Fire Green!

[IBatch]

42 minutes ago, stawns said:

Lthe optics can look worse than the reality, thats for sure.  There's been games where they have given up a lot of shots and garret says Marky stole one., but when you watch you can see that the opponent didn't actually have a lot of scoring chances, despite the high shot total.  

 

Still, I prefer them to play more aggressively, though the flip side of that is they get out of position a lot more and give up higher scoring chances.

Andersson has been keeping the Leafs above water for years now, one could say - BUT looking closer they don't block as many shots and just let their goalies make the save (almost all low percentage shots hit the goalie if he can see them).   It's similar with our team - sure we often allow more shots through but the majority are easy saves 29/30 times.   Don't really get into the advantages stats as they rarely tell the whole story - but shot attempts do say something.   As long as we are getting more shot attempts off then the opposition and our zone time is higher then our system is working. 

[the grinder]

2 hours ago, RowdyCanuck said:

I enjoy that pool lol it's fun seeing who you can tick off lol  

the canuck pool  is the great  right now . team is competing hard for spot , 1st in the pacific at the break  ,  , we have more good young players on the way , proving the doubters wrong,   ahhhh the canuck life 

[the grinder]

dbl

Edited January 20, 2020 by the grinder

[coastal.view]

23 minutes ago, the grinder said:

the canuck pool  is the great  right now . team is competing hard for spot , 1st in the pacific at the break  ,  , we have more good young players on the way , proving the doubters wrong,   ahhhh the canuck life 

never had any idea previously that i might say or desire this

but man

 

i suddenly have thoughts that it would it be nice to be a blow up orca

 

[oldnews]

On 1/20/2020 at 12:19 PM, stawns said:

I'm not a big fan of it either, but if played right, can be pretty effective 

In my mind it's a system more suited to the heavier teams in the league - ie the LAKIngs of their contending years - heavier D group and heavier forward group, all willing to block shots, fairly hard to dictate in the 'hard areas' Iand having a gt like Quick who was elite at gettng low and seeing through traffic didn't hurt) - but even with teams somewhat designed for it, opponents built otherwise - ie the Hawks - could activate their defense, could stretch the collapse out, could win the races to loose pucks via a speed/skill lineup, could take advantage of soft spot like higher in the slot or behind the net - could move the puck rapidly around the perimeter and wear on a team's ability to last out shifts...so it could be effective, but it could also be broken down.  I think it had become a more common D system around the league but I think the limits of it were also getting more exposed - particularly with the trend towards more speed throughout lineups, more puck moving defensmen and perhaps even more players entering the league that are able to score from outside the harder areas?

I imagine it's still something employed in a more fluid way - but at the same time I think if a team is too static and predictable, it gets too easy to gameplan.  Tortorella was as clear an example of that as I've ever seen.  He seemed literally 'figured out' by the entire conference by Christmas.   Teams employed precisely those tactics above against us - and not only was this team not really designed for it - but the less effective it was, the more exposed your key defensive players are - to getting peppered by shooting galleries.  I'm not suggesting their injury problems simply boiled down to this - it's way more complicated than that overall - but the wear and tear on rented mules like Edler - or Tanev was evident.  And Tortorella seemed to have a hard-headed refusal to system his team to it's strengths.  I personally was relieved when the franchise reverted back to its roots - towards the kind of up tempo, puck pressure, transition hockey of the AV era.   From WD forward (whether people like him or not and whether his personnel were able to pull it off or not) - the team seemed to 'transition' back to its roots, furthered by the style that Green employs.

 

Beyond that I find it pretty difficult to watch a game, particularly on tv at game speed - and attempt to decipher all the systems they are employing  - half the time you have a half-view or partial field of play, and moreover, systems change so much on the fly, depending on what unit is out there, in what situation, against whom.  I won't begin to pretend to chart their systems but I think it would and probably should be  a greater topic of discussion / addressed in more depth - particularly if people pretend to dismiss/critique Green's 'system'.

