Fire Green!

[nucklehead]

On 1/18/2020 at 10:29 PM, Dumb Nuck said:

I’m betting my beer money on it, now that’s what I’d call balls.

No, just sounds like your beer budget could stand a trimming anyhow. 

[oldnews]

9 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Very good question, IMHO, yes they can but it’s extremely difficult as when you’re in charge it’s hard to admit weaknesses.i have not seen anything from Green to indicate he is learning or adapting, same systems, same decisions, same excuses.

terrible answer

and you're projecting.

[Devron]

9 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Well, 40% of the teams that fired their coach mid season in the last ten years won the cup, regardless, read my original post, I said for all donations “under Green” that means I’ll donate next year, the year after or any year he’s our coach and actually accomplishes anything, I just don’t believe he will.

I’ll take 60% every single day of the week 

[stawns]

15 hours ago, RowdyCanuck said:

Okay where to start first.....this is nothing lol I've gotten my share of attention for having a different opinion but this is totally different.....

your talking to someone that called the Sedins a rude name and picks on Brock's skating but yet this isn't even a debate or a conversation......

if you have a different opinion then use your big boy words and don't insult people but explain why you see that.......it works for me. (Word choice has gotten me in trouble and sometimes not enough context)

Okay fire Green.....if you asked me acouple months ago I would agree but Green has shown he has tools to be a good NHL coach but lacks experience and it doesn't help Nolan's D system makes scratch my head more times then I can count....

So maybe the thread should say fire Nolan not Green. 

 

A collapsing, zone style system is a very effective system, but you need to have an aggressive dcorp who can pounce quickly on opposition mistakes and transition the puck up ice quickly.  I don't see tat consistently from this dcorps, but that doesn't mean the actual system isn't good.  That said, they might give up a high number of shots, but a low number of quality chances and a low number of rebounds........it's also why they are high in blocked shots.  Personally, I like a more aggressive system, but the zone system does work, and does work for the Canucks.......for the most part. 

[the grinder]

10 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Maybe, but I am putting my money where my mouth is, eventually we will see who’s insane but it could be at the expense of a many more cupless years.

if your expecting a cup this year , your out of your tree , , we are still a few years away from being a contender but we will definitely will be battling  in the playoffs for years , no matter who the coach is 

[Viper007]

10 hours ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Well, 40% of the teams that fired their coach mid season in the last ten years won the cup, regardless, read my original post, I said for all donations “under Green” that means I’ll donate next year, the year after or any year he’s our coach and actually accomplishes anything, I just don’t believe he will.

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%.

 

Edited January 20, 2020 by Viper007

[the grinder]

17 hours ago, CptCanuck16 said:

Your reading  comprehension isn't so good is it? Did you achieve a Grade 12 reading level in school? I'm guessing not. The qualifier in the first statement is "if anything",  meaning had Jake been put on the PP earlier in the season he may have started to blossom even earlier this season.  Potentially, but who knows? That's why I used the qualifier "if anything" so folks who can read would comprehend I wasnt saying definitively that Green was stifling Jake's development.  SMDH. The CDC is turning into a lesson in the English language. 

what a load  of BS ,  you said green stifled jakes developement , it either yes he has or no he hasn't,   it just  one simple answer to the question    it should be easy to comprehend

17 hours ago, CptCanuck16 said:

Good lord, so much vitriol on this board. Hold a dissenting opinion and people want to burn you at the stake. No wonder Sabresfan1 left.  What a cesspool the CDC has become. It's a shame.

well your in the pool  ,  have a opinion and then you try to insult people   and now playing the victim sounds like sabre fan  

[RowdyCanuck]

37 minutes ago, stawns said:

A collapsing, zone style system is a very effective system, but you need to have an aggressive dcorp who can pounce quickly on opposition mistakes and transition the puck up ice quickly.  I don't see tat consistently from this dcorps, but that doesn't mean the actual system isn't good.  That said, they might give up a high number of shots, but a low number of quality chances and a low number of rebounds........it's also why they are high in blocked shots.  Personally, I like a more aggressive system, but the zone system does work, and does work for the Canucks.......for the most part. 

I think if we don't have the right players to run a system then they should change the system to suit the guys they already have but I agree I want to see the D play with aggression....

Also awhile back I brought up the sens D system they used to make the east finals was built to complement the players they had.....hitters on the left and the pmd on the right and also why they would  funnel players to left for that reason. 

[RowdyCanuck]

11 minutes ago, the grinder said:

what a load  of BS ,  you said green stifled jakes developement , it either yes he has or no he hasn't,   it just  one simple answer to the question    it should be easy to comprehend

well your in the pool  ,  have a opinion and then you try to insult people   and now playing the victim sounds like sabre fan  

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

[IBatch]

On 1/19/2020 at 1:53 PM, CptCanuck16 said:

I concur. 

 

If Aquaman is serious about being anything other than a bubble team than Green should be replaced by Gallant asap. 

