2016-17 Utica Comets Thread

[Stierlitz]

2 minutes ago, stonecoldstevebernier said:

That's a wrap on the Comets' season as they lose 5-2 and fall just short of the playoffs. Not going to linger too much on this game; it was a tough one to watch especially with the way it started, and I spent a lot of time switching over to check the St. John's-Toronto score. Even with the season finishing the way it did, its been a fun ride and I've enjoyed watching more Comets games this year than I ever have before, getting to follow the players every weekend and watch them develop bit by bit.

 

I'll probably make a few more wrap-up posts in the near future on various players and such. Can't wait until training camp and I hope next year holds better things for both the Canucks and the Comets.

Thank you! I really appreciate your comments and game reviews.

[stonecoldstevebernier]

1 minute ago, Stierlitz said:

Thank you! I really appreciate your comments and game reviews.

You're welcome! I appreciate all your contributions too, you find so many things off of Twitter that the rest of us miss. Also I gotta recognize @Beary Sweet for being so consistent with the posts lately.

[mll]

45 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

We're not at it yet.

Only one spot left.

[Beary Sweet]

not the way we wanted the year to end with a 5-2 loss vs the Crunch but the team gave their all and put everything on the line. Shots were 30-25 Crunch. Goldy was a force and continued where he left off from last night, netting a pair of nice goals off breakaways. nice stretch pass by Robak to string Goldy on a breakaway and roofed it home with ease to get the Comets back in it in the 2nd. then Goldy cuts the lead once again off a turnover that Jake created and fed it to the eager Goldy who put a pretty forehand to backhand move home. other than that, the big boys in Archie, Valk and Grenier usually didn't get much going tonight. Archie had a chance on a PP off a Grenier feed in the period but he put it wide and it was a chance he usually buries. Demko basically kept the Comets in playoff contention when Marky went down with a injury for the Canucks and Bachman had to be summoned and it happened to be a opportunity he just ran with and never looked back. he was stellar during a crucial stretch including a 9-0-1 record i believe at one point. McEneny, Subban were solid defensively but didn't provide much offensively that could've helped the team win tonight. the St. John's loss last weekend was a killer for the Comets and losing to the Crunch mid week didn't help them either even though they played a good game for the most part. Demko made 26 saves and kept the Comets in the game once more. maybe if Bachman isn't back next year, he has a good chance of carrying a much heavier workload. Jake got a helper on Goldy's 2nd goal creating a turnover and stringing Goldy all alone from in close and he did the rest. he looked really engaged once more in the final Comets game of the year and made a strong case of why he deserves a shot to be with the Canucks next year. he was battling hard and wanted to win battles to take control of the puck. he had a shot on goal but he took care of business in the other facets of the game such as in his own zone and created a few chances which is all we could ask for along with a strong compete level. it wasn't a good game by all means but lots of positives to take from this past season including the emergence of McEneny, Demko, Subban and in a way Carcone, LaBate, Cassels along with other key staples of the team in Archie, Valk, Grenier. would've been cool to get a look of how MacEwan, MacKenzie would've done but I guess they can make their mark next year in the AHL. hopefully next season is the year both the big club and the farm team bounce back and make the playoffs. 

[Stierlitz]

 

[Sean Monahan]

At what point is a player considered an AHL vet? There's rules concerning how many vets are allowed on a team

right? Sorta similar to the CFL and their rules about Canadians if I'm not mistaken.

[HomeBrew]

5 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

At what point is a player considered an AHL vet? There's rules concerning how many vets are allowed on a team

right? Sorta similar to the CFL and their rules about Canadians if I'm not mistaken.

AHL's Development Rule:

 

"In the AHL, player development is a top priority. The American Hockey League and the Professional Hockey Players’ Association have the following development rule in place:

 

Of the 18 skaters (not counting two goaltenders) that teams may dress for a game, at least 13 must be qualified as “development players.” Of those 13, 12 must have played in 260 or fewer professional games (including AHL, NHL and European elite leagues), and one must have played in 320 or fewer professional games. All calculations for development status are based on regular-season totals as of the start of the season."

