[Report] Canucks fire Willie Desjardins

[-SN-]

6 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Which by coincidence was when we started losing. I wonder why that was. 

You believe that's why they lost 8 straight? 

What is accomplished by having Chaput on the first line? He had one assist. 

Wins and losses were irrelevant at that point (except for the tank).

 

The guy was a terrible coach. The youngsters don't need to be protected, they need to be given an opportunity to succeed. 

[alfstonker]

32 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I think management wanted to find out which kids were good and which weren't by seeingthem play bigger roles and in key situations. You know, to evaluate what they need to do going forward. 

 

Using Biega AND Larsen as forwards was a nice parting shot by Desjardins though I have to admit.

Linden and JB didn't seem to realise WD was protecting the youngsters who were already playing well. How many results like last night could the likes of Bo, Stetch, Hutton etc have taken before their heads went down and their confidence went.

They hired a guy because he knew how to develop youth and fired him because they overloaded the team with youth and couldn't handle the consequences. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Remember way back when and the Willie crew arrogantly assured us there was no chance he would be fired? Oh ya that was still happening yesterday.

 

Good times.

[Jiggs50]

Finally. It's a great day. 

[GB5]

6 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

The Canucks were passive in the defensive zone, they always backed in and kept the play on the perimeter.  This gave opposing teams a shooting gallery, and allowed them to keep possession more then they should have.  How much did this contribute to injuries?  When you are blocking shots, and running around a lot, it must take a toll on the team.

 

Stonker makes valid points, this was an AHL squad sprinkled with a few talented NHL players.  The back end was full of young guys.  No coach could have got them to the playoffs.  

 

But willie's system (which probably contributed to injuries) and his bizarre player deployments  put a target on his back.  This was the easiest move for management to make to appease the masses.  I cant see how you can go into next season, after finishing 29th, without drastic changes.

I think this had a huge part in injuries, at least to the defensemen. It made it way too easy for guys like Ferklund to take runs at them.

[BM24]

1 minute ago, Odjick29willkillyou said:

If this keeps up Trev is gonna go back to his health clubs and bike rides full time. I am not sure his luscious locks can take much more stress. 

Hopefully he follows Willie out the door. He's not even a good puppet because no one buys into what he's saying, other than the ones who still adore Linden and think he's the greatest. 

[oldnews]

2 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

He played every young player who was any good. That is what any coach would have done.

You're assuming they were obligated to keep Desjardins, simply because the roster was depleted - and that he did a good job with the youth.

I agree with you - that he did a great job with Baertschi, Horvat, Sbisa, Granlund, etc.   But it's not necessarily about "blame", or holding Desjardins responsble for results.  I suspect that's not really what the decision is about.

 

I'd guess that it's primarily about business - selling hope, selling tickets - to a market that has turned wholesale against a coach. 

Is it the moral high ground to fire that coach?  No. 

 

But at the same time, their AHL coach - one of the best in the business - is also expiring - I suspect - just my take on 'intuition' alone - but I think that also plays a part in the decision.   There are also all kinds of things we simply don't know - ie what the working relationship was between management and the coaching staff down the stretch.  It was a difficult, stressful end to the season.  It's possible that relationship deteriorated as Utica became somewhat more focal - imo for good reason - than the Canuck's lineup.

Regardless - Desjardins imo was good with the youth - but that's not the only thing his job hinged on.

I liked some things about Desjardins - disagreed with a few - but imo this is not a Gerard Gallant type situation where you should be coming out railing against the decision makers as if they're bleeping cowards.

[48MPHSlapShot]

Basically, what it comes down to is that Willie wasn't on the same page as Benning. 

 

Nothing to do with reacting to a "mob mentality". That's such a cop-out answer. The fact that we could all see that there was a disconnect between management and the coaching staff because of the player deployment doesn't make for a "mob mentality".

[Where'd Luongo?]

50 minutes ago, UticaHockey said:

One final comment on this subject.  I'm fairly well certain that if Markstrom didn't get hurt and Bachman being called up Demko would have been watching with a ball cap on about 70% of the time down the stretch.  I say that because before Bachman got called up he played in 10 of 12 games.  To be fair Demko missed two games early during that stretch because he was sick and the Comets had to sign a goalie on a PTO for a weekend but Green admitted in an interview that he stayed with Bachman after because he got hot and the team was winning.  It turned into a self fulfilling prophecy because Thatcher was so rusty from such little work that he didn't have a good game when he did play which lead to another stretch of Bachman starts.  The best thing that happened was Bachman getting called up which allowed Demko to play often enough to get into a rhythm.   Again this mirrors the usage of the veteran goalie by Willie in Vancouver but the NHL is not a development league so Willie is chartered to win.  The AHL is a development league so Travis is chartered to develop. 

