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

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

I'll admit because I don't like him anymore I was going to say 1 , but I'll be realistic and give him a 5, I'd give Willie Desjardins a 5 as well, because they're both mediocre coaches. Neither one is a great coach, and neither one is a bad coach, their systems are just mediocre nothing special, average. 

[JM_]

20 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Always a good read/post from you, sir. 

Maybe you responded already in the thread to rate the job TG has done as HC, I haven’t seen it yet, so I’m curious what you’d say.
 

Ultimately, I am not interested in what posters think on here, but rather how they think, which is why I made the post to which you responded. As you will see in the thread, there is almost zero, as in an embarrassingly big nothing of collective knowledge, being posted in here in regards to an informed assessment of the HC duties.  So far, this is what’s here:
 

“developing young players”

”timeouts” 

“line combinations”

 

 

I don’t know bud, does that strike you as a “knowledgeable fanbase/community”?  
 

We used to be here.  But then came the “hate” purge.  We rounded up those critical posters and minus’d them into oblivion, then dog-piled the rest, which IMO was seemingly an administrative function.  Pretty tough to prove that now, but look around.  Where are those posters today?  Instead, today, we have our resident super-homers setting the tone like a cartoonish mascot or something.  The seriousness which used to be here to balance that part out is gone.  So threads like these are pretty dry.  I’m not trying to set myself up as some hero mind here, not at all. I just wish we had a better mixture of posters who knew what they were saying because they did it themselves, or at least have some relevant exposure, rather than these emotional or baseline arguments.
 

Not too long ago here there were ‘joke threads’ to mock ourselves named things like “ I like Pyatt because he has pretty eyes”.  I miss that level of acknowledgment of how serious some posters were when we could openly mock uniformed opinions.  Today, IMO, we are doing the opposite. 
 

We’ve seen a culture shift on this site in the past oh maybe 7 years or so, which resulted in a purge of unpopular opinions and posters who used to frequent these forums who were experienced hockey people and ex professionals.  It often feels like we’ve replaced that knowledgeable with your average, never played, never coached, never anything posters who are here to cheer for the Canucks more than they are to discuss them, well, with any seriousness anyways.  
 

Fine, but the balance is gone and perhaps we should consider how the community is perceived by viewers from wherever who should quickly discern that this is a place to cheer, not to be serious.  IMO, it’s a shame and maybe some new moderators who are able entice back some of those who’ve been minused away, etc. For a few years here, it’s been awful, but in the past few months it’s seems to be less dog-piling on serious, critical posts of the team, mostly at the management of it, such as this thread attempts to do. 
 

Hate, quite the word to describe the way a fellow die hard fan feels towards their team, has been supported here so much now that we have a community vernacular which labels critical thought as hate. Incredible.  This is how far the knowledge-pendulum has swung over to the side of whatever the puck it is in here now.  
 

Sign-of-the-times, I know, but wow, I think we need some new representation here, from those who’d actually post something insightful for us goons to read in a post meant to describe why they think Greener is a good HC. Line combos?   
 

Bring back the self-hating trolls and whatever else the site’s chased away in its attempt to rid itself of “negativity” before CDC flips over on its side from being so ridiculously unbalanced these days (though it’s just stating to improve). 
 

Had there been even just a few posts in this thread which spoke to an assessment of the HC of the Canucks, I’d been satisfied and not need to ask the obvious question; what does TG do well as HC? By what metric? I think that’s a tough assignment.  It’s probably much easier to tackle his weaknesses. 
 

I just can’t think of anything at all that he does better than any other HC. If I do, I’ll post it. I hope someone does, and backs it up, so I can learn something, which is what first got me addicted to coming on here, way back. 

 

 

 

 

one of the reasons I started on CDC was to read things from people with actual coaching experience or very studied opinions. Thats why I'm hoping one of you or @oldnews wlll start a coaching thread.

 

But do more casual fans need to know how the sausage is made to not like a particular style, e.g.? I think of the boring ass games that used to be Minnesota, I may not have been able to describe it in detail, but I knew I was asleep. I think there are people that don't know why they dislike Green, just that they don't like the results. And there ere other aspects like the business side or draft that are fun to poke around in. 

