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

Coaching, decisions and player usage

Rate this topic


Wanless
 Share

Recommended Posts

These last playoffs were interesting, the highly skilled teams were bounced earlier than expected and even considered to be "upset", the teams that did better than expected all had new coaches, and then theres Boston just a very well assembled team. 

 

The thing I noticed most was how teams with little player movement and new coaching did well. 

 

I'm looking at player movement and the impact of coaching the rosters

 

I'm gonna start with the hurricanes as they had the most movement

Out - Skinner, Hanifin, Lindholm

In - Hamilton, Ferland, Svechnikov, Neidereitter. 

 

In terms of actually getting better on paper, it was marginal and due to the addition of 4 to the loss of 3 main pieces. Non of the trades were lopsided  and could be argued that the flames ended up with the better players. However Rod Brind'Amour took over coaching and everyone knows about his work ethic.

 

Next are the Islanders

Out - Tavares

In - ...

The big difference is Trotz, arguably the best coach in the league. He took a team with 296 goals against (worst) and brought it down to an incredible 196 (best). Sure this was at the expense of scoring but wins resulted. Trotz is also famous for tight defensive systems but he's shown to know how to use his players to get wins and how to get offense without sacrificing defence when he has scorers to work with, see Washington Capitals.

 

Now the cup winners

Out - 

In - 

No players changed between coaches and the blues went from last place in January to winning the cup. I didn't include any of the offseason changes as I'm looking to compare rosters with coaches and how the coaches managed their groups.

 

Here we are at my point. The Canucks have a coach in his third year, in the NHL. He's never been an assistant at this level! Rod was an assistant for 7 years first, Berube has been a head before aswell as multiple years as an assistant, they've both cut their teeth. I don't think that Travis Green has the experience necessary to be able to get the team to 100% he's just to "green" of a coach.

 

I do like the style he is after though. But I feel as though he has made questionable deployment to achieve it. A big indicator of this to me is using Horvat as an offensive guy where to my eye test he has done better as a two way guy capitalizing on the other team turning the puck over in the Canucks end and neutral zone. Horvat also believes "Being below the puck and committing to playing well defensively is what is driving [his ]offense right now" https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/defensive-responsibility-leads-to-offensive-reward-for-canucks-captain-in-waiting-horvat. His shutdown of McDavid was incredible this season, with Horvat winning the comparison in all categories while on the ice together (This came from John and john during a game in mid-late season). With this it seems as soon as another defensive center is available green moves Horvat back to offense primary roles.

 

Loui Eriksson and his comments of being used in a role he's not used to being in are spot on. I'm not saying that green is causing Eriksson to suck but he's not using him in the role he's always played. It's odd that a 20-30 goal scorer 50-65 point player who has been relied on for scoring his whole career is being used as a matchup guy (once again I'm not saying green is the only reason but I'm questioning is deployment). The comment seemed more in frustration of the spotlight on Erikssons production than lashing out, understandable.

 

(There are more players but this is getting long. I'd love to hear what you all think of player deployment and their roles. Examples Jake on right side not left, Boeser playing with Pettersson and not Horvat ect ect, and how players could better be utilized)

 

i feel that Green has until the beginning of December before he is let go due to not properly utilizing the roster Benning has assemble

 

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wanless said:

Here we are at my point. The Canucks have a coach in his third year, in the NHL. He's never been an assistant at this level! Rod was an assistant for 7 years first, Berube has been a head before aswell as multiple years as an assistant, they've both cut their teeth. I don't think that Travis Green has the experience necessary to be able to get the team to 100% he's just to "green" of a coach.

Based on timelines, I never thought that Green was the coach they were hiring to win the Stanley Cup.  When they hired Green, I figured they were at least 5 years from contending.  Most coaches have their biggest impact in the first few years with a team.  I still think, that in a couple of years they will decide the team needs a new coach to take them to the next level.  The only question is, who will be available when the time comes?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

Based on timelines, I never thought that Green was the coach they were hiring to win the Stanley Cup.  When they hired Green, I figured they were at least 5 years from contending.  Most coaches have their biggest impact in the first few years with a team.  I still think, that in a couple of years they will decide the team needs a new coach to take them to the next level.  The only question is, who will be available when the time comes?

I was actually thinking about who would succeed in the event. Living in Vic and watching the Royals I really liked Dave Lowry and his style. 

