A Toxic Culture of Negativity - Vancouver Courier Article

[CeeBee51]

gonna be a long summer

[TFerguson]

3 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

I think having a rule against calling out players with "potentially higher ceilings" than yourself is ridiculous.  It is precisely players with high ceilings that aren't playing to that level who need to be called out, and who better than someone who works hard and plays to his potential.

 

Linden called out Bure for dicking around in practice during the early 1990s.  Bure's ceiling was well above Linden's, but who better in the NHL to call out someone else than the guy who scored two goals in game seven with broken ribs?

I don't disagree and wouldn't want a rule. My annoyance at Sutter's comments comes more out of the fact that Sutter's been really disappointing as a player since coming to Van. He was heralded as a "foundation piece" before ever playing a game and has been payed like one ever since. I've lost confidence in Sutter as being able to provide a any kind of spark for this team and have hope that Goldobin might have the tools to become that.  I just don't want to see a young kid crushed before we ever get to see what he could do in the right environment. 

[amitriptyline]

I agree with the some of the criticism of the handling and development of the prospects by WD. I can certainly understand the need for a young prospect to get a little tough love, and making a player earn his playing time and be defensively responsible and all that, but there's also got to be some flexibility there too, to allow them to make occasional mistakes while they are still learning without getting benched immediately. That can be a real confidence killer in some cases and very frustrating, and it may have a negative effect. Its a fine line to walk but you've got to make players earn time while maintaining their confidence, providing support and encouraging them too. And when a player scores, for example like Goldy or Boucher did, and then get promptly benched or demoted over some other mistake, that is being too harsh and its wrong. You have to reward them a little for the good things they do, and have a little more tolerance for mistakes, not just punish when there's a mistake. I find it a bit contradictory how Desjardins complains about Lebate being sent down after having a good game against the Ducks and not rewarding that, when he doesn't reward the young players or give them a little leeway when they score a goal. A more balanced, fair approach is needed.

[Zedlee]

6 minutes ago, luckylager said:

Can I add disappointingly unproductive and overrated?

And just to stick with the negative theme - he doesn't play like a Sutter, more like a Matthias. Take that, "Mr. Balls"

Benning labled Sutter a "foundational player" when he traded and extended him.  What exactly does he do that is foundational?  I dont' see anything.  

[Frogger009]

3 minutes ago, Zedlee said:

Benning labled Sutter a "foundational player" when he traded and extended him.  What exactly does he do that is foundational?  I dont' see anything.  

I imagine when any other team has an "old time" style player they call up ol' Jim and offer him up for the low price of a decent player and second round pick. They must practice delivering their pitch without laughing first though.

[CeeBee51]

Is this a fire Willie thread, or a fire JB thread or a fire Trev thread? Used to be able to burn newspapers but interweb crap is harder to burn.

[ice orca]

Interesting that two vet's on the team are polar opposites in what they said to the kid.

[Bo fan]

Negativity here - negativity there - everywhere negativity.  Seldom see anything positive out of media - take your pick which ones - they're all about the same.

As  for Sutter - I don't think his ballsy comment  sits well with a lot of the fan base that want to see these kids play, who are prepared  to have them make mistakes - it's how they'll learn.  Seems like Miller is providing  the best veteran leadership this year.  There a positive - Miller  is great!!

[VIC_CITY]

All this Sutter hate when the reality is he was having a pretty damn good season but tailed off like the rest if our team after the teade deadline. The only difference between him and a lot of the other guys is it's been widely speculated that he's been playing hurt for quite some time now. 

 

Sutter is a leader on our team and I have no problem with him calling out a younger player. Like previous posters have stated, Goldobin is getting more of an opportunity with us than SJ ever gave him. A little tough love might go a long way. This isn't the AHL. Yes, Goldobin has tons of skill and is one of the reason I tune into games this time of the year but he needs to learn how to play the game the right way. Hopefully Goldobin hears the message loud and clear.