Often it's defined as simply as "dump and chase" - which is borderline comical.   I mean if you take a player approaching a zone entry (which itself is only a fraction of the game, perhaps 1/2 of 5%ish lol  - and look at the context, it becomes evident that 'dump and chase' has literally nothing to do with a team's overall systems - ie a team spends 45 seconds defending in it's own zone, gains possession, moves the puck through the neutral zone - is very likely to 'dump and change' (or possibly cycle the puck back to a D if the opposition also tips that they are changing = not really a 'system' but a situational option that a player options.  Likewise, a team forces a turnover outside the opposing blueline, gains possession in the neutral zone, but is confronted with a concentration of opponents, who are 'standing up' the entry at the blueline - likely a dump and chase circumstance.   Hughes, Virtanen or whomever winds up behind their net as an opponent changes - carry the puck through the neutral zone and the opponent respects their speed or ability to break down or beat pressure - perhaps they back off at the blueline not wanting to get beaten - probably a controlled entry situation, etc, etc.  But to nit-pick a singular micro-aspect of the game and characterize Green's "system" as 'dump and chase" is exceedingly absurd and relatively disinterested in actually learning anything about the game, about what actual systems a team employs.  Ir's right up there with the common complaints about AV's "defend the 0-0" tie 'system - when AV actually ran moderately aggressive forechecking systems, fairly aggressive puck pressuring d zone overloads, had one of the highest scoring teams in the NHL - a great 'possession' era for the franchise actually - and yet, 'defend the 0-0 tie!' lol    Not exactly 'discussion' worth repeatedly engaging in.

 

Ok - that's enough for me on this matter lol.  It's really the type of topic - NHL systems - that it would take chapters, books, to really get at the extent of.

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by oldnews

[Bertorama]

Uhhh no. I don’t think so. 
 

Heck while we are at it fire Benning, Trade Peterson and Hughes For some late round draft picks. That way we can justify the stupidity of firing Green and plead insanity in the courtroom during trial with some justification. 
 

 

[ShawnAntoski]

5 hours ago, Bertorama said:

Uhhh no. I don’t think so. 
 

Heck while we are at it fire Benning, Trade Peterson and Hughes For some late round draft picks. That way we can justify the stupidity of firing Green and plead insanity in the courtroom during trial with some justification. 
 

 

I kinda, enjoy the impulsiveness and shortsightedness that some posters post cause without them, there wouldnt be as many discussion.  I can tolerate such post(s), as long as it comes with a somewhat coherent and logical argument but if it is just a d!&b statement then I agree - at the very least give a reason why.

[ShawnAntoski]

9 hours ago, oldnews said:

In my mind it's a system more suited to the heavier teams in the league - ie the LAKIngs of their contending years - heavier D group and heavier forward group, all willing to block shots, fairly hard to dictate in the 'hard areas' - but even with teams somewhat designed for it, opponents built otherwise - ie the Hawks - could activate their defense, could stretch the collapse out, could win the races to loose pucks via a speed/skill lineup, could take advantage of soft spot like higher in the slot or behind the net - could move the puck rapidly around the perimeter and wear on a team's ability to last out shifts.....  I think it had become a more common D system around the league but I think the limits of it were also getting more exposed - particularly with the trend towards more speed throughout lineups, more puck moving defensmen and perhaps even more players entering the league that are able to score from outside the harder areas?

I imagine it's still something employed in a more fluid way - but at the same time I think if a team is too static and predictable, it gets too easy to gameplan.  Tortorella was as clear an example of that as I've ever seen.  He seemed literally 'figured out' by the entire conference by Christmas.   Teams employed precisely those tactics above against us - and not only was this team not really designed for it - but the less effective it was, the more exposed your key defensive players are - to getting peppered by shooting galleries.  I'm not suggesting their injury problems simply boiled down to this - it's way more complicated than that overall - but the wear and tear on rented mules like Edler - or Tanev was evident.  And Tortorella seemed to have a hard-headed refusal to system his team to it's strengths.  I personally was relieved when the franchise reverted back to its roots - towards the kind of up tempo, puck pressure, transition hockey of the AV era.   From WD forward (whether people like him or not and whether his personnel were able to pull it off or not) - the team seemed to 'transition' back to its roots, furthered by the style that Green employs.

 

Beyond that I find it pretty difficult to watch a game, particularly on tv at game speed - and attempt to decipher all the systems they are employing  - half the time you have a half-view or partial field of play, and moreover, systems change so much on the fly, depending on what unit is out there, in what situation, against whom.  I won't begin to pretend to chart their systems but I think it would and probably should be  a greater topic of discussion / addressed in more depth - particularly if people pretend to dismiss/critique Green's 'system'.

