what grade (1 to 10) would you give Travis Green?

[grouse747]

by overall tenure or this season, your choice.

 

 obviously this season is kinda unique and mediocre/poor. but the team's outstanding run last year was under unique circumstances so to me they wash-out.

 

I'd give him 6.5 on the season. maybe 7.0 overall tenure.

 

good: developing talent. players seem to like him

 

bad: alot of defensive lapses. maybe it's the flip side of players liking him (need more authoritative coach?).... and we get outshot badly a lot. (although I assume if I check shots for/against, we won't be far off our overall team rating). I did a post last year on this, but Canucks seem to be involved in alot of games where the goaltender steals the win. more giving Canucks the win, but definitely some the other way too.

 

definitely wouldn't get rid of a coach based on this year's performance....... of course, it's tricky as realistically Canucks can't keep TG one more season as his contract runs out this summer.

 

I see suggestions that TG has done outstanding job.... really? that's seem very generous.... one irony is the team had been doing better without EP than with him. but to me, it's a TG wash. underperformed with EP, outperformed without EP. one good, one bad.

 

thanks in advance

 

 

Edited April 29, 2021 by grouse747

[DSVII]

I think EP has a bit to do with the Ewing effect. 

 

I agree with your 6/10 scale. He's developed the core, seems like a good player's coach. But so many inconsistencies in his game.

• Whether it is his system or his assistants, his teams are way to sloppy in the defensive end and are too permissive in giving up shots and scoring chances, even with the man advantage
• Does not use the time out often enough or recognize shifts in momentum to adjust his game plan.
• Kind of a flip side of the second one, but there are times when he just throws lines into a blender for a period or even a shift and it just disrupts the chemistry of the team
• Does not seem to want to coach any type of player besides those that fit into his 200 ft game mold. I think there needs to be some flexibility here, there are players who can also be pure scorers that can add value.  
• Over reliance on veterans, it does not seem like our young guns have the same length of rope when it comes to a Roussel or Beagle on how long they can be dominate don their end of the ice
• This isn't strictly just Green, but the power play is too passive and that god damn back pass.....

[YEGCanuck]

My vote is a 7 out of ten for Green's overall performance. Not certain how much Assistants actually impact the team result, but I am thinking it is time to clean house.

[Junkyard Dog]

5.5 out of 10. 

[grouse747]

I'm not aware of the "Ewing effect" but I think I know what it is and I will look it up.

 

a well respected poster on a sports betting site had a theory that you should BACK an NBA team the first game without its star player... and FADE an NBA team the first game with its star player returning.....and I AGREE with that idea . but I think it should only be a small number of games that you BACK/FADE on that basis (and you might need to tweak/define things a bit). EP has been out a long time now.

 

 

[smithers joe]

i think if you rate the players, you can give green a proper grade. green coaches, he doesn't play on the ice each game.  imo, green is not the problem with this team.  he gets cudo from me.

[Shekky]

I think defensive woes are on the loss of Manny Maholtra but I am not in that lockeroom so I am going to say 8/10 based on the performance of playoff run last year as opposed to this year which we can chalk it up as a one off. I mean if the team keeps moving the same way its been going then you can start to look at how to improve the coaching maybe new assistant coaches?

[Dazzle]

I would agree. 6.5-7.

 

Anyone who thinks he is a 'great' coach is watering down the meaning of great. He seems to be a good guy, personality wise. Credit should go to him for bringing the team beyond the 1st round. Of course he had a lot of help, but everyone has to step up in the playoffs.

 

That being said, his deployment of players has always been questionable at best. Not using timeouts when available. The too many men penalties. No linematching. Low shot counts on net. There's a number of recurring themes on Green's team.

 

I think he doesn't deserve to be kicked when he's down though. I just want to see another coach that offers a fresh voice.

[CanucksCountry]

I'd give him a 3.5. He is a good rebuilding coach and is semi decent at developing players and seems like a players coach... That's about all i can praise him for it seems like almost every game he is out coached, Never uses the timeout, Early games the team is never ready, very bad defensive replaces, to stubborn to change the system when its not working, and just makes some bonehead Lineup choices 

[erkayloomeh]

5

He's very average 

[Dazzle]

8 minutes ago, Shekky said:

I think defensive woes are on the loss of Manny Maholtra but I am not in that lockeroom so I am going to say 8/10 based on the performance of playoff run last year as opposed to this year which we can chalk it up as a one off. I mean if the team keeps moving the same way its been going then you can start to look at how to improve the coaching maybe new assistant coaches?

8 is way too high. We've seen too big of a sample of his coaching to rate him that high.

[DSVII]

8 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I would agree. 6.5-7.

 

Anyone who thinks he is a 'great' coach is watering down the meaning of great. He seems to be a good guy, personality wise. Credit should go to him for bringing the team beyond the 1st round. Of course he had a lot of help, but everyone has to step up in the playoffs.

 

That being said, his deployment of players has always been questionable at best. Not using timeouts when available. The too many men penalties. No linematching. Low shot counts on net. There's a number of recurring themes on Green's team.

 

I think he doesn't deserve to be kicked when he's down though. I just want to see another coach that offers a fresh voice.

I forgot about the bench minors lol

 

But yeah, I think he's a good guy. But one wonders how he'll perform if he hadn't been coaching teams that had been blessed with Marky and Demko as back to back starters...

