Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

COACHES in VANCOUVER - I don't get it . . .


Fanaholic

Recommended Posts

I agree Goldy should be playing of course he will makes mistakes but that's part of learning and coaches now a days especially on rebuild teams need to allow this. Now if your on a team that's plan from day 1 is to be in the top for the cup then understandable you don't play your rookies who still need learning, but if your on a rebuild team it makes no sense to be benching them especially when you're down on injuries and 3 of those guys (Horvat,Baer,Dorsett) combined for 25 of the Canucks 82 goals, 30% of Canucks goals were relied on those 3 guys. Obviously you can't just replace those guys, but you need to find ways to get other players to help fill those holes offensively as well, the team needs guys to score goals with those 3 out of your lineup, that's a big hit to take for scoring and not replacing it with guys who aren't known for scoring makes no sense imo, makes sense to add 1 defensive player but after that you need players who can score or be more offensive. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

I agree Goldy should be playing of course he will makes mistakes but that's part of learning and coaches now a days especially on rebuild teams need to allow this. Now if your on a team that's plan from day 1 is to be in the top for the cup then understandable you don't play your rookies who still need learning, but if your on a rebuild team it makes no sense to be benching them especially when you're down on injuries and 3 of those guys (Horvat,Baer,Dorsett) combined for 31 of the Canucks 82 goals, 38% of Canucks goals were relied on those 3 guys. Obviously you can't just replace those guys, but you need to find ways to get other players to help fill those holes offensively as well, the team needs guys to score goals with those 3 out of your lineup, that's a big hit to take for scoring and not replacing it with guys who aren't known for scoring makes no sense imo, makes sense to add 1 defensive player but after that you need players who can score or be more offensive. 

 

 

10 + 8 + 7 = 31?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Brad Marchand said:

This isn't a Canucks coach thing, it's an every coach thing. For example, both Marner and Nylander put up more than 60 points last year and Babcock still made them play on the fourth line for several games this season.

 

Notice how Boeser hasn't been benched ever since he came into the lineup? The point is pretty clear. If you pay attention to the details, you'll play more minutes. Virtanen and Goldobin aren't quite there yet and that's fine. The important thing is they continue to progress.

this almost works until you think about guys like Vanek and Gags.   It sounds like Green wasn't liking Goldy's work in practice.  Fair enough, but leave the kid in for a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love it when CDC'ers post in a panic. Especially when they don't consider any other factors, like being down our two top defensive centers and needing help that our regular extra centers like Gagner, Granlund and Burmistrov aren't as strong at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree Goldy shouldn’t be scratch. But I’m love the way Travis green has coach this team he’s probably one of the more positive things this year. But Goldy should really get a string of games going here and let’s not do what Pens did with Pouliot this is the perfect time for him to step into an offensive role with horvat and bear out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread became null and void to me when I read a comparison between the Twins and Goldobin. If the OP thinks that Goldy and the Twins are the same in work ethic then we will have to agree to differ. 

 

I accept that Goldy has talent and unfortunately he doesn't have a twin on his same wavelength all the time but he just doesn't work hard enough for the NHL at present imo.

 

There are others coming up who do, so like Subban he better beware of becoming surplus to requirements.

 

Maybe Crawford's talent was not so much in his acceptance of "mistakes" but a recognition of players who work their asses off and are determined not to make the same mistake over and over again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

Maybe they were bad because they weren't ready. 

 

Also, it took a lock out for the Sedins to get good. They focused on improving their skating and fitness and when the NHL resumed, they were different players. They certainly didn't get good b/c Crawford used them as a bad second unit PP 5 years prior.

No, I’m fairly certain that they won Art Ross Trophies as a direct result

of them playing on the second power play unit during their rookie season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...