Willie D needs to pipe down.

[Salmonberries]

4 minutes ago, 5nothincanucksohno said:

I didn't take the comments as negative so I guess that is where we disagree. I simply felt WD was saying Tryamkin can be a difference maker and outlined what he needs to do to make that happen (it's really a compliment).

 

Also, given how hard the team seems to play for WD, I don't think negativity is an issue. From all accounts WD is a strong communicator and teacher...part of being a good teacher is telling the truth...even if it hurts a little.

I don't know this for a fact but I get the impression this Tryamkin thing is just some muck the local media has stirred up to keep the heat on Willie. It sure smacks of their handywork to me anyway.

[TheOgRook]

4 hours ago, Salmonberries said:

Just imagine being in Willie's position for a minute. Here he is an expert in his field with literally decades of experience at every level and he has to stand and be questioned about his work on camera by know nothings every day. People who are quite literally not qualified to do their own jobs, many of whom who have spent the past year or two trying to create public opinion and pressure to have you fired from your job, the dream job you waited for until late in your career even though you have exceeded all reasonable expectations.  And then dealing with it over and over again day after day and not once losing your $&!#. I can't begin to contemplate that kind of frustration.

Wish I had more pluses ;( Thoughful post, that some on here would be better off if they actually read it, and let soak in.  

[Bruce Boudreau]

On 17/03/2017 at 8:31 PM, hatedkid666 said:

Willie should pipe me down 

[darkpoet]

3 hours ago, 5nothincanucksohno said:

 

It's a fair point but I think the point WD was trying to make is that Tryamkin can be a difference maker. 

 

 

You're not the only one trying to make that point, and I agree to some extent. 

Having said that, you're talking about a guy who last year didn't speak a lick of English and then spent the following months learning a new language, adjusting to a new culture, and at the same time doing everything he could to become physically capable of playing in the best league in the world. 

All at the age of 21.

Taking all of that into consideration can anyone honestly say calling the guy out publicly a few months later is going to light a fire under him? Really?

Maybe WD's head was in the right place but like I said yesterday, how it came off and the optics of it were terrible... and that's not an opinion, that's a fact. 

Mama used to say "if you don't have anything good to say, stfu"

and that goes for everyone 



 

[BoDangles53]

7 hours ago, StealthNuck said:

I understand what you're saying but I'm not sure 27th instead of 30th can ever really be considered over-achieving. 

Your comment doesn't exhibit much knowledge of the game, are you just learning about hockey? curious - I agree with the person you replied to!

 

I see you have alot of posts but often those still learning the game don't think holistically, about nuances, about bigger issues (ie a player is only good if he gets points type view). Overly simplistic views and lacking critical analysis - just curious how long have you followed hockey?

[alfstonker]

On 3/18/2017 at 4:22 AM, hearditall said:

U guys all sound like the type that would call social services on your own parents for a spanking even though U definitely deserved it 110%......

 

Tryamkins a BIG, Strong Russian BOY, I'm sure he can handle it.  

LMAO. 6'8"  265lbs. & coach asks him to step it up now another level  which he did & learned a lot from BUT U guys find a way to make it out that WD is now pulling out the BELT & beating them... U DON"T LIKE IT, STOP answering For the players. the kids seem fine cause I haven't heard of any complaining Besides one that clearly needed what WD said he did. (hello JV).

 

WD has developed Tryamkin himself. 1st asking him to pick up his fitness level. Which he's done but still needs some work. Now he asks the BIG BOY to step it up a little more physically, Which he did & does need to do yet U see that Tryamkin is going backwards? WD has rewarded Him & Stecher with plenty of ice time as well so they can properly develop...

 

Did he not step it up against Dallas with one of his Better Games...I think Benn remembers Tryamkin stepping up...

Have U guys forgotten already that JB & WD talk on a daily basis about the players???

Maybe JB wants to see if Tryamkin has it in him to be a more physical player on more of a regular basis & this is his way to see if Tryamkin is willing to step up. What's wrong with that? That's a GM's & Coaches job of assessing his players & learning as much as he can about them...I believe they got the answer they were looking for...

 

So settle down drama queens, this is not a soap opera like U all like, This is REAL & this is what The NHL is about. Players stepping it up whenever a coach asks. Those are the ones that U keep.  

Looks like Tryamkins a keeper...

Exactly, all the usual suspects who love to stick the knife into the coach getting wet over the fact Willie asks Tryamkin to get more physically involved with players who are hurting us.

 

Jeez the hypocrisy on here is palpable. 

We have a massive thread devoted to a handbags at 50 paces "scrap" with Benn and yet these same "fans" are unhappy with the coach for suggesting that Try do it more consistently. Unbelievable.

