Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Ferraro: Canucks must let kids play through their mistakes...


Honky Cat

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In order to be competitive teams need to develop players. You can do that in the ahl and (yes this is shocking) also in the NHL. 

When you develop players at the Nhl they will make some mistakes and it can cost you some games. But that doesn't mean a coach should be afraid to play them. A coach has to teach a player to learn from their mistakes so that eventually they make less. Having them sit and watching isn't teaching.  Having them scared to make a mistake because the will sit doesn't make them better. 

 

typically cup teams can afford to develop players in the ahl. They can win without those players and let them dominated the ahl before making the jump. But cup contending teams also can't afford too many young players making mistaking. cup contending teams #1 focus is to win and win now. 

 

Since rebuilding teams can't keep up with the skilled cup contending teams they can afford to develop players at the NHL level and get them a head start on Nhl experience. rebuilding teams main focus is to win in the future. Developing players to help them tomorrow is more of a focus. You can stay competitive and rebuild. You just have to be ok with the mistakes a young team might make. Mistake that may cost you games.

 

 

Contending teams and rebuilding teams have different goals. Contending teams success is based on team records and how far they made it in the post season. Rebuilding teams goal is based on how much progress young players made. 

 

With that said. What type of team are the Canucks?  

So at the end of the year will we look back and say we accomplished our goal? 

 

Which model should we follow. 

 

we didn't make playoffs but at least dorsett, skille and burrows tried hard.  

Or 

we didn't make playoffs but jake, Hutton, bo and Sven have sure made good strides at becoming consistent impact players.   

 

When i listened to this interview a different angle that I never really thought of before kinda popped into my head. 

 

What if WD's struggles are more with handling experienced NHL players? Being that he is relatively new to the NHL and never played in the NHL he could feel inferior or intimidated by veteran players. He doesn't want to step on their toes by giving more ice time to younger players. He seems  worship NHL experience. It's a go to rebuttal when the media questions his deployment of young players. 

 

It's like he feels he still has control over the rookies which is why they seem to be the only players who pay for their mistakes. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest problem is how they're holding back the young defenders.

Why are we playing Sbisa and Larsen instead of tryamkin, pedan and stetcher?

This is obviously not going to be a great year for the canucks so let the young D prove what they've got and like Ferraro says play through mistakes.

 

Edler-Tavev

Hutton-Guddy

Tryamkin-Stetcher

Biega-Pedan

 

Keep Biega for the expansion draft and see if we can sell Sbisa and Larsen for some low picks. 

See what these young guys can do and then if all goes well trade one of Edler or Tanev at the deadline. Play Markstrom majority of games now and trade miller at the deadline for a first overall pick. I would also trade Hansen while his value is high and that prevents are logjam of RW moving forward (Eriksson,Rodin,virtanen,Dorsett, and potentially Boeser next year.) Then potentially have a good young core group of players next year along with a few veterans mixed in. Hopefully get a top 6 player from trading Hansen, Edler, Tanev or Miller.

 

Next year

Sedins-Eriksson

_____-Horvat-Boeser

Baertschi-Sutter-Rodin/Virtanen

Granlund-Gaunce-Labate

(run 4 line almost equally)

 

Juolevi-Tavev

Hutton-Guddy

Tryamkin-Stetcher

Subban-Pedan

Let the young D play and improve.

 

Markstrom

Garteig (with him already 25, throw him in and see what he can do as a backup)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

My biggest problem is how they're holding back the young defenders.

Why are we playing Sbisa and Larsen instead of tryamkin, pedan and stetcher?

This is obviously not going to be a great year for the canucks so let the young D prove what they've got and like Ferraro says play through mistakes.

 

Edler-Tavev

Hutton-Guddy

Tryamkin-Stetcher

Biega-Pedan

 

Keep Biega for the expansion draft and see if we can sell Sbisa and Larsen for some low picks. 