Often it's defined as simply as "dump and chase" - which is borderline comical.   I mean if you take a player approaching a zone entry (which itself is only a fraction of the game, perhaps 1/2 of 5%ish lol  - and look at the context, it becomes evident that 'dump and chase' has literally nothing to do with a team's overall systems - ie a team spends 45 seconds defending in it's own zone, gains possession, moves the puck through the neutral zone - is very likely to 'dump and change' (or possibly cycle the puck back to a D if the opposition also tips that they are changing = not really a 'system' but a situational option that a player options.  Likewise, a team forces a turnover outside the opposing blueline, gains possession in the neutral zone, but is confronted with a concentration of opponents, who are 'standing up' the entry at the blueline - likely a dump and chase circumstance.   Hughes, Virtanen or whomever winds up behind their net as an opponent changes - carry the puck through the neutral zone and the opponent respects their speed or ability to break down or beat pressure - perhaps they back off at the blueline not wanting to get beaten - probably a controlled entry situation, etc, etc.  But to nit-pick a singular micro-aspect of the game and characterize Green's "system" as 'dump and chase" is exceedingly absurd and relatively disinterested in actually learning anything about the game, about what actual systems a team employs.  Ir's right up there with the common complaints about AV's "defend the 0-0" tie 'system - when AV actually ran moderately aggressive forechecking systems, fairly aggressive puck pressuring d zone overloads, had one of the highest scoring teams in the NHL - a great 'possession' era for the franchise actually - and yet, 'defend the 0-0 tie!' lol    Not exactly 'discussion' worth repeatedly engaging in.

 

Ok - that's enough for me on this matter lol.  It's really the type of topic - NHL systems - that it would take chapters, books, to really get at the extent of.

 

Ditto and an emoji for writing the article.  Perhaps give the sheeps, a brake cause most of us are just (longtime) fans, with an untrained eye,  that tends to be impulsive with our comments, especially, after a lost - we just want the Canucks to win. 

[canuckels]

34 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Ditto and an emoji for writing the article.  Perhaps give the sheeps, a brake cause most of us are just (longtime) fans, with an untrained eye,  that tends to be impulsive with our comments, especially, after a lost - we just want the Canucks to win. 

AMEN!!!!!!!! 

[Moose Nuckle]

I thought this topic was about mystical green fire. That $&!# is cool!

[Dumb Nuck]

On 1/20/2020 at 10:33 AM, Viper007 said:

SEASON-BY-SEASON LOOK

 

* indicates interim coach at time of hiring

 

Season: 2014-15

TEAM	COACH OUT (Date of firing)	RECORD	COACH IN	RECORD	PLAYOFFS?
Senators	Paul MacLean (Dec. 8)	11-11-5	Dave Cameron	32-15-8	Lost Round 1
Oilers	Dallas Eakins (Dec. 15)	7-19-5	Todd Nelson*	17-22-7	No
Devils	Peter DeBoer (Dec. 26)	12-17-7	Adam Oates & Scott Stevens*	20-19-7	No
Maple Leafs	Randy Carlyle (Jan. 6)	21-16-3	Peter Horachek*	9-28-5	No

The Devils’ bench got pretty crowded — not only did then-GM Lou Lamoriello make the super-rare decision to name two co-coaches for the rest of the season, the executive himself joined them temporarily to get an up-close look at his team’s performance.

Season: 2015-16

TEAM	COACH OUT (Date of firing)	RECORD	COACH IN	RECORD	PLAYOFFS?
Blue Jackets	Todd Richards (Oct. 21)	0-7-0	John Tortorella	34-33-8	No
Penguins	Mike Johnston (Dec. 12)	15-10-3	Mike Sullivan	33-16-5	Won Stanley Cup
Wild	Mike Yeo (Feb. 13)	23-22-10	John Torchetti*	15-11-1	Lost Round 1

Tortorella couldn’t get Columbus into the post-season in 2015-16, but he’s coached the club to the playoffs in each of his three full seasons since.

