(Poll) Who should be the next head coach of the Vancouver Canucks?

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

I voted for Kirk Muller as head coach

 

Why?

 

Well he has worked with Jarvis and Melanson in Mtl and he was awesome as their PP dude. He has worked under some of the best and was an awesome 2 way player and cup winner.

 

I would also throw a crap ton of money at bringing in Larry Robinson to work the defense as he has also done a masterful job with every defense Corp he has worked with. Can you imagine Hutton, Stecher, Tryamkin, Juolevi and even Gudbranson all being that much better after 2-3 years of tutoring from that guy?

 

Muller

Jarvis

Robinson

 

Melanson 

 

There is an awesome coaching team right there. We don't need another rookie coach or a has been in Crawford or another trying to cut his teeth. Muller is modern, young and sees the directions of styles of play and what makes teams successful 

 

But that's just me

Thought of Larry Robinson - one of the first guys that comes to mind - but he isn't available (he's a Shark).   Muller is interesting though - such a great player and can't be judged on results with the Canes.

He, too isn't really available at this point - he's a Canadien - and would have to wait to avoid 'tampering' lol.

[apollo]

47 minutes ago, oldnews said:

yeah apollo - try to see the point there.  The homer glasses are great and all - but Bertuzzi learned how to play hockey on his side of the blueline as a Redwing.  He was nowhere near the player he was before, but he extended his career by becoming a capable bottom six type forward.

If he'd had that in his arsenal during the WCE years - like I said - they'd have been truly unstoppable.  But they weren't, really.

 

What?! Dude you gotta be kidding me... this guy was my god damn hero from 2002... I watched him as closely as possible and homerism aside. 

 

He had to adjust his style because his body gave up and he couldn't maintain what made him the games best power forward during his peak with the Canucks. Again, if you want to take away homerism, he was top 3... him iggy and forsberg... 

 

It was a matter of his body not lasting which led to his decline and arguably forced him to play more "defensively"... 

 

Which Bertuzzi do you think the Redwings would have prefered? 

 

The guy that almost hit 100 points and crushed opposing dman for a living or the guy that flirted with 40-50 a year but was better on his own side of the blue line as you say? 

[oldnews]

Just now, apollo said:

What?! Dude you gotta be kidding me... this guy was my god damn hero from 2002... I watched him as closely as possible and homerism aside. 

 

He had to adjust his style because his body gave up and he couldn't maintain what made him the games best power forward during his peak with the Canucks. Again, if you want to take away homerism, he was top 3... him iggy and forsberg... 

 

It was a matter of his body not lasting which led to his decline and arguably forced him to play more "defensively"... 

 

Which Bertuzzi do you think the Redwings would have prefered? 

 

The guy that almost hit 100 points and crushed opposing dman for a living or the guy that flirted with 40-50 a year but was better on his own side of the blue line as you say? 

ok. 

woosh.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

51 minutes ago, CanuckleHorse said:

https://www.nhl.com/news

What are you wanting me to look at?

[CanuckleHorse]

32 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

What are you wanting me to look at?

NHL to end coach and executive compensation policy

by Dan Rosen / NHL.com

 December 8th, 2015

 Share

 

PEBBLE BEACH, Calif. -- Draft-pick compensation for the hiring of coaches and executives from other teams will be eliminated, effective Jan. 1, Commissioner Gary Bettman said Tuesday following the completion of the Board of Governors meeting.

The original policy was put into effect Jan. 1, 2015, in part to allow for compensation for coaches and executives under contract who departed for a position with another team. But it morphed to include coaches and executives who had been fired but remained under contract.

Now the League will return to the previous policy, which requires teams to grant permission to its coaches and executives under contract to interview with other teams. If permission is granted and the coach or executive changes teams, there will no longer be any compensation to the team losing personnel.

"On balance, it just wasn't worth the debate, the confusion, the uncertainty that flowed from it," Commissioner Bettman said. "Frankly, I thought the old policy worked very well. I think you remember from the GM Meeting [November 2014], one of the caveats that I put into place when I agreed to implement the revised policy was that if there are any problems with this we will scrap it and go back to what we had. That ultimately happened. We deferred to the will of the GMs for a year, we tried it, and I think we were better off with the policy we had."

Commissioner Bettman said the Board agreed fully with reverting to the previous policy.

"I asked if there was any discussion or comment before I announced that that was the decision I was going to make, and there was none," Commissioner Bettman said. "So overwhelmingly, I think people, having heard the presentation and seen the experience over the past year, decided what we had that worked well for 10 years roughly was probably the best way to go."

There was discussion about modifying the policy to prohibit teams from receiving compensation for fired coaches and executives, but the League felt fired coaches and executives would have to be included if the newer policy were to remain in effect.