 

 

Some of these "fire Green for no logical reason" threads are just plain ridiculous.   This is another one of them.  Seriously can't tell if it's just plain trolling (he does have the best winning percentage going into the all-star game and probably should be the one going) or honest opinions.   Our team hasn't even made the playoffs yet - why don't we judge later once they do?   Of course he could get fired .... and will eventually.   But not right now.  

[180sret]

Hate to say it but I think the OP chummed the waters and has gotten a lot of bites. I believe an adult would be open to discussion but a child or troll just keeps bleating at the top of their lungs. God, can't believe I'm even responding in this "thread"

[oldnews]

15 minutes ago, 180sret said:

Hate to say it but I think the OP chummed the waters and has gotten a lot of bites. I believe an adult would be open to discussion but a child or troll just keeps bleating at the top of their lungs. God, can't believe I'm even responding in this "thread"

that may be true - but ironically, at the same time, it's a theme that has 'risen' throughout the market repeatedly, and 'even' got an airing at the national level - with a Leaf homer like Friedman getting a kick out of how absurd it is - and yet how much currency it's gotten - (and not just among internet 'trolls').

Edited January 20, 2020 by oldnews

[Angry Goose]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

A collapsing, zone style system is a very effective system, but you need to have an aggressive dcorp who can pounce quickly on opposition mistakes and transition the puck up ice quickly.  I don't see tat consistently from this dcorps, but that doesn't mean the actual system isn't good.  That said, they might give up a high number of shots, but a low number of quality chances and a low number of rebounds........it's also why they are high in blocked shots.  Personally, I like a more aggressive system, but the zone system does work, and does work for the Canucks.......for the most part. 

I've been saying this a lot lately when I catch a GDT but I don't think the Canucks are playing a true collapse style D.  It's more of a hybrid zone.  Yes, when the puck is low or on the half wall the wingers tend to drop to the slot to protect the most dangerous area of the ice.  The wingers arnt playing the point tight without the puck but it's the wingers responsibility to keep the D to the outside once they do get it.  So in these respects the Canucks do collapse, especially if they start getting tired.  And like u say, this structure tends to keep dangerous passes through the middle of the d zone down.  It's a conservative approach on one hand, but I don't think the coaching staff is saying don't be aggressive either.  I don't know for sure since I'm not at practice, but I'm guessing they  want players to be aggressive on the puck when they can be. It's like you say, the roster make up doesn't necessarily fit with what fans want to see. 

 

That's the way I've viewed it so far this season at least.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2020 by SILLY GOOSE

[stawns]

11 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

I've been saying this a lot lately when I catch a GDT but I don't think the Canucks are playing a true collapse style D.  It's more of a hybrid zone.  Yes, when the puck is low or on the half wall the wingers tend to drop to the slot to protect the most dangerous area of the ice.  The wingers arnt playing the point tight without the puck but it's the wingers responsibility to keep the D to the outside once they do get it.  So in these respects the Canucks do collapse, especially if they start getting tired.  And like u say, this structure tends to keep dangerous passes through the middle of the d zone down.  It's a conservative approach on one hand, but I don't think the coaching staff is saying don't be aggressive.  I don't know for sure since I'm not at practice, but I'm guessing they  want players to be aggressive on the puck when they can be.  Seems to fit with the coaching staffs philosophy of aggressive but smart hockey.

 

That's the way I've viewed it so far this season at least.

 

 

I agree, it's the players playing more conservatively, rather than a passive d system.  Down low, they should be playing more aggressively to force turnovers, but seem to err on the side of caution. A big part of that, I think, is just a lack of familiarity with half the dcorp being new this year..........you really have to trust that your d partner is going to cover if you're going to be aggressive and chase the puck.

 

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

A collapsing, zone style system is a very effective system, but you need to have an aggressive dcorp who can pounce quickly on opposition mistakes and transition the puck up ice quickly.  I don't see tat consistently from this dcorps, but that doesn't mean the actual system isn't good.  That said, they might give up a high number of shots, but a low number of quality chances and a low number of rebounds........it's also why they are high in blocked shots.  Personally, I like a more aggressive system, but the zone system does work, and does work for the Canucks.......for the most part. 

not a fan of zone collapses - couldn't stand watching it in the Tortorella era - and particularly did not like how passive it was on the heels of his overly aggressive two deep forecheck - which I also didn't think the team had the personnel to pull off.   Have never, in all the years as a fan of this team, watched them chase the play with such futility.  That zone collapse era was so lacking in motion/puck pressure, and equally as bad, their puck retrieval on blocked shots, deflections, misses, etc was so frustrating and flat-footed it drove me nuts.  I've never seen so many  sustained tire fires, so much cycling, so much sustained dzone possession against this team - as then.  And to make it worse, Tortorella had this cookie-cutter conception that everyone should be interchangeable - ie the 'genius' of making slow-footed, not particularly physical or aggressive offensive specialists like the Sedins, into penalty killers.  Absolutely assinine, especially when you have high end two way guys like Hansen, Higgins, Burrows, Kesler available.   Awful mismatched, unwatchable systems - only topped by the idea that Top Sixtito was the answer to the powerplay (sorry "BoxingHobo" - love ya, but you're not on my powerplay)

Was always a fan of AV's zone overloads - which I think this group, particularly when healthy, is capable of pulling off.   On that note, the last game against SJ - is the best dzone, ozone and neutral zone puck pressure and support I've seen this team apply since early in the season when they were healthy (having Sutter, Motte and Beagle certainly does not hurt) - a pleasure to watch - and I'm not sure how Green would characterize it, but the dzone systems did not look like a zone collapse.