 

Do we even know the coach was ACTUALLY talking about the fight or could it be the way Try actually bullied Benn with the big hit and made him react? 

 

These forums are historically filled with people on here pleading for Canucks players to step up and then when our coach mentions the one guy who has every attribute required to take that action do it more consistently he is slaughtered on here.

 

Some of you people are media dupes, hand picked to suck this crap up and spew it out on here often it appears, without even realising it.

 

What gets me is there is no "Band of Brothers " attitude between the coach the team and the fans because half the fans are fifth columnists who don't even realise they are stooges for a perfidious Vancouver media. All the while WD is building this close knit competitive group of young exciting players, these people are working just as hard to destroy it - and for what, another throw of the dice that could set this team's development back 3 years or more.

 

If Willie was half as bad a coach and a man manager as these media jackals constantly try to infer, he would have lost the room months ago - instead we get a performance like we saw against Edmonton last night.

 

I will agree on one thing though. WD should not have said we would have won the Boston game - no one knows if that would have happened. But then we have a whole pack of posters constantly using their crystal balls and faulty hindsight in order to attack the coach so maybe Willie is only human.

[alfstonker]

3 hours ago, darkpoet said:

You're not the only one trying to make that point, and I agree to some extent. 

Having said that, you're talking about a guy who last year didn't speak a lick of English and then spent the following months learning a new language, adjusting to a new culture, and at the same time doing everything he could to become physically capable of playing in the best league in the world. 

All at the age of 21.

Taking all of that into consideration can anyone honestly say calling the guy out publicly a few months later is going to light a fire under him? Really?

Maybe WD's head was in the right place but like I said yesterday, how it came off and the optics of it were terrible... and that's not an opinion, that's a fact. 

Mama used to say "if you don't have anything good to say, stfu"

and that goes for everyone 



 

What word am I looking for here? Is it "irony" or maybe "hypocrisy" 

[alfstonker]

14 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

i watched the game. it does feel and look like the team has given up on its coach. further confirms probably the end of Willie's time in Vancouver. he's a nice guy. just not a great coach. and his player deployment and use has been very odd. his obsession with megna and using him in top six roles where other players could be used there has been suspect. it just already feels like the coach has run out of time here in this city. weird since he hasn't been here for a long time. but a part of it i feel is his own doing as well. 

You watched that game and saw that?

Bud you need to find another sport. When even the commentator sees it and commends the way the team is coached and you come up with dross like that, seriously, maybe this game is not for you.

I hear there are openings on some of the local sports papers, go for it, you are definitely over qualified.

[alfstonker]

10 hours ago, SilentSam said:

You could be considered an obsessive watcher yourself,  your using players and situations which are not relevant to defend him.

I think the majority here are critical of Desjardins record, his deployment of players,  utilization of prospects, and rational/ reasoning in his interviews for the past 3 of 4 seasons.

Not camparing him to anyone here...  the shoe fits.

Yes but they can never back it up with any logical "in context" argument because they haven't a clue about what the coach sees in practice, most of them don't have any appreciation of intangibles and quite frankly their application of double standards qualifies most for some kind of "Oscar" By that I mean they get a victim and then sit and watch for whatever mistake they might make. You can apply that to any player most nights on any team.

 

It's similar to what referees got accused of doing with Alex Burrows.

[alfstonker]

8 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Jamie McLennan

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/mclennan-canucks-will-be-in-the-grey-area-in-the-west#t=4:20

When you actually listen he makes his prediction of 8-12 in the conference based on the usual output by the Sedins, and a healthy team. We haven't had any of that and in fact have used 37 players.

 

He also would not have known we would have been without Gudy and Dorsett for virtually all of the season or that Loui had such miserable output.

So where does all that really leave is 8-12 prediction? Way off the mark I'd say.  I realise that once more this was a post meant to reflect on Desjardin's performance but once more it doesn't bear scrutiny.

 

I'm not going to look at what qualifications the others have used as I would think they were also unaware how much we would have been affected by poor vet performance and injuries - again. 

 

Maybe the USA Today people were more aware of the drop in vet performance and our injury curse but didn't count on Willie's ability to get so much out of this rag tag team.

8 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Button

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/craig-button-canucks-better-than-60points-but-not-a-playoff-club-larsen-not-an-nhl-player#t=2:00

 

Bob 

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/mckenzie-health-is-the-key-for-the-sedins-and-canucks

 

Duthie

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/duthie-canucks-have-better-chance-of-making-playoffs-than-oilers-but

 

Even Watters said canucks wont make playoffs but will be better than last year.