[grouse747]

wouldn't tons of teams love to have our core six players..... everyone knows who they are. which describes the problem perfectly. there is huge drop-off after BB, EP, BH, JTM, QH and TD. I don't think many other teams have a big a drop-off (it may or may not be after 6 players on another team).... AE or NS might not be a massive drop-off now that I think about it. but I do think many teams would love to have a top 6 like that.

 

I think JB and TG, more JB, have failed in finding/developing beyond those top 6 players....  I will probably save it for the offseason forum, but I wonder about building a team in the NHL. is paying top dollar for mid 2nd and 3rd line veterans from other teams worth it? it doesn't seem like it. and Canucks are far from the only team that's been bitten by that. and of course, our some of our signings have performed really terribly. so it's combo of maybe not a good way to build and the players we sign not performing.

 

I will change sports and mention baseball. I wonder about throwing money at players beyond a certain age AND when a player changes teams. Albert Pujos was a terrible signing for LAA, but if he'd stayed in STL it might have been ok. he was part of the caridinal culture there. less pressure to perform. and less stress if he doesn't perform well...... doesn't seem like changing teams works out as well as guys staying put. and of course, the players you really want in the NHL generally are not available. AP going from Blues to LV is a huge exception to this comment.

 

as per my mention of goals and shots... Canucks are #23 and #28 in goal differential and shot differential. #23 in shooting percentage. and #13 in save percentage... so thank you TD. (and maybe BH, I'll have to check. been good recently)

Edited April 29, 2021 by grouse747

[Bad_BOI_pete]

at the beginning of the year every analyst pretty much predicted us to finish the season in 6th place. even though we were the same team we had two goaltenders with question marks over thier head? the goalies underperformed,our star player had his first ever major slump and our d pairings were struggling to find chemistry. january we played pretty poorly, february it seemed like we started to gel, but still came up short on most nights.

 

march was great for our team, powerplay was on fire and so was demko. i think our pk was ranked 14th. then all the injuries and we started struggling again,then covid hit the team. 

 

anyways i probably grade green 7.5/10 he loses points for defending ties.

[grouse747]

I agree with the one poster...... JM got a lot of wins for the Canucks in past seasons.... would have been such a no-brainer to keep if not for TD. and I don't think we would have got that much for TD in a trade after a few sensational games.

 

TD is a big body which takes away some of the performance risk. if he loses his confidence he will still take up a big % of the net (I have an idea for a Sumo Wrestler goalie. as I think others have. I think ESPN did an article on the idea)

 

off-topic, but what happened to Calgary? JM was #3 pick for NHL MVP a 3rd of the way through the season one place I saw (very unscientific but reasonable qualified media guys)..... and Calgary and I think GAA has gone way downhill since.

[grouse747]

5 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

at the beginning of the year every analyst pretty much predicted us to finish the season in 6th place. even though we were the same team we had two goaltenders with question marks over thier head? the goalies underperformed,our star player had his first ever major slump and our d pairings were struggling to find chemistry. january we played pretty poorly, february it seemed like we started to gel, but still came up short on most nights.

 

march was great for our team, powerplay was on fire and so was demko. i think our pk was ranked 14th. then all the injuries and we started struggling again,then covid hit the team. 

 

what happened though in those 2 last games at Winnipeg right before covid? we scored one goal very late in 2nd game. and that was it...was that COVID?..... serious question, and not meaning to call you out. I am legit curious...... this team was so inconsistent this year. whenever we gave up on them, they played well and vice-versa. beat some awesome teams and vice-versa too. wonder if you could have made money betting it (100% hindsight comment of course)

Edited April 29, 2021 by grouse747

[Bad_BOI_pete]

12 minutes ago, grouse747 said:

what happened though in those 2 last games at Winnipeg right before covid? we scored one goal very late in 2nd game. and that was it...was that COVID?..... serious question, and not meaning to call you out. I am legit curious...... this team was so inconsistent this year. whenever we gave up on them, they played well and vice-versa. beat some awesome teams and vice-versa too. wonder if you could have made money betting it (100% hindsight comment of course)

it was the fact that we had 3/4 of our centers not in the lineup and motte.

[DSVII]

42 minutes ago, grouse747 said:

I'm not aware of the "Ewing effect" but I think I know what it is and I will look it up.

 

a well respected poster on a sports betting site had a theory that you should BACK an NBA team the first game without its star player... and FADE an NBA team the first game with its star player returning.....and I AGREE with that idea . but I think it should only be a small number of games that you BACK/FADE on that basis (and you might need to tweak/define things a bit). EP has been out a long time now.

 

 

That's exactly it. 

 

I think the sample size can extend more than just one game if the team is playing under the expectation that their star is out for the long haul. But then again I dunno the entire theory behind it, but could contribute to it. But agreed, you can only maintain that level of play for so long before the hole left behind by the star becomes too apparent to overcome.

 

I think we're starting to see it now.

[grouse747]

1 minute ago, Petey_BOI said:

it was the fact that we had 3/4 of our centers not in the lineup and motte.

thank you..... as they say on Family Feud "good answer...... good answer"... and it was a good answer 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

1 minute ago, grouse747 said:

thank you..... as they say on Family Feud "good answer...... good answer"... and it was a good answer 

thanks for having a honest disussion. breath of fresh air. also miller has been underwhelming as a center, he's much better as a lw.