Edited January 20, 2020 by oldnews

[Angry Goose]

Just now, stawns said:

I agree, it's the players playing more conservatively, rather than a passive d system.  Down low, they should be playing more aggressively to force turnovers, but seem to err on the side of caution. A big part of that, I think, is just a lack of familiarity with half the dcorp being new this year..........you really have to trust that your d partner is going to cover if you're going to be aggressive and chase the puck.

 

Agreed.  Sometimes with longer shifts in the d zone it can look really 'bad' but with energy dwindling and not wanting to get beat 1 on 1 or give up prime scoring chances on the weak side it's kind of a necessity.  

 

You watch guys like Tanev/Hughes/Roussel/Motte and they are very aggressive when the opportunity is there, but not everyone on the roster can play like that either 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

not a fan of zone collapses - couldn't stand watching it in the Tortorella era - and particularly did not like how passive it was on the heels of his overly aggressive two deep forecheck - which I also didn't think the team had the personnel to pull off.   Have never, in all the years as a fan of this team, watched them chase the play with such futility.  That zone collapse era was so lacking in motion/puck pressure, and equally as bad, their puck retrieval on blocked shots, deflections, misses, etc was so frustrating and flat-footed it drove me nuts.  I've never seen so many  sustained tire fires, so much cycling, so much sustained dzone possession against this team - as then.  And to make it worse, Tortorella had this cookie-cutter conception that everyone should be interchangeable - ie the 'genius' of making slow-footed, not particularly physical or aggressive offensive specialists like the Sedins, into penalty killers.  Absolutely assinine, especially when you have high end two way guys like Hansen, Higgins, Burrows, Kesler available.   Awful mismatched, unwatchable systems - only topped by the idea that Top Sixtito was the answer to the powerplay (sorry "BoxingHobo" - love ya, but you're not on my powerplay)

Was always a fan of AV's zone overloads - which I think this group, particularly when healthy, is capable of pulling off.   On that note, the last game against SJ - is the best dzone, ozone and neutral zone puck pressure and support I've seen this team apply since early in the season when they were healthy - a pleasure to watch - and I'm not sure how Green would characterize it, but the dzone systems did not look like a zone collapse.

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

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Agreed.  Sometimes with longer shifts in the d zone it can look really 'bad' but with energy dwindling and not wanting to get beat 1 on 1 or give up prime scoring chances on the weak side it's kind of a necessity.  

 

You watch guys like Tanev/Hughes/Roussel/Motte and they are very aggressive when the opportunity is there, but not everyone on the roster can play like that either 

the 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.

[coastal.view]

On 1/19/2020 at 2:25 AM, RomanP said:

I hope you realize that every coach that ever won a Stanley Cup, at some point in his career was someone who has never won a Stanley Cup before. Just think about it slowly...

you exaggerate a tad

we all know scotty was born with a stanley cup in his arms

 

[IBatch]

58 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

I've been saying this a lot lately when I catch a GDT but I don't think the Canucks are playing a true collapse style D.  It's more of a hybrid zone.  Yes, when the puck is low or on the half wall the wingers tend to drop to the slot to protect the most dangerous area of the ice.  The wingers arnt playing the point tight without the puck but it's the wingers responsibility to keep the D to the outside once they do get it.  So in these respects the Canucks do collapse, especially if they start getting tired.  And like u say, this structure tends to keep dangerous passes through the middle of the d zone down.  It's a conservative approach on one hand, but I don't think the coaching staff is saying don't be aggressive either.  I don't know for sure since I'm not at practice, but I'm guessing they  want players to be aggressive on the puck when they can be. It's like you say, the roster make up doesn't necessarily fit with what fans want to see. 

 

That's the way I've viewed it so far this season at least.

 

 

 Both the SJ and ARI game the players did a good/great job at not giving away too many chances - when it works we look like a contender - when not we look like pretenders and JMs play becomes all the more critical.  Like to see more Demko,  often teams are more likely to commit when the back-up plays - will give the team more practice at it.   Noticeable but against SJ and they are definitely trying hard to break our system to little avail.   If they can do it in front of Markstrom... well the other teams not going to win unless their goalie is standing on his head (which happens).

 

One thing that I don't see mentioned often is when we have the last change our winnning percentage goes way up.  That's on Green.  Of course the opposite could be said of a middling road record...bad preparation etc which is also on the coach.    TG is going fine.  We don't have a top defense, not even close.   Yet here we are.