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/watters-canucks-will-not-make-the-playoffs

 

No one really believed in the Canucks finishing dead last that USA today predicted.  Obvisouly it's possibly we could (any team with enough injuries could) finish dead last.

 

[oldnews]

8 hours ago, darkpoet said:

Maybe WD's head was in the right place but like I said yesterday, how it came off and the optics of it were terrible... and that's not an opinion, that's a fact.

You're confused about what a "fact" is.

Hey, my opinion/perspective is a 'fact' = doesn't make it so.

The fact that you realize his head was in the right place completely undermines your attempt to hold him responsible for how a bunch of drama queens read the 'optics' of it.

[WeneedLumme]

For those who suggest that Willie should be trying to improve the play of the veterans rather than the rookies, consider this: Who has the potential to improve their game more due to a coach's input, a 1000 game veteran or a rookie still working on his first 100 games?

 

And as far as coaching Tram, while he is one of my favourite players, I have a feeling that he might not be that easy to coach. Whenever the camera zooms in on Lidster talking to Tram on the bench after a shift, while Tram periodically nods, he really doesn't seem to be paying much attention to what he's being told.

 

I have a feeling that this particular tempest in a teapot arose because Willie took the opportunity to pass a message on to Tram that he has the potential to be a star, if he would just focus on the things he needs to do to become a star.

[Boudrias]

5 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Exactly, all the usual suspects who love to stick the knife into the coach getting wet over the fact Willie asks Tryamkin to get more physically involved with players who are hurting us.

 

Jeez the hypocrisy on here is palpable. 

We have a massive thread devoted to a handbags at 50 paces "scrap" with Benn and yet these same "fans" are unhappy with the coach for suggesting that Try do it more consistently. Unbelievable.

 

Do we even know the coach was ACTUALLY talking about the fight or could it be the way Try actually bullied Benn with the big hit and made him react? 

 

These forums are historically filled with people on here pleading for Canucks players to step up and then when our coach mentions the one guy who has every attribute required to take that action do it more consistently he is slaughtered on here.

 

Some of you people are media dupes, hand picked to suck this crap up and spew it out on here often it appears, without even realising it.

 

What gets me is there is no "Band of Brothers " attitude between the coach the team and the fans because half the fans are fifth columnists who don't even realise they are stooges for a perfidious Vancouver media. All the while WD is building this close knit competitive group of young exciting players, these people are working just as hard to destroy it - and for what, another throw of the dice that could set this team's development back 3 years or more.

 

If Willie was half as bad a coach and a man manager as these media jackals constantly try to infer, he would have lost the room months ago - instead we get a performance like we saw against Edmonton last night.

 

I will agree on one thing though. WD should not have said we would have won the Boston game - no one knows if that would have happened. But then we have a whole pack of posters constantly using their crystal balls and faulty hindsight in order to attack the coach so maybe Willie is only human.

No doubt one of your best efforts +1. Great job.

 

Posters here have no idea what dynamics are at work with this team. Desjardin might not have the fan base on side (I suggest he has a sizable majority) but there is little doubt in my mind that he has the Canuck dressing room. NHL coaching is a pretty methodical process of eliminating errors and maximizing opportunity which is what this coaching group appears to do. The idea that Tryamkin needs a more physical game is without question IMO. The idea that coaching would encourage his exploring that side of his game later in the season should surprise no one. I highly doubt that it surprises anyone in the room.   

[alfstonker]

9 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

No doubt one of your best efforts +1. Great job.

 

Posters here have no idea what dynamics are at work with this team. Desjardin might not have the fan base on side (I suggest he has a sizable majority) but there is little doubt in my mind that he has the Canuck dressing room. NHL coaching is a pretty methodical process of eliminating errors and maximizing opportunity which is what this coaching group appears to do. The idea that Tryamkin needs a more physical game is without question IMO. The idea that coaching would encourage his exploring that side of his game later in the season should surprise no one. I highly doubt that it surprises anyone in the room.   

Or even the big guy himself.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

4 hours ago, alfstonker said:

When you actually listen he makes his prediction of 8-12 in the conference based on the usual output by the Sedins, and a healthy team. We haven't had any of that and in fact have used 37 players.

 

He also would not have known we would have been without Gudy and Dorsett for virtually all of the season or that Loui had such miserable output.

So where does all that really leave is 8-12 prediction? Way off the mark I'd say.  I realise that once more this was a post meant to reflect on Desjardin's performance but once more it doesn't bear scrutiny.

 

I'm not going to look at what qualifications the others have used as I would think they were also unaware how much we would have been affected by poor vet performance and injuries - again. 

 

Maybe the USA Today people were more aware of the drop in vet performance and our injury curse but didn't count on Willie's ability to get so much out of this rag tag team.