 

The team is allowed to have 5 players that you would consider a veteran. A player basically has 4-5 seasons (260 games) to prove themselves as an NHL prospect under development status in the AHL, until they are considered a veteran - ie one of the five allowed on the team. That is why you see a bunch of players take off to the Euro leagues after playing several seasons in the AHL. 

[JamesB]

6 hours ago, DeNiro said:

People still high on the idea of Green as head coach?

 

I'm just not on board with it. He really hasn't done a whole lot at this level. One trip to the finals on the backs of Marsktrom and Baertschi isn't enough for me.

I have a similar opinion. From what Linden and Benning have said it sounds very much to me like they are leaning toward Green and have perhaps already made the decision. But if he gets the job he will have as light a resume as I can recall for an NHL head coach. Willie had a lot more on his resume (including a Calder Cup).

 

Maybe one thing that Benning likes is that Green will play the same kind of defensive style that Willie has been playing (apparently at the request of management). Admittedly, that is the best way for a team with limited talent to keep things close on a nightly basis. But it is not a lot of fun to watch and I am not sure it is the best way to develop young players.

 

The mantra on the Canucks for the past two years has been --play good defence and that is the foundation of good offense. That mantra has resulted in the two lowest scoring seasons in Canuck history.

 

If you force players to become very good defensively before letting them think about offence you run the risk of the Brendan Gaunce problem. He has played well defensively at the the NHL level but this year he had 0 goals and 5 assists in 57 games. You just can't win with numbers like that, even for your 4th liners. 

 

It is important that every player works hard, and you want every guy to be responsible on defence. But you need to let players develop their offensive creativity -- something has not happened much in Utica while Green has been there. 

 

I would prefer a coach who puts a put more emphasis on offense -- maybe like Mark Crawford.

 

I admit it is not clear cut but I am bit worried about just getting more of the same next year.

 

[alfstonker]

11 hours ago, DeNiro said:

People still high on the idea of Green as head coach?

 

I'm just not on board with it. He really hasn't done a whole lot at this level. One trip to the finals on the backs of Marsktrom and Baertschi isn't enough for me.

Says the guy who just days ago, argued his as$ off for Green quoting all kinds of hardships that in reality most AHL coaches have to put up with - certainly WD did at Texas but then he still won the Cup in only his 2nd season. That is what winners do.

 

"Talk to the people who actually live in Utica and ask them about the job Green has done. Otherwise you're just talking out of your as$."

 

Seems like it wasn't me talking out my as$.

[alfstonker]

4 hours ago, JamesB said:

I have a similar opinion. From what Linden and Benning have said it sounds very much to me like they are leaning toward Green and have perhaps already made the decision. But if he gets the job he will have as light a resume as I can recall for an NHL head coach. Willie had a lot more on his resume (including a Calder Cup).

 

Maybe one thing that Benning likes is that Green will play the same kind of defensive style that Willie has been playing (apparently at the request of management). Admittedly, that is the best way for a team with limited talent to keep things close on a nightly basis. But it is not a lot of fun to watch and I am not sure it is the best way to develop young players.

 

The mantra on the Canucks for the past two years has been --play good defence and that is the foundation of good offense. That mantra has resulted in the two lowest scoring seasons in Canuck history.

 

If you force players to become very good defensively before letting them think about offence you run the risk of the Brendan Gaunce problem. He has played well defensively at the the NHL level but this year he had 0 goals and 5 assists in 57 games. You just can't win with numbers like that, even for your 4th liners. 

 

It is important that every player works hard, and you want every guy to be responsible on defence. But you need to let players develop their offensive creativity -- something has not happened much in Utica while Green has been there. 

 

I would prefer a coach who puts a put more emphasis on offense -- maybe like Mark Crawford.

 

I admit it is not clear cut but I am bit worried about just getting more of the same next year.

 

I really don't know what you expected with Ericsson having a slump, the Twins entering their twilight years and little proven goalscoring below them. If Sven Bo and Granlund hadn't boosted their output it would have been a lot worse. Then two of them were injured. We had next to nothing from the blue line.

 

Management were so concerned with scoring they traded Hansen and Burr. Sooner or later our fans must actually step into the real world.