 

It would be really helpful to see an attempt at an actual coaching discussion, I'd start it but I don't have to knowledge to know where to begin with it. 

 

[189lb enforcers?]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

one of the reasons I started on CDC was to read things from people with actual coaching experience or very studied opinions. Thats why I'm hoping one of you or @oldnews wlll start a coaching thread.

 

But do more casual fans need to know how the sausage is made to not like a particular style, e.g.? I think of the boring ass games that used to be Minnesota, I may not have been able to describe it in detail, but I knew I was asleep. I think there are people that don't know why they dislike Green, just that they don't like the results. And there ere other aspects like the business side or draft that are fun to poke around in. 

 

It would be really helpful to see an attempt at an actual coaching discussion, I'd start it but I don't have to knowledge to know where to begin with it. 

 

You’re right, and I recall us discussing this before.  
 

I think that the best way to start to entice back that kind of community knowledge is to get some new moderators who are capable of leading or and least engaging in those kinds of threads or ideas.  Why I say this would be a great place to start is because I think that the capacity of a moderator to promote key ideas and behaviour on here is paramount to changing the culture. 
 

A brilliant communicator like oldnews, with showings from others could definitely provide value here beyond feelz and emocons, but I think it has to start at the top.  The mods have always done a great job to be here to manage content and I’m sure would welcome some new blood, especially if it was game-spilt blood. 
 

Currently, the community values praise and that type of creed more than it does anything else.  Threads like you’ve suggested could cultivate a different image and approach here for sure.  Banter and style is also fun and we need our mascots, but the forum has lost itself for the most part, IMO.  I think it has to do with a form of censorship of dissenting ideas, opinions and other posts, deemed as negative.  I mean, we were all there to see it, no sense beating around the bush.  I have one strike left before the ban hammer, so not mod material, haha, but we should definitely embrace all serious viewpoints on the Canucks in Canucks Talk. Not just happy ones. 
 

Those kinds of threads once existed, but weren’t especially needed either because there was enough embedded balance and substance to some posters’ work. It would be neat to have a technical thread.  The Forum is pretty much a desert these days, except where controversy and existing rivalries get to artificially fill pages with squabbling or worse. What the hell happened here, guys?   
 

You can see the culture in the upvoting in the Forum.  It was especially troubling if and when the site mods/admin were involved in quelling others’ in what appeared to be an concerted effort to keep the positivity and hype machine alive here.  Recently, it’s swinging and I hope it swings back.  
 

Rough Game, CDC. 
Get well soon. 

[kloubek]

I think Green is OK. He gets buy-in from the group, and I think the players like him.

 

For me, it's about my not understanding why we are so bad defensively. We give the puck away astonishingly often, and we rely on our goalies to be outstanding nightly. This must not continue. BUT, how much of this is on Green? Baumer? The players themselves... and by extension, maybe Benning?

 

Something's gotta give.

[CanadianRugby]

8

 

-developed prospects very well

-terrible lineup to work with, has them playing hard every game even though they're out of playoffs 

[alt kilgore]

Between 7 - 8.

But its so subjective, we don't have a clue of how he is heard in the room. How his one on one conversations go with players. How much his players respect him.  His rating compared to me as coach?  a 10/10.  Compared to a Scotty Bowman in his prime?  1/10. 

 

This teams stagnant positioning during the last 7 years has way more to do with what players that the GM has provided for the coach. The coach's job is to win...the next game.  Not to manage the long term goals. But when the GM, maybe being led by nose by a meddling owner, is also managing in a "day to day" style, when every year is a playoff year (no matter how unrealistic).  Where draft picks and prospects were superfluous pieces to discard, and picking up veterans who were just on that tipping point of a career with enough seniority to demand top money for their position, but just ready to drop off in production in their pro career, was his primary focus.

 

I would challenge anyone that rates Green lower to say with a straight face (Have to take your word on this) that any other coach could do more with the wasteful cap spending and roster cluster#$%@ that this GM has presided over?