 

Haha... So the geniuses at USA today were so in depth with canucks team that team that they knew the Sedins would decline to 40 point players, but they didn't realize that the sens, oilers, and Bluejackets wouldn't be bottom feeders and be actual playoff teams  haha ok then.

 

 

USA today could predict the future because they knew that canucks would have their top 3 D go down with injuries and but some how didn't realize the greatness of WD?  haha it's truly amazing, somehow any time you can find an excuse and turn into WD Worship you do... 

 

 

[alfstonker]

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Haha... So the geniuses at USA today were so in depth with canucks team that team that they knew the Sedins would decline to 40 point players, but they didn't realize that the sens, oilers, and Bluejackets wouldn't be bottom feeders and be actual playoff teams  haha ok then.

 

 

USA today could predict the future because they knew that canucks would have their top 3 D go down with injuries and but some how didn't realize the greatness of WD?  haha it's truly amazing, somehow any time you can find an excuse and turn into WD Worship you do... 

 

 

Relax man the last bit was said tongue in cheek. 

But yes Desjardins has kept this team from imploding, of that there is no doubt. There was ample evidence of that last night against a team that put 7 in against the Bruins and the Stars.

[SilentSam]

5 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Yes but they can never back it up with any logical "in context" argument because they haven't a clue about what the coach sees in practice, most of them don't have any appreciation of intangibles and quite frankly their application of double standards qualifies most for some kind of "Oscar" By that I mean they get a victim and then sit and watch for whatever mistake they might make. You can apply that to any player most nights on any team.

 

It's similar to what referees got accused of doing with Alex Burrows.

I agree with you on this..  I can not appreciate posts without logic,. Wether it be a "pro" or "con" statement, they are all better written with the rationale to create discussion.

Having said that, and read through a few other posts here Alfstonker,.   What do you think would have happened if Tryamkin would have gone after Marchand the other night?  

Wether it was a hard hit, or dropped mitts,.   I really think it would not have been good..  I don't know if Desjardins was actually thinking about an outcome when he made that statement.

[Alflives]

After last night's Coilers game, Willie D was asked how his kid line, centred by Bo played.  Even though they were CLEARLY our best line, Willie wouldn't say anything positive about them.  Is Willie pushing back against JB's (play the young guys) directive, by saying these types of things in the media?  And how come Boucher, one of the few guys who actually might score, again gets less icetime and opportunity than Megna?  

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Relax man the last bit was said tongue in cheek. 

But yes Desjardins has kept this team from imploding, of that there is no doubt. There was ample evidence of that last night against a team that put 7 in against the Bruins and the Stars.

Maybe the Oilers also figured we were an easy mark (which we certainly are at times) and were looking past us. That seems to happen to good teams frequently at this time of year.

 

Desjardins has the team working hard but that's not enough for an NHL coach. He has to make adjustments and put players in the best possible position to succeed based on that hard work.

 

Hearing Willie fans talk our team is complete garbage that would never win a game without his coaching brilliance. I think that is overstating his positive impact a lot. There are not many NHL coaches where you can consistently see that their decisions directly led to losses. Willie is a coach where we see that all the time though. 

 

Give this team to a good tactical coach that can look past entitlement of vets/plugs and make in game and strategic adjustments and I bet we are a playoff team this year. We have some good young players that need to grow into bigger roles because those players aren't coming through trades or free agency. We need a good portion of our core to be home grown. 

 

Getting them to work hard is only one part. Getting them to make a positive difference by letting them play the game they are designed to play is effective coaching. Sticking to failed strategies and deployment is ineffective coaching.

[wallstreetamigo]

13 minutes ago, Alflives said:

After last night's Coilers game, Willie D was asked how his kid line, centred by Bo played.  Even though they were CLEARLY our best line, Willie wouldn't say anything positive about them.  Is Willie pushing back against JB's (play the young guys) directive, by saying these types of things in the media?  And how come Boucher, one of the few guys who actually might score, again gets less icetime and opportunity than Megna?  

This is a huge pet peeve of mine with Desjardins. When a player like Boucher plays well he cannot acknowledge it. That's stubbornness considering he clearly believes guys like that can't do the job. So when they do he can't acknowledge it. 

 

When the young kids lines play well he almost almost always has to deflect individual praise and put it on his faves too. "I thought the Sedins played well too" or "The whole team played well" etc.

 

It would be easy to just say, "Yes Boucher had a great game I want to see him play like that every game" or "Yes the kids played strong and carried the offensive play for us, we need them to do so on a nightly basis."

 

Both of these allow him his necessary criticism of their consistency while also recognizing they did a good job in that game. Far more effective than what he usually does.