[TFerguson]

Just now, Bo fan said:

Negativity here - negativity there - everywhere negativity.  Seldom see anything positive out of media - take your pick which ones - they're all about the same.

As  for Sutter - I don't think his ballsy comment  sits well with a lot of the fan base that want to see these kids play, who are prepared  to have them make mistakes - it's how they'll learn.  Seems like Miller is providing  the best veteran leadership this year.  There a positive - Miller  is great!!

Could not agree more. Have loved the reports of Miller working with the kids. Even his demeanour during games has spoken volumes for him this year. Even though he's kept us in losable games...he's been a great veteran to have around. 

[Kevin Biestra]

34 minutes ago, AllWeatherFan said:

I don't disagree and wouldn't want a rule. My annoyance at Sutter's comments comes more out of the fact that Sutter's been really disappointing as a player since coming to Van. He was heralded as a "foundation piece" before ever playing a game and has been payed like one ever since. I've lost confidence in Sutter as being able to provide a any kind of spark for this team and have hope that Goldobin might have the tools to become that.  I just don't want to see a young kid crushed before we ever get to see what he could do in the right environment. 

Sutter has been exactly what he was with Pittsburgh and Carolina.  It's not his fault Benning sang his praises from the rooftop.  He's Brent Sutter's kid, but he doesn't have Brent's talent.  Brent was a world class second-liner.  Brandon is more like his uncle Duane or Ron...a very solid third-liner.  He plays Sutter hockey and I think that if there's anyone on the team with the credibility to call out underperforming youngsters, he's one of the few that might fit the bill.  I expect to hear about him playing with a long-term injury the morning after Game 82.

[luckylager]

32 minutes ago, Zedlee said:

Benning labled Sutter a "foundational player" when he traded and extended him.  What exactly does he do that is foundational?  I dont' see anything.  

He blocks shots with his face.

But yeah, underwhelming overall. 

[PhillipBlunt]

This team is prime for some serious offseason shakeups. 

[Hectic]

1 hour ago, tas said:

judging from the title I thought this would be about vancouver media. 

I thought so too. Because that is honestly the most toxic thing about the Canucks to be honest 

[TFerguson]

1 minute ago, VIC_CITY said:

All this Sutter hate when the reality is he was having a pretty damn good season but tailed off like the rest if our team after the teade deadline. The only difference between him and a lot of the other guys is it's been widely speculated that he's been playing hurt for quite some time now. 

 

Sutter is a leader on our team and I have no problem with him calling out a younger player. Like previous posters have stated, Goldobin is getting more of an opportunity with us than SJ ever gave him. A little tough love might go a long way. This isn't the AHL. Yes, Goldobin has tons of skill and is one of the reason I tune into games this time of the year but he needs to learn how to play the game the right way. Hopefully Goldobin hears the message loud and clear.

Again, I'm not advocating for a no consequence approach to Goldobin or saying that he should get a free ride. I just think when we look at where we are as a team in our lifecycle and in our season, kids like Goldobin should be given more rope not less. He gets more in Van than in SJ because they have a way deeper than us. But being benched, scratched, and moved around like crazy on a team like Vancouver says a whole lot that I don't think we should be saying at the moment. 

[darkpoet]

1 hour ago, CoolCanucklehead said:

I'm yet to see a player make it to the NHL without some tough coaching & tough love.

Godoblin has been given more of an opportunity here in a short time than he ever got in years from San Jose.

 

Because they're an elite team. We haven't been since 2012, and sure aren't now. 

 

[TFerguson]

9 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

This team is prime for some serious offseason shakeups. 

Not gonna old my breath. Would be nice though if we had any way to move some of the under performing vets to grab a few picks and prospects.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, AllWeatherFan said:

HI all,
 

I'm a new poster (but long time reader) on here so please feel free to point me in the right direction if I put things in the wrong places.
 

