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

1 minute 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.

It is an ex players point of view,nothing more......He is no coach,but he certainly knows about players..what makes them tick..or what stultifies them..

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.

 

He's not coach material if he complains about Tryamkin and Stecher not getting enough minutes Tryamkin is averaging 16mins and Stecher 20mins. Is there any rookies anywhere drafted as low as these two (Stecher wasn't even drafted) playing D who are getting more? Stecher has 6? games in the NHL.

 

The guy is an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Honky Cat said:

It is an ex players point of view,nothing more......He is no coach,but he certainly knows about players..what makes them tick..or what stultifies them..

 

That's why I said he's more likely giving a players perspective than a coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

 

What teams has he coached?

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

Stetcher and Tram are playing big minutes because they show that they belong.  Jake just skates around doing F all. No speed, no emotion no fire...... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stelar said:

Stetcher and Tram are playing big minutes because they show that they belong.  Jake just skates around doing F all. No speed, no emotion no fire...... 

 Exactly. However you missed the point, Ferraro mentioned these two by name proving he was talking out his ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, LaBamba said:

 

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. 

 

Willie has said this multiple times, the leadership group is very strong and very knowledgeable and self aware.  They know what is going on and Willie doesn't need to go out and explain a lot of things to them.  They are self regulating and motivating and deal with all the small things themselves.  He gives guidance strategy wise such as playing 1-2-2 against the Wings.  But going out and giving a "win one for the Gipper" type speech before the game would be a waste of time with this group.  They would think it was odd and go out and play their game anyways.

 

A good coach knows how to treat players.  Everybody is different.  Some need a lot of guidance, some want a lot.  Others don't need any.  And others are somewhere in between.  This was one thing that people used to criticize Viegnault about.  He let the leadership group on this team lead.  He was hands off because it worked for this group.  Willie takes a hands off approach because this leadership group is essentially the Sedin twins and a few others (Hansen and Burrows).   

 

There is certainly a transition for younger players who are used to the Sgt Major authoritarian approach.  Or the lead dog approach that some coaches like Torts still employ.  There is a bit of getting used to the dynamic in the room when players are grown men who are masters of their craft and tell the young guys what they need to do in various situations.  When you have a situation like this, the team is much stronger than if there is just one person (the coach) doing all and telling all.  Willie trusts his leadership group.  Being a good coach and leader is recognizing when to lay off and let the group do their thing.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

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.

It's still losing.  Are you suggesting the current path is going to fill seats? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cripplereh said:

yes but is paid by a place in the east and follows them more

 

has he coached in the west or GMed in the west,if no then he has no clue really and speculates

regardless of where his paycheque comes from, he is one of the most unbiased analysts out there. 

How many of the posters on here have coached or played in the west (NHL).  I would guess zero but they seem to think they all have more insight and knowledge that a proven NHLer.  I find it quite funny that so many think that just because he isn't currently from the west that his years of experience amount to nothing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, cripplereh said:

yes but is paid by a place in the east and follows them more

 

has he coached in the west or GMed in the west,if no then he has no clue really and speculates

Have you coached or GMed in the west? 

Ferrero knows his stuff and it's not like he's the only one saying this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5Fivehole0 said:


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.

and you sound like a fan who like watching responsible vets lose 10 of 11 games. 

 

Playing the kids is about developing tomorrow's team.  By playing, I mean putting them in positions where they actually have a chance to take over form the vets.  Sending Bo out to defend in his own zone and shut down other team's scoring lines while expecting him to challenge the twins for top line duties is ridiculous.  The twins say they will give up their role once someone takes it from them.  THe playing field is so tilted in their favour it would take McDavid with Crosby to unseat them. 

 

The "proven" vets you speak of will not take this franchise to the cup and will not be around when this team is ready to compete again.  Play and develop the kids while the vets are there to support them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

and you sound like a fan who like watching responsible vets lose 10 of 11 games. 

 

Playing the kids is about developing tomorrow's team.  By playing, I mean putting them in positions where they actually have a chance to take over form the vets.  Sending Bo out to defend in his own zone and shut down other team's scoring lines while expecting him to challenge the twins for top line duties is ridiculous.  The twins say they will give up their role once someone takes it from them.  THe playing field is so tilted in their favour it would take McDavid with Crosby to unseat them. 

 

The "proven" vets you speak of will not take this franchise to the cup and will not be around when this team is ready to compete again.  Play and develop the kids while the vets are there to support them. 


And what? Endure what Toronto/Buffalo/Edmonton have endured? No cups and a decade of mediocrity.

All the teams that tanked and got a cup in the modern era.

__________
__________
__________

Can't forget

__________

You can say Chicago and LA, but I don't really remember them "letting the young guns take all the vets minutes", and even then, that's two of how many teams.

Teams that haven't won a cup and are still unable to win a cup within the past 20+ years.

New Jersey
Carolina 
St. Louis
Nashville
Florida(Who have literally done nothing but tank and "let the young kids play" for decades.
Columbus
Minnesota
Vancouver
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Washington
Calgary
San Jose
Colorado
Dallas
Detroit is only 1 year out 
Buffalo is AGAIN rebuilding after their times to shine with Hasek and Miller.


How many of those teams have been bottom feeders for a few years only to reach mediocrity again? Detroit is an exception as they have always been mediocre with some decent play-off runs.

Tanking doesn't always work if you force the idea that losing is okay and that ice time isn't earned. Then you have a team like Edmonton who finally is getting the idea that losing isn't acceptable. 
 

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...