 

But he also only has 4 years of assisting under his belt in the NHL

 

Also to the point of coaches having most impact in the first 4 years, the Penguins have won the cup twice after a mid season coaching change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Wanless said:

These last playoffs were interesting, the highly skilled teams were bounced earlier than expected and even considered to be "upset", the teams that did better than expected all had new coaches, and then theres Boston just a very well assembled team. 

 

The thing I noticed most was how teams with little player movement and new coaching did well. 

 

I'm looking at player movement and the impact of coaching the rosters

 

I'm gonna start with the hurricanes as they had the most movement

Out - Skinner, Hanifin, Lindholm

In - Hamilton, Ferland, Svechnikov, Neidereitter. 

 

In terms of actually getting better on paper, it was marginal and due to the addition of 4 to the loss of 3 main pieces. Non of the trades were lopsided  and could be argued that the flames ended up with the better players. However Rod Brind'Amour took over coaching and everyone knows about his work ethic.

 

Next are the Islanders

Out - Tavares

In - ...

The big difference is Trotz, arguably the best coach in the league. He took a team with 296 goals against (worst) and brought it down to an incredible 196 (best). Sure this was at the expense of scoring but wins resulted. Trotz is also famous for tight defensive systems but he's shown to know how to use his players to get wins and how to get offense without sacrificing defence when he has scorers to work with, see Washington Capitals.

 

Now the cup winners

Out - 

In - 

No players changed between coaches and the blues went from last place in January to winning the cup. I didn't include any of the offseason changes as I'm looking to compare rosters with coaches and how the coaches managed their groups.

 

Here we are at my point. The Canucks have a coach in his third year, in the NHL. He's never been an assistant at this level! Rod was an assistant for 7 years first, Berube has been a head before aswell as multiple years as an assistant, they've both cut their teeth. I don't think that Travis Green has the experience necessary to be able to get the team to 100% he's just to "green" of a coach.

 

I do like the style he is after though. But I feel as though he has made questionable deployment to achieve it. A big indicator of this to me is using Horvat as an offensive guy where to my eye test he has done better as a two way guy capitalizing on the other team turning the puck over in the Canucks end and neutral zone. Horvat also believes "Being below the puck and committing to playing well defensively is what is driving [his ]offense right now" https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/defensive-responsibility-leads-to-offensive-reward-for-canucks-captain-in-waiting-horvat. His shutdown of McDavid was incredible this season, with Horvat winning the comparison in all categories while on the ice together (This came from John and john during a game in mid-late season). With this it seems as soon as another defensive center is available green moves Horvat back to offense primary roles.

 

Loui Eriksson and his comments of being used in a role he's not used to being in are spot on. I'm not saying that green is causing Eriksson to suck but he's not using him in the role he's always played. It's odd that a 20-30 goal scorer 50-65 point player who has been relied on for scoring his whole career is being used as a matchup guy (once again I'm not saying green is the only reason but I'm questioning is deployment). The comment seemed more in frustration of the spotlight on Erikssons production than lashing out, understandable.

 

(There are more players but this is getting long. I'd love to hear what you all think of player deployment and their roles. Examples Jake on right side not left, Boeser playing with Pettersson and not Horvat ect ect, and how players could better be utilized)

 

i feel that Green has until the beginning of December before he is let go due to not properly utilizing the roster Benning has assemble

 

 

 

Green no longer can make excuses if the team doesn't perform. This is the deepest team the Canucks have assembled in recent memory (ignoring 2011 of course) from top to bottom.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dazzle said:

Green no longer can make excuses if the team doesn't perform. This is the deepest team the Canucks have assembled in recent memory (ignoring 2011 of course) from top to bottom.

But I think he will get an entire season with this roster.  I don't feel like a coaching change is on the horizon, yet.  Next season at the earliest.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, goalie13 said:

But I think he will get an entire season with this roster.  I don't feel like a coaching change is on the horizon, yet.  Next season at the earliest.

I think it depends on who is available like you suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Green no longer can make excuses if the team doesn't perform. This is the deepest team the Canucks have assembled in recent memory (ignoring 2011 of course) from top to bottom.

Absolutely.

 

There is no longer the issue of losing a centre, there is a proper top 6 forward group with a couple tweeners and the defence gained 3 new roster players 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

But I think he will get an entire season with this roster.  I don't feel like a coaching change is on the horizon, yet.  Next season at the earliest.

I think he'll get two. Petey with three seasons under his belt, and Boeser with four. And far more young depth on the farm by then. That's when the team will be primed for a real run and a new proven coach needed.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know.. coaching changes usually happen when teams are really sucking, or at least relative to expectations. I don't know numbers, but that's how I see it.