[UticaHockey]

6 hours ago, JamesB said:

I have a similar opinion. From what Linden and Benning have said it sounds very much to me like they are leaning toward Green and have perhaps already made the decision. But if he gets the job he will have as light a resume as I can recall for an NHL head coach. Willie had a lot more on his resume (including a Calder Cup).

 

Maybe one thing that Benning likes is that Green will play the same kind of defensive style that Willie has been playing (apparently at the request of management). Admittedly, that is the best way for a team with limited talent to keep things close on a nightly basis. But it is not a lot of fun to watch and I am not sure it is the best way to develop young players.

 

The mantra on the Canucks for the past two years has been --play good defence and that is the foundation of good offense. That mantra has resulted in the two lowest scoring seasons in Canuck history.

 

If you force players to become very good defensively before letting them think about offence you run the risk of the Brendan Gaunce problem. He has played well defensively at the the NHL level but this year he had 0 goals and 5 assists in 57 games. You just can't win with numbers like that, even for your 4th liners. 

 

It is important that every player works hard, and you want every guy to be responsible on defence. But you need to let players develop their offensive creativity -- something has not happened much in Utica while Green has been there. 

 

I would prefer a coach who puts a put more emphasis on offense -- maybe like Mark Crawford.

 

I admit it is not clear cut but I am bit worried about just getting more of the same next year.

 

When you have the roster that Willie had in Vancouver and Travis had in Utica you really don't have a choice but to play a defensive first style or you will get blown out night after night.  I've never seen an AHL hockey team so inept at completing passes as this year's Comets but somehow they managed to stay in the playoff hunt until the final game of the season.  Watching the skill level of teams like Toronto, Syracuse, Wilkes Barre and Lehigh Valley we didn't even belong on the same ice with them in many games but for the most part held our own.

 

I've stated on here many times for those who were calling for Willie's head and wanted Travis Green brought up that you are essentially getting a younger Willie.  But I never said than Green is a bad coach just as I firmly believe Willie is not a bad coach.  A coach can only do so much with a bad roster and Willie over the past two seasons had a roster with an aging core and no real high end prospects. On top of that the number of injuries has been ridiculous.  Travis has been delt with the same injury issues and a roster lacking in any high skill not to mention no true playmaker center and no true number one dman for the past two years. If either Willie or Travis tried playing a high flying offensive game these teams would have lost the 6 - 3 type games on a nightly basis so they have to win as many 2 - 1 games as possible.  Neither takes the air out of a game like say a Guy Boucher but they have to adjust their coaching to the lack of skill on their team.

 

Brendan Gaunce is Brendan Gaunce and no coach is going to turn him into the a first line scorer. He is a big body power forward that is lacking in puck skills and quickness.  He should be able to score some goals in the NHL unlike he did this year but there is no way he will ever stay in the NHL based on his offense alone.  He needs to be very good defensively or he is right back in the AHL. 

[Boudrias]

Another excellent post.

 

My son played on teams that had excellent individual talents. When his teams met well coached teams they usually lost. Not saying that offensive coaches cannot be successful just that eliminating errors is what hockey is about from PeeWee up. A solid defensive team that can counterpunch is can be as intimidating as an offensive one. 

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Another excellent post.

 

My son played on teams that had excellent individual talents. When his teams met well coached teams they usually lost. Not saying that offensive coaches cannot be successful just that eliminating errors is what hockey is about from PeeWee up. A solid defensive team that can counterpunch is can be as intimidating as an offensive one. 

I agree with this.   Played for a large variety of coaches but only won anything with those that had systems to keep puck out of net first and foremost and ironically those also typically ended up being the ones that scored the most goals too.   Look at best seasons Canuck's have had in their history offensively and you will see their CORSI and other possession stats, as well as shots on goal etc. also in the upper end of their historical averages.   AV was a defence first coach yet his teams always scored - but typically off of the rush and/or from having so many offensive zone face-offs.

[Crabcakes]

So the Comets are done for the season.  Might Benning make a decision on hiring Green soon?

 

Or is it a case of Green being one candidate among several who have to be interviewed?