See what these young guys can do and then if all goes well trade one of Edler or Tanev at the deadline. Play Markstrom majority of games now and trade miller at the deadline for a first overall pick. I would also trade Hansen while his value is high and that prevents are logjam of RW moving forward (Eriksson,Rodin,virtanen,Dorsett, and potentially Boeser next year.) Then potentially have a good young core group of players next year along with a few veterans mixed in. Hopefully get a top 6 player from trading Hansen, Edler, Tanev or Miller.

 

Next year

Sedins-Eriksson

_____-Horvat-Boeser

Baertschi-Sutter-Rodin/Virtanen

Granlund-Gaunce-Labate

(run 4 line almost equally)

 

Juolevi-Tavev

Hutton-Guddy

Tryamkin-Stetcher

Subban-Pedan

Let the young D play and improve.

 

Markstrom

Garteig (with him already 25, throw him in and see what he can do as a backup)

 

 

 

I agree with most of this...but Pedan should stay down until there is a trade on D. or a long term injury, Juolevi may need easing in to the lineup....maybe by the end of next year on the first pairing.

Miller won't get us high 2nd let alone a 1st rounder unless he is carrying us to a possible playoff spot...in which case management wouldn't trade him until the summer, although they should sell high for a change....

Hansen isn't that old and is the best of the rest so...

 

My line up:

 

Sedin's / Eriisson

Rodin / Horvart / Boeser

Baertschi / Sutter / Virtanen

Granlund / Gaunce / Hansen

Dorsett / ?     (carry 14 forwards again)

 

Tryamkin / Tanev

Hutton / Gudbransen

Juolevi / Stecher

Pedan  (Biega gone to Vegas or AHL, we carry 7 D. again)

 

Juolevi and Stecher get PP time together and limited minutes 5 on 5...by keeping them together they should meld quicker and by season's end they will be a force on the PP anyway!

WD would never do this though....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When a 400 goal scorer is saying something I think you should listen.

Everybody has their own opinions on what the canucks should do. Personally I think Ray made some points that hopefully management considers.

 

We already know what we have in our verts, they are a bunch of overaged guys who should be playing 2nd line minutes right now if it wasnt for our decade long draft problems. Our vets time to win a cup is over so long as they remain 1st line guys, which is more than likely so long as they remain in vancouver.

 

We need to play the young kids more to at least see what we have, and what we can build with going forward. Its time to start searching for and finding out who can be a part of a future cup contender here in Vancouver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

 

I agree with most of this...but Pedan should stay down until there is a trade on D. or a long term injury, Juolevi may need easing in to the lineup....maybe by the end of next year on the first pairing.

Miller won't get us high 2nd let alone a 1st rounder unless he is carrying us to a possible playoff spot...in which case management wouldn't trade him until the summer, although they should sell high for a change....

Hansen isn't that old and is the best of the rest so...

 

My line up:

 

Sedin's / Eriisson

Rodin / Horvart / Boeser

Baertschi / Sutter / Virtanen

Granlund / Gaunce / Hansen

Dorsett / ?     (carry 14 forwards again)

 

Tryamkin / Tanev

Hutton / Gudbransen

Juolevi / Stecher

Pedan  (Biega gone to Vegas or AHL, we carry 7 D. again)

 

Juolevi and Stecher get PP time together and limited minutes 5 on 5...by keeping them together they should meld quicker and by season's end they will be a force on the PP anyway!

WD would never do this though....

 

 

I think Millers worth a first. Besides the W/L column(which is due to team not scoring) Miller has put up starter numbers. He'd make a great backup/starter and if you trade him at the deadline his value could be sky high. Also keep in mind this years draft isn't as good. Also don't see why we would hold onto hansen when his values so high, his caps nice for a contender and he doesn't fit in with our next core group

Reason I put Juolevi with tanev is to shelter him a little bit with a veteran. I don't think of them as a top pair but instead as 3 good pairings in

Juolevi-Tanev

Hutton-Guddy

Stetcher-Tryamkin

 

I think a pairing of Stetcher and Juolevi is just to young and small. Be great for the PP but not a pair to play consistently together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

After almost 18 years of playing in the NHL,I'm sure he has a pretty good idea of good and bad coaches...