 

As such, I think our boys are past the point of truly sucking, but it will still be a few years before the expectations are high enough that failure warrants a change.. 

 

I think Green has 3-4 years to produce something grand.. and hopefully he will be learning during that time as well.. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wanless said:

These last playoffs were interesting, the highly skilled teams were bounced earlier than expected and even considered to be "upset", the teams that did better than expected all had new coaches, and then theres Boston just a very well assembled team. 

 

The thing I noticed most was how teams with little player movement and new coaching did well. 

 

I'm looking at player movement and the impact of coaching the rosters

 

I'm gonna start with the hurricanes as they had the most movement

Out - Skinner, Hanifin, Lindholm

In - Hamilton, Ferland, Svechnikov, Neidereitter. 

 

In terms of actually getting better on paper, it was marginal and due to the addition of 4 to the loss of 3 main pieces. Non of the trades were lopsided  and could be argued that the flames ended up with the better players. However Rod Brind'Amour took over coaching and everyone knows about his work ethic.

 

Next are the Islanders

Out - Tavares

In - ...

The big difference is Trotz, arguably the best coach in the league. He took a team with 296 goals against (worst) and brought it down to an incredible 196 (best). Sure this was at the expense of scoring but wins resulted. Trotz is also famous for tight defensive systems but he's shown to know how to use his players to get wins and how to get offense without sacrificing defence when he has scorers to work with, see Washington Capitals.

 

Now the cup winners

Out - 

In - 

No players changed between coaches and the blues went from last place in January to winning the cup. I didn't include any of the offseason changes as I'm looking to compare rosters with coaches and how the coaches managed their groups.

 

Here we are at my point. The Canucks have a coach in his third year, in the NHL. He's never been an assistant at this level! Rod was an assistant for 7 years first, Berube has been a head before aswell as multiple years as an assistant, they've both cut their teeth. I don't think that Travis Green has the experience necessary to be able to get the team to 100% he's just to "green" of a coach.

 

I do like the style he is after though. But I feel as though he has made questionable deployment to achieve it. A big indicator of this to me is using Horvat as an offensive guy where to my eye test he has done better as a two way guy capitalizing on the other team turning the puck over in the Canucks end and neutral zone. Horvat also believes "Being below the puck and committing to playing well defensively is what is driving [his ]offense right now" https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/defensive-responsibility-leads-to-offensive-reward-for-canucks-captain-in-waiting-horvat. His shutdown of McDavid was incredible this season, with Horvat winning the comparison in all categories while on the ice together (This came from John and john during a game in mid-late season). With this it seems as soon as another defensive center is available green moves Horvat back to offense primary roles.

 

Loui Eriksson and his comments of being used in a role he's not used to being in are spot on. I'm not saying that green is causing Eriksson to suck but he's not using him in the role he's always played. It's odd that a 20-30 goal scorer 50-65 point player who has been relied on for scoring his whole career is being used as a matchup guy (once again I'm not saying green is the only reason but I'm questioning is deployment). The comment seemed more in frustration of the spotlight on Erikssons production than lashing out, understandable.

 

(There are more players but this is getting long. I'd love to hear what you all think of player deployment and their roles. Examples Jake on right side not left, Boeser playing with Pettersson and not Horvat ect ect, and how players could better be utilized)

 

i feel that Green has until the beginning of December before he is let go due to not properly utilizing the roster Benning has assemble

 

 

 

so basically what you are saying coach green is terrible  lol   really he has coached for 2 years at the nhl level  had the 2 leading scorer;s retire , a ton of injuries and still managed not to lose ground  point wise ,  Horvat has come into is own and is a great  2 way player and your complaining about him being an offensive guy  , what you want only one offensive line then? who is the second line center then ? wasn't sutter our 3rd line center hurt all season ? you want green to put bo on the 4 th line like willie d did ?

 

 

Come on with the eriksson  bs  he has 2 coaches with the canucks  , he has had every opportunity to play  in the top 6 and top 9 roles  , that's not coaching that's a player not taking responsibility for his play , you wanna play more , show that you wanna play more , don't sit there like a baby whining the coach don't like you boo hoo  .lol like how you give loui the benefit of the doubt for 3years but not coach green  in 2    Coach Green has the canucks playing a hard  working up tempo game  ice time is earned not given  and now he has pieces in place to play a even more aggressive game

Edited by the grinder
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Green has done a great job and seems in sync with the team JB is putting together.  He coaches an up tempo style that really fits the current group, at least on paper.