[stawns]

19 hours ago, JamesB said:

I have a similar opinion. From what Linden and Benning have said it sounds very much to me like they are leaning toward Green and have perhaps already made the decision. But if he gets the job he will have as light a resume as I can recall for an NHL head coach. Willie had a lot more on his resume (including a Calder Cup).

 

Maybe one thing that Benning likes is that Green will play the same kind of defensive style that Willie has been playing (apparently at the request of management). Admittedly, that is the best way for a team with limited talent to keep things close on a nightly basis. But it is not a lot of fun to watch and I am not sure it is the best way to develop young players.

 

The mantra on the Canucks for the past two years has been --play good defence and that is the foundation of good offense. That mantra has resulted in the two lowest scoring seasons in Canuck history.

 

If you force players to become very good defensively before letting them think about offence you run the risk of the Brendan Gaunce problem. He has played well defensively at the the NHL level but this year he had 0 goals and 5 assists in 57 games. You just can't win with numbers like that, even for your 4th liners. 

 

It is important that every player works hard, and you want every guy to be responsible on defence. But you need to let players develop their offensive creativity -- something has not happened much in Utica while Green has been there. 

 

I would prefer a coach who puts a put more emphasis on offense -- maybe like Mark Crawford.

 

I admit it is not clear cut but I am bit worried about just getting more of the same next year.

 

There are no offense first coaches in the NHL, or even pro hockey for that matter.  Every coaches top priority is keeping pucks out of your own bet.

[sockeye]

On 4/16/2017 at 8:18 PM, stawns said:

There are no offense first coaches in the NHL, or even pro hockey for that matter.  Every coaches top priority is keeping pucks out of your own bet.

That's reality.  Defense first if you want to keep your job.  All this talk about up tempo and run and gun hockey might work for a team like Edmonton because they have the players -  Vancouver doesn't.  Not even close.  Maybe in a few years if we can develop some prospects.  If we don't play defense first, we will be challenging for worst team overall for the next few years.  But ... maybe that's what most people want?? but not me.

[UticaHockey]

It sounds like Thatcher Demko wouldn't mind playing for Travis Green someday in Vancouver.

 

 

[elvis15]

On 4/16/2017 at 7:05 PM, Crabcakes said:

So the Comets are done for the season.  Might Benning make a decision on hiring Green soon?

 

Or is it a case of Green being one candidate among several who have to be interviewed?

I would hope so. They're very familiar with Green but wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't see who else could fill the role and if there's a better fit available.

[Crabcakes]

6 minutes ago, elvis15 said:

I would hope so. They're very familiar with Green but wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't see who else could fill the role and if there's a better fit available.

Friedman just suggested that Ralph Krueger is on the list for potential coaches.

 

He is the former Swiss national team coach and coached the Oilers briefly in 2013.  He is presently director of English Premier League Football club, Southhampton.

 

Sounds like a stretch.  Lots of hockey coaching experience mostly in Europe.

[JamesB]

On 4/16/2017 at 8:18 PM, stawns said:

There are no offense first coaches in the NHL, or even pro hockey for that matter.  Every coaches top priority is keeping pucks out of your own bet.

I wasn't going to comment on this but I can't resist. The main point here is about use of language. If we are comparing different possible coaches or different players we need language that allows us to make comparisons. If we insist that "all coaches are defensive" and are not allowed to describe some coaches as "more offensive" in their orientation, it prevents reasonable discussion of coaching differences.

 

In fact, one important difference between coaches is the kind of game they like to play. Some coaches are very defensive, some less so. And that has a big impact on how a team plays. Insisting that every coach is "defensive" prevents us from talking about an important difference between coaches.

 

It is kind like of insisting that every NHL skater is a good skater so we can't compare the skating of different players.

 

Green appears to be a very defensive coach. I said Crawford was a more offensive coach. That is true. Instead of saying "more offensive" we can say "less defensive" if that helps.

 

The substantive point I was raising was how the coaching system affects player development. In particular, I was wondering if very defensive systems hold back the development of offensive skills.

 

And, of course, more offensive hockey is usually more fun to watch.