Exactly.  So many posters here (Baggins, Old News) constantly putting forward their thoughts on what the team should do yet react almost violently when someone with significant experience and success at the NHL level dares to express an opinion that is different.

Ray has lived what the Nucks dressing room/organization is going through.  He is known to be totally unbiased and will praise or criticize any and all teams based on his experience.  He also doesn't give a crap whether fans, owners, management etc. like or agree with his opinions. All of that makes me respect his opinions more than most analysts.

 

I personally think he makes a number of good points.  Overall, I think the Nucks are a confused organization at least and quite likely a mis-directed one.  If Benning and Linden are in total control, I would not be surprised to see ownership make changes at the top.  If ownership is driving the bus and forcing management to pursue the unachievable playoff revenue, then WD is likely toast first.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

Great post. 

I think at this point, the fans are ok with losses if it means hope for the future. We're ok with JV missing an assignment of it means he'll lay a guy out with a monster hit or snipe a goal. 

The latter option is much more exciting than watching a team that is clearly not good enough ride their old guys in hopes of making the playoffs which is apparent to everyone else as impossible. 

If they were, tickets would still be being bought.

The keyboard warriors who don't go to the games are fine with the rebuild, but the season ticket holders/buyers obviously aren't. It's pretty well known that Canuck fans are bandwagoners and will not support a losing team. This was evident in the dark ages when the franchise was almost lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said:

If they were, tickets would still be being bought.

The keyboard warriors who don't go to the games are fine with the rebuild, but the season ticket holders/buyers obviously aren't. It's pretty well known that Canuck fans are bandwagoners and will not support a losing team. This was evident in the dark ages when the franchise was almost lost.

If this is the case, which do you think Is more likely...

a - fans will buy tickets and support losses by an aging group of slow vets playing boring, trap hockey in a failed attempt yo make the playoffs and get bounced?

or

b -losses by a group of  young, fast players, supported by a few vets, playing an up-pace style and developing NHL level skills?

 

Right now, the team is neither effective or entertaining.  At least with the kids and a more up-pace game, they might at least provide some excitement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/ferraro-canucks-must-let-kids-play-through-mistakes-1.606278

 

Ray Ferraro gives some insight as to what the Canucks should be doing with their younger players..A lot of good points here...

 

 

What teams has he coached?

Does he even look at the minutes Stecher, Tryamkin etc are playing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

 

If this is the case, which do you think Is more likely...

a - fans will buy tickets and support losses by an aging group of slow vets playing boring, trap hockey in a failed attempt yo make the playoffs and get bounced?

or

b -losses by a group of  young, fast players, supported by a few vets, playing an up-pace style and developing NHL level skills?

 

Right now, the team is neither effective or entertaining.  At least with the kids and a more up-pace game, they might at least provide some excitement.


The kids are playing, and thats the problem. This season hinged on the young players doing well offensively, to support the Sedins, and it hasn't happened.

People are clamouring for the young kids to get more ice time when they aren't even doing much with the ice they are getting. The team is failing because the young players aren't scoring; they aren't taking the next step. The Canucks need more scoring, and it has to come from Bo, Sven, Virt, Eriksson Rodin* etc... Not just the twins. 

The aging guys are still doing whats expected of them. Dorsett is grinding and fighting, Burrows grinding, and penalty killing (yes they are expensive but they are living up to their current low expectations). Who would fill their cap space anyways? The Sedins are the only ones really generating offense right now, which makes it easy for the team to get shut down. Shut down the Sedins, win the game. 

My point is, all these young kids you are begging to get ice time, need to stop being minuses on the score board, and start scoring. It's a do league, not a try league, and the young guns are doing it.