I would love to get your opinions on Daniel Wagner's article in the Vancouver Courier today:

Brandon Sutter’s balls and a culture of negativity (link: HERE)

I really appreciated and agreed with several of the points he raised. Specifically, that "the Canucks have an obsession with culture...that is starting to look toxic" which works itself out in the following ways:

 

1) The refusal to fully acknowledge and embrace a rebuild.

 

I know some would object and say that a rebuild is exactly what's currently happening. I get that. But I also think there continues to be reasons for skepticism: Players that have been signed, the refusal to use the "R" word, and the fact that our coach, at least to my eye, doesn't seem to be on the same page. 

 

2)  The handling of Goldobin. 

 

I was so excited when we signed Goldy and still am. But I've been frustrated watching the way he's been handled so far. I see the need to develop his work ethic, grit, defensive positioning, and willingness to go to the hard areas. But I also see a kid who appears to be fairly sensitive (despite talking a big game) and could use some evidences of his coaches' confidence in him; not just for a game or two but a consistent level of confidence that would allow him to make mistakes and keep getting opportunities. 
It seems to me that our obsession with a "work ethic" culture has left us rewarding what would normally be the right things but in our current situation are robbing us of the very few unique (potential) talents we have on this team. 
BTW - I felt the same dynamic in play with WD's comments toward Tryamkin after the Boston game. 

 

3) The inability to model hope for the future and positivity in the middle of present struggle. 

 

I think there's a way to spin the whole situation we're currently in as very positive but right now our attempts at building a certain kind of culture are getting in the way.
 

• I would love for the kids to get to play. Really play. Not without consequences but with the kind of confidence from management and leadership that fosters a sense of stability for the players to go out, make some mistakes, and get right back out there. 
   
• I would love management to come out tell the fans that we're rebuilding, it's going to be painful, drop prices a little, and ask us to support a team with our eyes on the future and not the present (which is where they've been trying to force us to look since 2013-14).
   
• And almost most of all, I would love to have a coach in place that will design a structure around the greatest attributes of the players he has rather than one who constantly tries to fit each of his players (from different cultures, at different ages, and with different abilities) into one mold and only gauge their effectiveness on the ice by that standard. I want a progressive coach next year. One who loves working with young players and helping them grow - as opposed to one who needs his arm twisted to get around to it. 

 

One last thing, while I don't share the author's (apparent) level of animosity toward Sutter, I do find it very annoying that Sutter - considering his play this year - has taken it upon himself to call out one of our younger players that has a far greater (potential) ceilings than he does. 

 

Anyways, would love any of your thoughts on this stuff. 

 

this post absolutely reeks of fan entitlement.  The "rebuild" debate has no relevance to the organization, only to sad sack fans who need to be reinforced at every turn.  They have handled Goldobin exactly the same way they have handled every young guy.  Do you think he deserves more preferential treatment than Horvat, Baer, Granlund, Stetcher and Tryamkin?  How do you think they would feel about that.  If the kid is going to play lazy, apathetic hockey, he's going to watch from the pressbox.  I'm sure he got the memo and builds off a strong performance last game.

 

Clearly you think that a players potential should determine how they are treated.  Pretty sad.  The only thing toxic in this organization is entitled fans and self important bloggers

[riffraff]

55 minutes ago, luckylager said:

Can I add disappointingly unproductive and overrated?

And just to stick with the negative theme - he doesn't play like a Sutter, more like a Matthias. Take that, "Mr. Balls"

Qft.

 

this is a point that people either forget, ignore, or are too young to know.

[TFerguson]

4 minutes ago, Hectic said:

I thought so too. Because that is honestly the most toxic thing about the Canucks to be honest 

Maybe I'm a pessimist (I really don't think I am since I feel good about our team) but sometimes the negativity of the media is a breath of fresh air to the canned post-game responses we've had to listen to for the first three quarters of this year. Sometimes I want to hear some frustration coming out. Which, by the way, tends to get management (ownership's?) attention too.