burrows was under appreciated under Torts. I fully expect WD to know better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 That's an interesting cherry pick Heretic, but trying to make a 3 year decline of it is slanted. .17 (half season) .04 .15 .34 .42 .36 .35 .28 (1/2 season) .10 (1/2 season) How so? Doesn't matter 1/2 season, nor full season, the goals per game is the same measurement. Sorry, I guess it's more of a 4 year decline eh? IE he peaked at 0.42 Like I said before, if a player is "injured" then don't come back until you're healthy - unless you can still put up reasonable numbers and make a difference - else it's better to save cap space and either bring up someone or get a rental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Doctor Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 It's official. Torts is the worst head coach in Canucks history. Pretty bad when Mike Keenan was on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 "unless you can still put up reasonable numbers and make a difference" This should read " put up reasonable numbers OR a difference ". Burrows still made a difference for that team. PK, and team leader still means something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 How so? Doesn't matter 1/2 season, nor full season, the goals per game is the same measurement. Sorry, I guess it's more of a 4 year decline eh? IE he peaked at 0.42 Like I said before, if a player is "injured" then don't come back until you're healthy - unless you can still put up reasonable numbers and make a difference - else it's better to save cap space and either bring up someone or get a rental. If you prefer to call a 26 goal in 72 game season, or a 28 goal season some kind of indication of a "decline", fill your boots. I'm hoping there's a whole lot of that sorta 'decline' on the roster this coming season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Numbers don't lie. He's definitely has been declining. As have the Sedins. As expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Torts is quickly becoming one of the greatest scapegoats in Canucks history. Something about former Rangers signing here. Hyperbole!!!! To me a scapegoat is unfairly labelled. I think Torts' decisions and actions warrant the scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great 8 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 And if he gets injured again this season? Sure it's an excuse but suddenly he's an injury prone player You can say that about EVERY player that gets injured in the NHL. Kesler injury prone, Stammer injury prone, Crosby injury prone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Looks like some people need to take off the Canucks coloured glasses as they have been blinded by the spin. Okay fine, his last 2 years have been abysmal for a top line winger. Better? I will say that I hope he does regain his former scoring touch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Numbers don't lie. He's definitely has been declining. As have the Sedins. As expected. Nobodies denying aging players are aging. What's in dispute is that last year's plummeting off a cliff is indicative of a trend. IMO, it's not. That and Burrows brings far more than "just" goal scoring to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 "unless you can still put up reasonable numbers and make a difference" This should read " put up reasonable numbers OR a difference ". Burrows still made a difference for that team. PK, and team leader still means something. like an over compensated Jeff Cowan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Just recovered from 2 injuries = Torts hey lets throw him in the top 6 with protective wear around his face which does not let him see properly. -7 I wonder how the rest of the team played after Christmas? Injuries are only an excuse when you play bad. Plenty of people return from injuries and do not miss a beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 If he wasn't 100% then he shouldn't have wasted a roster spot/cap space. So drop the injury excuse. Yes, I was averaging his last 3 seasons so he wouldn't look as bad as your picture. His last 176 games played he has averaged 0.26 so yes, that is an accurate figure - not seasonal I agree. The problem wasn't that he was playing injured. The problem is the fact he could never reach the fitness and competitiveness of other players because of that lack of playing/training/practising time. We can all agree that .42 was a career year for Burrows and to expect him to return to that in unfair. Actually a 0.30 GPG is a good expectation for Burrows and pretty much his average over the last 5 years. That equals to 25 goals. If Burrows can reach 25 goals this year, that's pretty good. I'm ok if he reaches 20 goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Nobodies denying aging players are aging. What's in dispute is that last year's plummeting off a cliff is indicative of a trend. IMO, it's not. That and Burrows brings far more than "just" goal scoring to the team.Agreed. Burrows sure isn't done, but will he or the Sedins be worth their current contracts? Mmmmm... My magic eight ball is busted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.