Sincerly, 
             A Horvat/Baertschi fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

After almost 18 years of playing in the NHL,I'm sure he has a pretty good idea of good and bad coaches...

 

Ferraro was no Gretzky. Greatest player of all time. How'd he do at coaching? Being a player does not mean knowlegeable coach. Ferraro has never coached and hasn't played in almost 15 years. Don't think he's in a position to tell an actual coach how to do his job. More likely it's his players perspective - put me in coach - than his knowledge of coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said:


The kids are playing, and thats the problem. This season hinged on the young players doing well offensively, to support the Sedins, and it hasn't happened.

People are clamouring for the young kids to get more ice time when they aren't even doing much with the ice they are getting. The team is failing because the young players aren't scoring; they aren't taking the next step. The Canucks need more scoring, and it has to come from Bo, Sven, Virt, Eriksson Rodin* etc... Not just the twins. 

The aging guys are still doing whats expected of them. Dorsett is grinding and fighting, Burrows grinding, and penalty killing (yes they are expensive but they are living up to their current low expectations). Who would fill their cap space anyways? The Sedins are the only ones really generating offense right now, which makes it easy for the team to get shut down. Shut down the Sedins, win the game. 

My point is, all these young kids you are begging to get ice time, need to stop being minuses on the score board, and start scoring. It's a do league, not a try league, and the young guns are doing it.

Sincerly, 
             A Horvat/Baertschi fan.

The kids are expected to struggle as they find their way.  I see the problem with the team as much due to vets failing as the kids. 

Eriksson = total fail

Edler - no offence

Sedins - significant decline

Burrows - basically an offensive black hole

Sutter - hasn't delivered offence since game 2.

 

If the vets aren't producing, may as well as play kids that aren't producing and build for tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

 

If this is the case, which do you think Is more likely...

a - fans will buy tickets and support losses by an aging group of slow vets playing boring, trap hockey in a failed attempt yo make the playoffs and get bounced?

or

b -losses by a group of  young, fast players, supported by a few vets, playing an up-pace style and developing NHL level skills?

 

Right now, the team is neither effective or entertaining.  At least with the kids and a more up-pace game, they might at least provide some excitement.

 

Here winning is what matters most to fans. Bure with Mogilny couldn't keep butts in seats when losing. So which is the answer....

 

a - losing 2-1 with veterans

b - losing 6-2 with kids

c - neither, Fans here don't like paying to see a losing team

 

The answer is c.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

Ferraro was no Gretzky. Greatest player of all time. How'd he do at coaching? Being a player does not mean knowlegeable coach. Ferraro has never coached and hasn't played in almost 15 years. Don't think he's in a position to tell an actual coach how to do his job. More likely it's his players perspective - put me in coach - than his knowledge of coaching.


And lot's of great coaches were mediocre hockey players. So there's that, maybe Ferraro could be a good coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

The kids are expected to struggle as they find their way.  I see the problem with the team as much due to vets failing as the kids. 

Eriksson = total fail

Edler - no offence

Sedins - significant decline

Burrows - basically an offensive black hole

Sutter - hasn't delivered offence since game 2.

 

If the vets aren't producing, may as well as play kids that aren't producing and build for tomorrow.


The difference is, the vets, Sutter etc... Have all proved they belong in the NHL and have been there done that. All those player you listed are great 2 way players, and do more than shoot the puck. Maybe less so Hank, but he's not one dimensional.

Why play the kids, when the kids aren't doing anything different offensively than the vets, and the vets are better defensively. 

You sound like a parent who expects their kids to get a medal for coming last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 5Fivehole0 said:


And lot's of great coaches were mediocre hockey players. So there's that, maybe Ferraro could be a good coach.

 

You set the bar high when an 898 point player with 1258 NHL games is a mediocre career. Anybody "could be" a good coach but there's only one way to prove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...