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

Green and his assistants - not the men for this job

Rate this topic


Dazzle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Assistants - I agree. Green seems to be highly regarded league wide according to guys like Lebrun and Friedman... and then you replaces him? THough I will say that I disagree with the decision to start Chatfield over Juolevi today. Juolevi played a good game and scored. Chatfield is returning from an upper body injury, possibly concussion, and you are putting him back in over Juolevi? Keep OJ in and give Chatfield an extra day or so.

  • Wat 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

Assistants - I agree. Green seems to be highly regarded league wide according to guys like Lebrun and Friedman... and then you replaces him? THough I will say that I disagree with the decision to start Chatfield over Juolevi today. Juolevi played a good game and scored. Chatfield is returning from an upper body injury, possibly concussion, and you are putting him back in over Juolevi? Keep OJ in and give Chatfield an extra day or so.

Benning's also highly regarded too, as he was voted sixth for best GMs by other GMs. Do fans care about that stuff? No.

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can sack Green, sure, but the composition of this team, outside of 5-6 players, is absolute trash, and I don't see many coaches doing much better with this team.  Green is not elite nor a great coach, but let's be honest, he's working miracles with what he has.

Edited by Alain Vigneault
  • Wat 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

This is an overreaction. There's nothing wrong with Green, we have the wrong mixture on defense, and we're not likely going to fix that before the end of the season.

 

It sucks that we got trapped by the flat cap. We need Tryamkin added for next season, and the only reason he isn't here this year, was due to Covid and the flat cap.

 

Everyone needs to calm down a little. We didn't have any exhibition schedule, and we haven't had any real practice time to work on systems since the season started. Take a look at the schedule, we've been playing more than any other team. We need 2 or 3 days of practice time.

It's the exact same system from last season. It's the same entry strategies. Defensively, they are passive. Pinches by defenseman are still just as risky.

 

Even with four goals, we are still outshot by Ottawa.

 

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

This is an overreaction. There's nothing wrong with Green, we have the wrong mixture on defense, and we're not likely going to fix that before the end of the season.

 

It sucks that we got trapped by the flat cap. We need Tryamkin added for next season, and the only reason he isn't here this year, was due to Covid and the flat cap.

 

Everyone needs to calm down a little. We didn't have any exhibition schedule, and we haven't had any real practice time to work on systems since the season started. Take a look at the schedule, we've been playing more than any other team. We need 2 or 3 days of practice time.

It isn’t though. Same issues happened last year which made Markstrom and Demko look like gods. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pears said:

It isn’t though. Same issues happened last year which made Markstrom and Demko look like gods. 

Our defense makeup is a work in progress. We still need work, we need more size and we need someone else who can block shots.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that the Canucks are up 5-1, but the shot count is 41-35 for the Senators.

 

If a couple of those shots went in, this game would have been very different, especially since the last two goals by the Canucks were at the halfway mark.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I get that the Canucks are up 5-1, but the shot count is 41-35 for the Senators.

 

If a couple of those shots went in, this game would have been very different, especially since the last two goals by the Canucks were at the halfway mark.

It doesn't matter what the shot count is if the score says otherwise.  Scoring chances is another matter (unless your goalie steals one for you).

 

You can say 'If a couple of those shots went it' all you want but it didn't happen.  If wishes were horses then beggars would ride.  Demko made a couple of really good saves, but he didn't have to work nearly as hard as he did in the 7-1 victory.  High quality chances for the Sens were lower than for the Canucks.  The type of shots you take in a game really matter a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RogersTowell said:

It doesn't matter what the shot count is if the score says otherwise.  Scoring chances is another matter (unless your goalie steals one for you).

 

You can say 'If a couple of those shots went it' all you want but it didn't happen.  If wishes were horses then beggars would ride.  Demko made a couple of really good saves, but he didn't have to work nearly as hard as he did in the 7-1 victory.  High quality chances for the Sens were lower than for the Canucks.  The type of shots you take in a game really matter a lot.

Regardless, giving up 40+ shots to a team with one (1) win on the season is unacceptable.

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

There's been a lot of talk about fire Benning, but the scrutiny on Green is not the same. There's so many more excuses for him. Brown and Baumer tend to get more flack out of his coaching staff.

 

This game is a symptom that the coaches are failing this team. The players of course deserve blame, but the lackluster passing and giveaways speak to the coaches not being able to get through to the players.

 

This is not strictly about this game, but being outshot by the opponents (this game being the most obvious indication), is a long-standing issue that hasn't been addressed. There's a lack of adaptation.

 

Coaching is most definitely an issue.

Most coaches aren't Adaptable they tend to panic and switch up lines when they are losing 4-2 and nothing is going right. Most people in general tend not to be able to use forethought  coaches are no different. The best coaches change things when the team is winning but see structural issues. This is what separates hall a fame coaches from all the rest. Coaches in general are creatures of habit if it works don't break it, don't mess with a winning lineup the players will figure it out on their own

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Pears said:

Regardless, giving up 40+ shots to a team with one (1) win on the season is unacceptable.

To me I think the opposite. If they get 40 low chance shots on net, those are 40 'chances' to retain or regain possession and break back out.

 

The issue with 'swiss cheese defence' is when it's 3-1 and 2/1 or 2/0 breakaways given up 5-6-7 times a game. Those are extreme high chance shots on net.

 

I don't like our defensive scheme, but my issues with it don't stem from goalies seeing a ton of shots from the outside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

There's been a lot of talk about fire Benning, but the scrutiny on Green is not the same. There's so many more excuses for him. Brown and Baumer tend to get more flack out of his coaching staff.

 

This game is a symptom that the coaches are failing this team. The players of course deserve blame, but the lackluster passing and giveaways speak to the coaches not being able to get through to the players.

 

This is not strictly about this game, but being outshot by the opponents (this game being the most obvious indication), is a long-standing issue that hasn't been addressed. There's a lack of adaptation.

 

Coaching is most definitely an issue.

where ya been? 

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can fire a coach for not overperforming. The team has finished about exactly where you expect given the quality of the roster that Benning and hockey ops has put in place every year that Green has been here.

 

If the Canucks finish on par with the AHL Senators this season, that's an obvious underperformance. But, I think anywhere from 3-6 was expected from Vancouver this season. 

 

Do I think Gallant or Trotz are objectively better coaches? Sure. I just think it's a reach to blame Green for this roster's issues. He's not Willie D. 

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...