"What we had worked very well for 10 years," Commissioner Bettman said. "There was a sentiment by some of the managers that we should do something different. I resisted it for a while, and then, perhaps against my better judgment, I deferred to them to try it. But again, when I discussed this with the Executive Committee they were all in agreement that going back to what we had was the correct thing."

The policy in place this year allowed the Vancouver Canucks to secure a second-round draft pick when coach John Tortorella was hired by the Columbus Blue Jackets on Oct. 21. Tortorella hadn't coached for the Canucks since the end of the 2013-14 season, but he was still under contract. The Toronto Maple Leafs had to sacrifice third-round draft picks to the Detroit Red Wings and New Jersey Devils for hiring coach Mike Babcock in May and general manager Lou Lamoriello in September.

The Pittsburgh Penguins received a draft pick from the Buffalo Sabres when they hired Dan Bylsma, who was fired by the Penguins following the 2013-14 season. They also got one from the Devils for hiring coach John Hynes, who was coaching Pittsburgh's affiliate in the American Hockey League.

The San Jose Sharks got a draft pick from the Edmonton Oilers when they hired coach Todd McLellan. The Boston Bruins also got a pick from the Oilers for hiring general manager Peter Chiarelli.

On two occasions, the compensation proviso was waived. Coach Peter DeBoer was hired without compensation by the Sharks after being fired by the Devils last season. GM Ray Shero, fired after the 2013-14 season by the Penguins, went to New Jersey this summer without compensation.

"I think it was pretty clear all the reasons supporting why it's been eliminated," Maple Leafs president Brendan Shanahan said. "It's unfortunate for us the year in which they tried it out was a year in which we were seeking [a coach and GM], but I can't complain and look back. If we had to do it all over again we would still go out and do it if we were acquiring somebody like Mike and Lou. At the end of the day there are certain things you can control and other things you can't, so I support their decision today to take it away."

Brian Burke, the Calgary Flames president of hockey operations, was a supporter of the compensation policy until he heard the presentation from Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly on Tuesday.

"What we were trying to do was provide an orderly way for young management people or coaches to be allowed to progress and move up the ladder, but a team that had skill at identifying young people would be compensated for it," Burke said. "It was never envisioned it would apply to terminated employees. The League applied it in that manner and they presented today, I think, some compelling ideas for eliminating it and they eliminated it.

"Once it was explained why they recommended that it would be eliminated, there was no opposition to it."

---

[missioncanucksfan]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Thought of Larry Robinson - one of the first guys that comes to mind - but he isn't available (he's a Shark).   Muller is interesting though - such a great player and can't be judged on results with the Canes.

He, too isn't really available at this point - he's a Canadien - and would have to wait to avoid 'tampering' lol.

Robinson hasn't been with the Sharks since McLellan.....I think. So he is sitting at home enjoying his free time. At 65, I'm not sure if he wants to get back into the swing of things. Depends on the situation I guess.

As for Muller, I would wait it out until Habs are done. I don't like that Canucks are in such a hurry to name a coach. Why Green? Why Lowry? Ya Lowry was a former Canuck but for what....a whole season? Maybe he was Benning's room mate?

Another defense coach that did good was Doug Bodger while in Boston. 

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

So now with the adjusted voting and the hiring of Gallant and Hitchcock elsewhere, the poll currently reads as follows:

 

1st - Travis Green

2nd - Marc Crawford

3rd - Darryl Sutter

 

Followed by the rest of the pack including Ruff, Dineen, Krueger, etc.

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

37 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Robinson hasn't been with the Sharks since McLellan.....I think. So he is sitting at home enjoying his free time. At 65, I'm not sure if he wants to get back into the swing of things. Depends on the situation I guess.

As for Muller, I would wait it out until Habs are done. I don't like that Canucks are in such a hurry to name a coach. Why Green? Why Lowry? Ya Lowry was a former Canuck but for what....a whole season? Maybe he was Benning's room mate?

Another defense coach that did good was Doug Bodger while in Boston. 

 

When did Doug Bodger coach defence in Boston?

[JayCanuck10]

How about Jack Capuano?

[oldnews]

46 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Robinson hasn't been with the Sharks since McLellan.....I think. So he is sitting at home enjoying his free time. At 65, I'm not sure if he wants to get back into the swing of things. Depends on the situation I guess.

As for Muller, I would wait it out until Habs are done. I don't like that Canucks are in such a hurry to name a coach. Why Green? Why Lowry? Ya Lowry was a former Canuck but for what....a whole season? Maybe he was Benning's room mate?

Another defense coach that did good was Doug Bodger while in Boston. 

Wiki still has him as an associate - modified 5 days ago - but you're right - I checked on the Sharks own index and they have Boughner, Spott and Hedberg - no Larry.