Season: 2016-17

TEAM	COACH OUT (Date of firing)	RECORD	COACH IN	RECORD	PLAYOFFS?
Panthers	Gerard Gallant (Nov. 27)	11-10-1	Tom Rowe, GM*	24-26-10	No
Islanders	Jack Capuano (Jan. 17)	17-17-8	Dought Weight*	24-12-4	No
Blues	Ken Hitchcock (Feb. 1)	24-21-5	Mike Yeo	22-8-2	Lost in Round 2
Bruins	Claude Julien (Feb. 7)	26-23-6	Bruce Cassidy*	18-8-1	Lost in Round 1
Canadiens	Michel Therrien (Feb. 14)	31-19-8	Claude Julien	16-7-1	Lost in Round 1

Julien was the longest-tenured coach at the time of his dismissal in Boston, and he was unemployed for all of one week as the Canadiens took swift action to hire him. This was Montreal’s second time hiring Julien as head coach — and Therrien’s second time being replaced by Julien behind the the Canadiens’ bench.

Hitchcock’s dismissal was also pretty surprising at the time, considering he had announced prior to the season that 2016-17 would be his last. The team hired Yeo as an assistant with the intention of being Hitchcock’s replacement following the campaign, but Blues management ultimately decided to go ahead and make the move early.

Season: 2017-18
None!

This was the first season since 1966-67, the last year of the Original Six era, that saw no coaches fired mid-season. Turns out, it was just the calm before the storm…

Season: 2018-19

TEAM	COACH OUT (Date of firing)	RECORD	COACH IN	RECORD	PLAYOFFS?
Kings	John Stevens (Nov. 4)	4-8-1	Willie Desjardins*	27-34-8	No
Blackhawks	Joel Quenneville (Nov. 6)	6-6-3	Jeremy Colliton	30-28-9	No
Blues	Mike Yeo (Nov. 19)	7-9-3	Craig Berube*	38-19-6	Won Stanley Cup
Oilers	Todd McLellan (Nov. 20)	9-10-1	Ken Hitchcock*	26-28-8	No
Flyers	Dave Hakstol (Dec. 17)	12-15-4	Scott Gordon*	25-22-4	No
Ducks	Randy Carlyle (Feb. 10)	21-26-9	Bob Murray, GM*	14-11-1	No
Senators	Guy Boucher (March 1)	22-37-5	Marc Crawford*	7-10-1	No

 

This doesn't look like 40% to me, and this is only the last 5 seasons.  How about you post some real facts instead of spewing what you think is true. 19 Coaches changed midseason.  Only 2 won the cup.  2/19 = 10.5%.  No where near 40%.

 

In the past 10 years, four teams have gone on to win the Stanley Cup after firing their head coach during the season. And prior to 2009, only three teams in league history had accomplished the feat. Coincidentally, the Leafs — in 1932 when they replaced Art Duncan with Dick Irvin Sr. — were the first to do it.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/seven-nhl-teams-fire-coach-win-stanley-cup-sheldon-keefe-leafs-try-to-add-to-that-1.5368179

 

 

[TheCammer]

On 1/18/2020 at 10:05 PM, Dumb Nuck said:

I love our team, hate the coaching. Yeah, I know that today we are #1 in our division but we are one loss away from 6th. I’m not a Green lover, I think he’s way to soft of a coach to have any playoff success so I’ll put my money where my mouth is:

 

I will donate to Canucks Place as follows:

 

$25 if we win the first round under Green.

$50 more if we win the second round under Green.

$100 more if we win the conference finals under Green.

$150 more if we win the cup under Green.

 

Bookmark it, quote me, hold me accountable, I’m putting my beer money where my mouth is.

 

 

 

After reading all your posts and responses on here I do agree with one thing; your name. You certainly are.

[Dumb Nuck]

5 hours ago, TheCammer said:

After reading all your posts and responses on here I do agree with one thing; your name. You certainly are.

Wow, good one, never would have thought of that, you are a genius.

[Timråfan]

On 1/20/2020 at 10:11 PM, IBatch said:

Andersson has been keeping the Leafs above water for years now, one could say - BUT looking closer they don't block as many shots and just let their goalies make the save (almost all low percentage shots hit the goalie if he can see them).   It's similar with our team - sure we often allow more shots through but the majority are easy saves 29/30 times.   Don't really get into the advantages stats as they rarely tell the whole story - but shot attempts do say something.   As long as we are getting more shot attempts off then the opposition and our zone time is higher then our system is working. 

When I heard or read anyone going deeper into goalie shot stats, they all talk about Marky as a top 5/10.

 

 

[IBatch]

5 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

When I heard or read anyone going deeper into goalie shot stats, they all talk about Marky as a top 5/10.