 

He’s gotten a ton out of the young guys while the vets have played hard for him too when healthy.  Edler is playing what might be the best hockey of his career and healthy 17-18 Sutter is exactly what we went out to acquire.  

 

No reason to think he’ll be replaced any time soon. 

maybe if we had a different coach we'd magically have better assets. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

imo, green is doing a good job with what he has. if louie was more effective on a scoring line, green would have played him more on it. i trust his decisions more than mine.

Joe, 

Not laughing at you....just laughing at your simplicity

True words!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, the grinder said:

so basically what you are saying coach green is terrible  lol   really he has coached for 2 years at the nhl level  had the 2 leading scorer;s retire , a ton of injuries and still managed not to lose ground  point wise ,  Horvat has come into is own and is a great  2 way player and your complaining about him being an offensive guy  , what you want only one offensive line then? who is the second line center then ? wasn't sutter our 3rd line center hurt all season ? you want green to put bo on the 4 th line like willie d did ?

 

 

Come on with the eriksson  bs  he has 2 coaches with the canucks  , he has had every opportunity to play  in the top 6 and top 9 roles  , that's not coaching that's a player not taking responsibility for his play , you wanna play more , show that you wanna play more , don't sit there like a baby whining the coach don't like you boo hoo  .lol like how you give loui the benefit of the doubt for 3years but not coach green  in 2    Coach Green has the canucks playing a hard  working up tempo game  ice time is earned not given  and now he has pieces in place to play a even more aggressive game

I never said he's terrible

 

I'm making the point that coaching might be more important that most people think and also coach green might not be deploying his players properly

 

As for Horvat, no complaints that he being used as an offensive player, but I've seen and it's been reported that his offense stays the same or increases when he plays a more defensive role.

 

As for Eriksson, he isn't being used to his strengths especially while playing with Sutter in a shutdown role. He is an offensive player. The argument is against green not about Eriksson. 

 

So clearly you missed the point that I believe Green is not deploying players to their strengths and the on ice product is suffering.

 

With this year's roster I suggested he have until December to prove he can coach. Until then I hope he wins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Regarding Green

Other than Eriksson's comments

I have only heard good words coming from the players

Honest and fair is what I hear from the players

I wish we all could have Bosses like him

 

As for usage

I think putting Pettersson, Boeser and Hughes out together 3 on 3 was genius

Especially with no red lights

Just create boys and have some fun!

To me, that was a lot of trust...…………….

 

As for play...………….

Green wants a 200 ft. game and plays everyone according to that

It is honest and fair

Eriksson plays because he has a 200 ft. game

Goldobin doesn't because he does not have a 200 ft. game

Again Fair and Honest

 

As for results

Green has shown when given the proper tools

Both in the AHL and NHL he is successful

You can't judge him for no depth

That was Benning's problem

 

He will get 2 or 3 years of leash

It will be interesting to see how he deal with Eriksson

and how he deals with Tryamkin if he comes back

I agree that he has done well in the past and that he is fair. But that doesn't mean he is evaluating and deploying his talent appropriately. That is my main concern. Remember the Hutton Gudbranson pairing?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Yeah if the coaching change comes with a top pairing, right shooting defenceman I’ll drive Green to the airport myself. 

 

It’s a common fallacy in sport that if something isn’t going well to just try something different.  Sometimes teams need time to learn and grow.. and mistakes and periods of “failure” are a part of that.

 

It’s especially true when the overall talent level is low.  They could be preforming at a (relatively) high level and still losing games.  One aspect of the last 5 seasons I’ve appreciated is the relative continuity in management and coaching.  

 

We’ve lost Willie and Linden, but overall it’s been stable considering the team’s record.  I don’t have any magic stats to back it up, but I’ve always thought this was a wise course.  Particularly if you’re transitioning in a bunch of younger players who can benefit from some familiarity rather than musical chairs with the coaching staff (and subsequently strategy, etc.) 

I feel the same way about the past. But looking forward how much rope does Green get. There is only 1 area that is lacking and that is a true top pairing dman as you suggested, but the d should no longer be a scapegoat as there two top 2-3 guys (Edler-Tanev) a legit number 4 (Myers) two number 5 guys (Benn and Stetcher) and a wild card in Hughes who is looking to be anywhere from a 1-4 guy.

 

The grace of job security due to lack of depth is gone for Green. Especially looking from Benning's point of view. The Canucks need to be in a position to make the playoffs so Benning can keep his job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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