Why not Green and Lowry though?  I don't care who played with who tbh - I like them both as coaches.   I also like Muller though - always have.

[E. Lindros]

Scott niedermayer was an assistant coach for 3 years with Anaheim.  But don't think he coached anywhere this season. Wonder if he would be a good choice as an assistant? 

[hlinkas wrister]

What about Ted Nolan? 

[Hairy Kneel]

Green Jarvis and Malholtra easy-peasy cheap an cheezy.

 

 

[missioncanucksfan]

4 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

 

When did Doug Bodger coach defence in Boston?

Omg....sorry....

 

Doug Houda 

 

Think he is an assistant with Detroit now but did a great job in Boston as a long time assistant

[missioncanucksfan]

4 hours ago, oldnews said:

Wiki still has him as an associate - modified 5 days ago - but you're right - I checked on the Sharks own index and they have Boughner, Spott and Hedberg - no Larry.

Why not Green and Lowry though?  I don't care who played with who tbh - I like them both as coaches.   I also like Muller though - always have.

No to Lowry and Green because we are simply rinse and repeat the same coaching as we just had. At that point, why fire WD? Plus do we bring in yet 2 more rookie coaches? 

Muller has had a term as head coach although being put into a situation much like Torts and Willie where he had to deal with a vet heavy team and deal with their absences due to injuries but before and after that he has actually been cutting his teeth as an assistant with some of the best coaches and running successful special teams which is what killed our team.

I, and many others don't wish to go thru a season in which the skill guys are stuck slugging it out for ice-time to "earn it" while we watch vet types such as Megna and Chaput "fail it"

 

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

No to Lowry and Green because we are simply rinse and repeat the same coaching as we just had.

 

Meh. That's just too reductive imo.  Green is responsible for Green.  Lowry for Lowry.  Neither of them have anything to do with WD. 

And 'experience' is over-rated imo.  They're all 'experienced.'

[hlinkas wrister]

54 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Meh. That's just too reductive imo.  Green is responsible for Green.  Lowry for Lowry.  Neither of them have anything to do with WD. 

And 'experience' is over-rated imo.  They're all 'experienced.'

Lowry looked out of his depth in the WJC. It's a pressure cooker of a tournament for sure, but he never looked like he had things under control.

[khay]

7 hours ago, apollo said:

What?! Dude you gotta be kidding me... this guy was my god damn hero from 2002... I watched him as closely as possible and homerism aside. 

 

He had to adjust his style because his body gave up and he couldn't maintain what made him the games best power forward during his peak with the Canucks. Again, if you want to take away homerism, he was top 3... him iggy and forsberg... 

 

It was a matter of his body not lasting which led to his decline and arguably forced him to play more "defensively"... 

 

Which Bertuzzi do you think the Redwings would have prefered? 

 

The guy that almost hit 100 points and crushed opposing dman for a living or the guy that flirted with 40-50 a year but was better on his own side of the blue line as you say? 

We would not have traded that guy, even for Luongo. By the time the Red Wings got him, he was already on the decline. But I have to admit, he was probably the most exciting player for the Canucks since Pavel Bure -- almost on par with Pavel. I loved that guy.

 

[iceman64]

On 4/10/2017 at 0:45 PM, Davathor said:

Hitchcock 

 

enough rookies in management. 

Benning is trying to make this team a better version of the Bruins who beat us up, it's a fine balance of size,skill, and speed. Ben is doing ok with it considering it was a disaster here when he walked in. This is why i'm hoping for a trade for a second top something pick and get rasmussen to put with the twins for experience and using his SIZE and puck winning skills (which he has too, noted for a good set of hands) 

Why does Anson Carter come to mind?  He did that until he got too many points with the twins and got ego overload with demands and got outed"

 

Since then, we've never had a big imposing player with them to puck chase, take, and pass for sedinery...  to me it seemed obvious but they tried that with speedy smaller guys but they'd get beat on, worn down, and injured. Painful to watch when you already saw what size with the Twins will do as in Carter so...

 

Rassmusen PLEASE Mr Benning! (or trade) 

 

Anything!!!  (wonder if Train could play forward?) 

[oldnews]

5 minutes ago, hlinkas wrister said:

Lowry looked out of his depth in the WJC. It's a pressure cooker of a tournament for sure, but he never looked like he had things under control.

I don't think a bunch of floating prima donnas are the ideal group for him to work with - and he didn't really have the time or the licence to deal with.

That's a sensitive situation - but his 'stars' were a gaggle of me-firsters that imo were annoying as hell.  it's like babysitting kids that aren't your own.  they may need some serious discipline, but....

I can see that not being the ideal circumstances for his coaching style.

Canada's best players were their workers.

I don't judge or blame a coach in circumstances like that.