 

 

Maybe lately...but not a year ago or even before the season started.   Top five?  Well I've seen one article declaring that and it was yesterday.   THN annual goaltending issue, which came about eight weeks ago at least finally had him in the top 30.  It's going to take some time for recognition...as it should - experts know how fickle the position is.   Remember Hammond when he came I the league in the Spring and won all 25ish of his starts/games in a row?  Remember who he is at all?   Not sure what your post is declaring - was referring too systems and how shots on goal don't tell the entire story.    Right now I'd agree that Markstrom is playing like a top ten goalie, maybe top five even, especially at home. 

[Timråfan]

6 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Maybe lately...but not a year ago or even before the season started.   Top five?  Well I've seen one article declaring that and it was yesterday.   THN annual goaltending issue, which came about eight weeks ago at least finally had him in the top 30.  It's going to take some time for recognition...as it should - experts know how fickle the position is.   Remember Hammond when he came I the league in the Spring and won all 25ish of his starts/games in a row?  Remember who he is at all?   Not sure what your post is declaring - was referring too systems and how shots on goal don't tell the entire story.    Right now I'd agree that Markstrom is playing like a top ten goalie, maybe top five even, especially at home. 

It was a radio broadcast, or pod or whatever it's called nowadays.. They talked about advanced shot stats and the shots Marky saved put him in or close to top 5. I'm sorry I can't remember where I listened to it. 

[IBatch]

38 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

It was a radio broadcast, or pod or whatever it's called nowadays.. They talked about advanced shot stats and the shots Marky saved put him in or close to top 5. I'm sorry I can't remember where I listened to it. 

No worries.   It's great he's getting recognized now - it's been over a year now since his play has gone up a level and he's sustained it.    If it wasn't for a slow start it would be even longer (last year).   Even though he's not leading in the regular statistical categories he's definitely an eye test goalie - and  for a reason given the quality of saves and what sort of saves he makes, he is  also becoming an advanced stat darling.   He's often left exposed on the road - hope the team figures out how to tighten this up ... also can't wait to see if he's a money goalie in the playoffs.   Home ice advantage would sure go a long way for our playoff aspirations - and without him no way we'd have any.   A month ago I made a thread that we should possibly let JM walk or trade him while we still can as the cost to sign him will likely be Demko.   Since he's made me a believer, and get why JB wants him on our team for another contract, and accept that as a reasonable cost (ED).  

 

Fortunately for us goalies often play their best hockey in their 30's (the good ones), same as good defenseman.    No apology necessary- like to read and hear more about Markstrom, just haven't yet but he's made me a believer despite how up and down the position is - maybe the All Star game will be his coming out party.

[Viper007]

20 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

In the past 10 years, four teams have gone on to win the Stanley Cup after firing their head coach during the season. And prior to 2009, only three teams in league history had accomplished the feat. Coincidentally, the Leafs — in 1932 when they replaced Art Duncan with Dick Irvin Sr. — were the first to do it.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/seven-nhl-teams-fire-coach-win-stanley-cup-sheldon-keefe-leafs-try-to-add-to-that-1.5368179

 

 

You wrote 40% of teams who changed coaches mid season had won the cup.  So if you're gonna go by those stats (moving goalposts again) wouldn't it be better to keep the coach since 60% of the time, a team that doesn't change the coach has won the cup?

[Rob_Zepp]

On 1/18/2020 at 10:05 PM, Dumb Nuck said:

I love our team, hate the coaching. Yeah, I know that today we are #1 in our division but we are one loss away from 6th. I’m not a Green lover, I think he’s way to soft of a coach to have any playoff success so I’ll put my money where my mouth is:

 

I will donate to Canucks Place as follows:

 

$25 if we win the first round under Green.

$50 more if we win the second round under Green.

$100 more if we win the conference finals under Green.

$150 more if we win the cup under Green.

 

Bookmark it, quote me, hold me accountable, I’m putting my beer money where my mouth is.

 

 

 

[Rob_Zepp]

21 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

In the past 10 years, four teams have gone on to win the Stanley Cup after firing their head coach during the season. And prior to 2009, only three teams in league history had accomplished the feat. Coincidentally, the Leafs — in 1932 when they replaced Art Duncan with Dick Irvin Sr. — were the first to do it.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/seven-nhl-teams-fire-coach-win-stanley-cup-sheldon-keefe-leafs-try-to-add-to-that-1.5368179

 

 

...and some people who have devastating kitchen knife accidents to their genitals go on to better sex lives - doesn't mean that you should try it.