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

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

57 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Scoring a goal should entitle a player to something. Scoring in the NHL isn't easy, just ask Gaunce, that's why players typically get rewarded when they score. 

 

It's funny you're asking the poster how long they've watched hockey and then believing that somehow fans were able to convinced Linden to fire WD.  Linden, a person who played in the NHL for 19 seasons and now as a NHL president of 3 season.  I'll take Trevor and JB's opinion (who have over 40 years combined of NHL involvement) over yours and WD's any day. 

This x 1,000,000

[grumpworsley]

4 hours ago, alfstonker said:

How long have you watched hockey? You actually think a kid scoring a breakaway goal entitles him to ANYTHING? No wonder WD got canned with people like you whispering BS like this in "not so clever" Trevor's ear. 

Mind boggling that you would even hint at something like this, after all your accolades to management and their decisions during the seasons. Now once your "guy" is gone you turn on management. 

[grumpworsley]

23 hours ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

I have stuck up for WD as I think he has been criticized unfairly in a lot of cases. People blindly had their pitchforks out just because. He didn't get enough credit for the successes of Baerstchi, Granlund, Bo, Tryamkin etc.. BUT benching Goldy after that goal was certainly a wtf moment. 

I am pretty sure that benching him after that goal was simply an authoritarian type move at same time giving one finger up to management In his "I know better style" 

[wallstreetamigo]

58 minutes ago, grumpworsley said:

I am pretty sure that benching him after that goal was simply an authoritarian type move at same time giving one finger up to management In his "I know better style" 

It definitely felt like a line in the sand from Desjardins how he handled Goldobin and Boucher, two players who Benning publicly stated he wanted to see playing more minutes to see where they were at.

 

I think his inability to switch to the development only mandate is the reason he was fired. There were several comments along the way that suggested he and management were not on the same page. And after he was fired the insinuation was definitely made by Linden when discussing what they need in a new coach.

 

On the flip side, I think a case can be made that management moved the goal posts on him by finally abandoning the win and also develop mandate they held onto for two years. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

5 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Yes and he was SOOOOOO GOOOOOD in Chicago with the Wolves. 

Well, if we're just looking at win-loss records as to how we gauge coaches...

 

30-43-9

 

 

 

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Scoring a goal should entitle a player to something. Scoring in the NHL isn't easy, just ask Gaunce, that's why players typically get rewarded when they score. 

 

It's funny you're asking the poster how long they've watched hockey and then believing that somehow fans were able to convinced Linden to fire WD.  Linden, a person who played in the NHL for 19 seasons and now as a NHL president of 3 season.  I'll take Trevor and JB's opinion (who have over 40 years combined of NHL involvement) over yours and WD's any day. 

Gaunce's defence was outstanding. He was never put up front with the Sedins. 

Don't be naive (I know it's a little late to change now) of course public opinion affects decisions in sporting management. Especially if they have no real gravitas in their position.

 

A trained monkey could do what Linden does for this club. Benning is an excellent scout who may or may not prove to be an excellent GM.

[alfstonker]

1 hour ago, grumpworsley said:

Mind boggling that you would even hint at something like this, after all your accolades to management and their decisions during the seasons. Now once your "guy" is gone you turn on management. 

So let me get this straight. Up to now Linden has done "nothing" but when he does decide to make a massive decision for this Club he gets it wrong in my opinion and I'm supposed to praise hime? Get over yourself.

 

I have taken exception to a number of Benning decisions. Forsling, Ericsson were two examples. I have never believed Benning was great at trades/signings but he more than makes up for it with his drafting imo. However while I have always given him the benefit of the doubt when it came to GM decisions, if he had a hand in this one I think he got it wrong.

 

Are you a child? I ask because you seem to think in life, opinions are set and that just because someone agrees with some of someone else's actions, they ALWAYS have to agree with them. Mind boggling indeed.

[alfstonker]

53 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Well, if we're just looking at win-loss records as to how we gauge coaches...

 

30-43-9

 

 

 

No I wasn't actually. 

Arneil never reached a Calder Cup playoff, never developed a rookie, never had the team playing consistently with effort - need I go on because it seems clear to me you never watched Chicago Wolves. Hell you probably never watched the Canucks either.

[alfstonker]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

It definitely felt like a line in the sand from Desjardins how he handled Goldobin and Boucher, two players who Benning publicly stated he wanted to see playing more minutes to see where they were at.

 

I think his inability to switch to the development only mandate is the reason he was fired. There were several comments along the way that suggested he and management were not on the same page. And after he was fired the insinuation was definitely made by Linden when discussing what they need in a new coach.

 

On the flip side, I think a case can be made that management moved the goal posts on him by finally abandoning the win and also develop mandate they held onto for two years. 

I doubt that.

 

He was fired because of the results at the end of the season. 

Ironically that was when he played to "dumb and dumber's" instructions to flood the team with rookies playing unearned minutes, who were not up to the job.

 

Imo Willie walks away knowing that at the end of the day he was doing it the right way and it was only when he went to rookie overkill that the rest of the youngsters were overpowered. He knew that Stech, Hutton Bo etc could only cope with so many passengers (even if they were scoring the odd goal )

 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, alfstonker said:

I doubt that.

 

He was fired because of the results at the end of the season. 

Ironically that was when he played to "dumb and dumber's" instructions to flood the team with rookies playing unearned minutes, who were not up to the job.

 

Imo Willie walks away knowing that at the end of the day he was doing it the right way and it was only when he went to rookie overkill that the rest of the youngsters were overpowered. He knew that Stech, Hutton Bo etc could only cope with so many passengers (even if they were scoring the odd goal )

 

I don't think the lack of wins or the end result of the season were the reasons he got fired. Maybe partially due to impatient ownership but it seems to not fit as reasoning.