Fair point. I think with the goal of making the playoffs that the players would develop more by being in that setting, so even though we want Demko to develop we can't hinder the rest of the team's development by letting him lose games and hinder the chances of making the playoffs. Goaltending is a trickier situation everytime.

[420Fish]

9 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

The Canucks were passive in the defensive zone, they always backed in and kept the play on the perimeter.  This gave opposing teams a shooting gallery, and allowed them to keep possession more then they should have.  How much did this contribute to injuries?  When you are blocking shots, and running around a lot, it must take a toll on the team.

 

Stonker makes valid points, this was an AHL squad sprinkled with a few talented NHL players.  The back end was full of young guys.  No coach could have got them to the playoffs.  

 

But willie's system (which probably contributed to injuries) and his bizarre player deployments  put a target on his back.  This was the easiest move for management to make to appease the masses.  I cant see how you can go into next season, after finishing 29th, without drastic changes.

Great post. Agree.

[Davathor]

Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

Remember way back when and the Willie crew arrogantly assured us there was no chance he would be fired? Oh ya that was still happening yesterday.

 

Good times.

 

Yeah im seeing a noticeable absence of the Willie crew right now. 

 

Ha

 

ha

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, alfstonker said:

Linden and JB didn't seem to realise WD was protecting the youngsters who were already playing well. How many results like last night could the likes of Bo, Stetch, Hutton etc have taken before their heads went down and their confidence went.

They hired a guy because he knew how to develop youth and fired him because they overloaded the team with youth and couldn't handle then consequences. 

I think Hutton and Horvat both showed far more resilience to a frustrating end to the season than the try hard on offense only (if that) Sedins and apathetic half sleepy Edler did. 

 

I resoect that the Sedins said they had a bad year. Seeming annoyed at being asked about Bo leading the team in scoring was pretty telling to though.

[combover]

Hard to do worse than second last this season and third last season.

he didn't get the most out of the guys he had and he didn't play a style that was remotely enterianing which when your selling tickets is important. 

I won't miss him and bottom line he " earned it" with bizzare deployment and lack of success with his terrible defensive system that still allowed more than 35 shots against.

Goodbye 

And it would seem managment agreed 

Ps take your mengna with you. 

[alfstonker]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

The 'mob' or pressure from above?

Who knows Alf. It smacked of lack of balls and self preservation.

I am a fan of the Club so I hope they don't live to regret this move. They could easily have given him his last year after all we were heading in the right direction regarding the development of our young players.

[GB5]

19 minutes ago, nucksnavsfan said:

Guys on the radio were talking about how the Aquelini's like big names /celebrity to get attention for the team 

I.e. TO signing Babcock ( bigger level  than what the Canucks could pull off ) but they felt they would be more likely to go will a more ' famous / well known / successful ' coach rather than another rookie like Green 

Ah, that solves it, AV is coming back then.......... right after the Rangers make an early exit from the playoffs.

[SilentSam]

7 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

Linden:  "Willie's a competitor,. and he thinks about ONE thing,. and that's WINNING".

 

I think that says it all folks,. WD's emphasis on winning over the past year has, in the eyes of management, been counterproductive to the pace of development.

[Hockey101 class]

Good riddance. Guaranteed players are happy especially Virtanen.

[-NucksFan]

28 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Not really a "lie"....lying would have been a "no".

 

Again, in line with my last comment...what would you expect him to say?  "Yep, sure are".

 

It's part of the gig...to give information without really giving information.

Before the trade deadline when they said that they would not ask any players with a NTC to move  and then they ended up trading 2 guys with ntc's , it was explained that they did that to protect the players from media scrutiny and allow them to focus on playing. So the ' lying' was done as was way to protect their players. I am ok with that as long as they come clean with an explanation like they did in that case.

[Fan since 82]

3 hours ago, Mad_Duck said:

I guess this means the Willie watch poll thread is done then?

Probably as done as the Burrows - Do we really need him? thread.

[48MPHSlapShot]

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Linden:  "Willie's a competitor,. and he thinks about ONE thing,. and that's WINNING".

 

I think that says it all folks,. WD's emphasis on winning over the past year has, in the eyes of management, been counterproductive to the pace of development.

I doubt that management had an issue with Willie doing everything he could to win over the first half of the season. However, when it became apparent that we weren't going to be a playoff team, Willie failed to adapt to what management was looking for out of him, and it cost him his job in the end.