 

The problem with Desjardins was that some could not "earn it" in his eyes no matter what they did. Others didn't need to earn it at all.

 

His lineup decisions were largely similar after the public "clarification" by Benning that Desjardins would be on board with giving the kids bigger opportunity to see what they were working with. Desjardins couldn't adjust and it cost him his job.

[wallstreetamigo]

I also think his complete inability to effectively make tactical changes in game that were helpful was a factor. Almost to the point of certainty his in game line blendering and ineffective strategy adjustments hurt the team more than it helped them. Desjardins is not terribly creative or competent running a bench in game. I think that hurt him as well.

[WestCoastDave]

17 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

The downside for them though would be if they have no NHL experience but are considered good AHL, NCAA, etc coaches it would not help their future marketability to bomb out in a small sample size. Rookie NHL coaches often need some time to get their feet under them.

On the upside, they could exceed expectations.  You could increase sample size by having them split time coaching between Utica and the main club.  If they do get bombed out, it is all part of the risk.  At least they got their shot in the NHL and the pay is usually better even though it is for a short time.  If you are competiting with other good young candidates, the better ones will be those who adopt quicker.

 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, WestCoastDave said:

On the upside, they could exceed expectations.  You could increase sample size by having them split time coaching between Utica and the main club.  If they do get bombed out, it is all part of the risk.  At least they got their shot in the NHL and the pay is usually better even though it is for a short time.  If you are competiting with other good young candidates, the better ones will be those who adopt quicker.

 

Sometimes you just have to trust that the process inside the box is the right one. This is certainly outside the box thinking but will actually make the organizations job much tougher. This is why they have an interview process. So they can determine the fit philosophically and review the qualifications of the applicants.

 

This creates an aura of indecisiveness that would dog the ultimately successful candidate and the organization throughout their tenure if things don't immediately go as or better than expected. It creates an unnecessary PR circus.

[WestCoastDave]

20 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Sometimes you just have to trust that the process inside the box is the right one. This is certainly outside the box thinking but will actually make the organizations job much tougher. This is why they have an interview process. So they can determine the fit philosophically and review the qualifications of the applicants.

 

This creates an aura of indecisiveness that would dog the ultimately successful candidate and the organization throughout their tenure if things don't immediately go as or better than expected. It creates an unnecessary PR circus.

Yeah wallstreetamigo, I agree it is not for everyone.  It is a different kind of process for sure and I'm not sure establishment would even try something like that.  It is just an idea, but it could potentially be used to find the next great coach.

[wallstreetamigo]

11 minutes ago, WestCoastDave said:

Yeah wallstreetamigo, I agree it is not for everyone.  It is a different kind of process for sure and I'm not sure establishment would even try something like that.  It is just an idea, but it could potentially be used to find the next great coach.

I appreciate you coming up with alternate ideas and thinking differently. Obviously your end goal with this idea is to get the best coach available which is something I think we can all agree is of key importance for this hire.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, alfstonker said:

Gaunce's defence was outstanding. He was never put up front with the Sedins. 

Don't be naive (I know it's a little late to change now) of course public opinion affects decisions in sporting management. Especially if they have no real gravitas in their position.

 

A trained monkey could do what Linden does for this club. Benning is an excellent scout who may or may not prove to be an excellent GM.

A trained monkey could have got more wins with this roster than WD has in the last 2 years.  In fact not a single coach in the NHL had less wins in the last two years than WD.  That's quite the accomplishment. 

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I also think his complete inability to effectively make tactical changes in game that were helpful was a factor. Almost to the point of certainty his in game line blendering and ineffective strategy adjustments hurt the team more than it helped them. Desjardins is not terribly creative or competent running a bench in game. I think that hurt him as well.

I remember some of the "coaches" on here saying the same about AV.

These things whether you like it or not are above the knowledge and ability of people on here. It never stops those who will never sniff an NHL dressing room from expressing "coaching" opinions though.

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

A trained monkey could have got more wins with this roster than WD has in the last 2 years.  In fact not a single coach in the NHL had less wins in the last two years than WD.  That's quite the accomplishment. 

Not really if you are intelligent enough to understand what was going on. I always make allowances for you in that respect. Taking Hansen and Burr from him at a crucial stage and the loss of our "$6m/ goal scorer" saw to that, allied to the fact that no other team probably had such a weak first line.

[canuck2288]

1 minute ago, alfstonker said:

I remember some of the "coaches" on here saying the same about AV.

These things whether you like it or not are above the knowledge and ability of people on here. It never stops those who will never sniff an NHL dressing room from expressing "coaching" opinions though.

Oh Willie's mom, is your mourning period over? 

 

So if I understand your rambling accurately, we should close down CDC as nobody on here haver ever had "a sniff of an NHL dressing room"? So fans cannot have an opinion? 

 

Unlike you, many of us actually have played the game so in fact, in your own words, should have a greater "right" than you to express an opinion

 

oh and as far as AV is concerned, most of us "hockey people" saw him that firing for what it was....MG trying to live another day 

[wallstreetamigo]

5 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

I remember some of the "coaches" on here saying the same about AV.

These things whether you like it or not are above the knowledge and ability of people on here. It never stops those who will never sniff an NHL dressing room from expressing "coaching" opinions though.

So why do you think you can "express" your coaching opinion that all the problems in Vancouver are management and players and all development or other success was all Desjardins brilliant and flawless coaching.

 

The reality is those who found Desjardins lacking as a coach were apparently on the same page as the two former NHL players who just fired him.