 

My ideal would be a two year extension for Green with a good and earned raise.  If the team does not perform up to standards, buy out his last year.  Conversely, he could be extended after next season if all goes well. I don't think the problem with this team is the head coach. But I'm also open to the idea that a team just runs out of runway for a coach eventually. And sometimes a change for changes sake can be a good thing to spark a team.

 

Replace his two assistant coaches.  (Why are you taken already Burr?)

Even if just to get some other looks on the PP and PK. Its so damn predictable. And I'm sick of the shrink back, cocoon style defensive system for one example.

 

* * *

Long post Intermission

 

Happy belated Bugs Bunny Day!

 

* * *

 

Fire Benning. Before he can waste more of the cap.  Latest is paying a million more for Pearson than the market price. Cut of a thousand knives style GMing.  He's been nothing if not consistent with his over-evaluation of pro players abilities and fit on the team, which arguably is a GM's most important role.  No creativity. Such as a cap weaponizing deal when he could have.  A net loss in draft picks through his years....yet maxed out on the cap.....on a team perpetually near the bottom of the standings and trying to rebuild, no matter what they called it. How is that even possible? Always a day late and a dollar short.

 

The exposure of his timing, and judgment should have had the nail put in his coffin after losing Toffoli.   But its just one more failure lost in the shuffle.  We lost Madden, a top prospect. Plus another second round pick, plus Toffoli......for nothing back.  And of course it hurts double watching how he has helped the Canadiens.  Think about it...Even if we had not lost him, but, Canuck Luck,  he had a season long injury in his first game of this season here.  We'd probably STILL be ahead of the Canadiens and into a playoff spot.  If you take away not only the goals against he laid on us leading to Habs wins, which were 4 pointers,  but also all the important goals for the Canadiens he contributed to win other 2 pointer games for them. And bonus.... we'd still have had Madden and the second in the holster.   

 

How many of these net loss moves has JB made here?  Gagner was another that was more than a net loss, we ended up taking on a piece of Spooner's buy out cap hit on top of it just to get rid of him.  I don't want JB in charge of spending another dime here.

.

.

Edited May 1, 2021 by kilgore

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Always a good read/post from you, sir. 

Maybe you responded already in the thread to rate the job TG has done as HC, I haven’t seen it yet, so I’m curious what you’d say.
 

Ultimately, I am not interested in what posters think on here, but rather how they think, which is why I made the post to which you responded. As you will see in the thread, there is almost zero, as in an embarrassingly big nothing of collective knowledge, being posted in here in regards to an informed assessment of the HC duties.  So far, this is what’s here:
 

“developing young players”

”timeouts” 

“line combinations”

 

 

I don’t know bud, does that strike you as a “knowledgeable fanbase/community”?  
 

We used to be here.  But then came the “hate” purge.  We rounded up those critical posters and minus’d them into oblivion, then dog-piled the rest, which IMO was seemingly an administrative function.  Pretty tough to prove that now, but look around.  Where are those posters today?  Instead, today, we have our resident super-homers setting the tone like a cartoonish mascot or something.  The seriousness which used to be here to balance that part out is gone.  So threads like these are pretty dry.  I’m not trying to set myself up as some hero mind here, not at all. I just wish we had a better mixture of posters who knew what they were saying because they did it themselves, or at least have some relevant exposure, rather than these emotional or baseline arguments.
 

Not too long ago here there were ‘joke threads’ to mock ourselves named things like “ I like Pyatt because he has pretty eyes”.  I miss that level of acknowledgment of how serious some posters were when we could openly mock uniformed opinions.  Today, IMO, we are doing the opposite. 
 

We’ve seen a culture shift on this site in the past oh maybe 7 years or so, which resulted in a purge of unpopular opinions and posters who used to frequent these forums who were experienced hockey people and ex professionals.  It often feels like we’ve replaced that knowledgeable with your average, never played, never coached, never anything posters who are here to cheer for the Canucks more than they are to discuss them, well, with any seriousness anyways.  
 

Fine, but the balance is gone and perhaps we should consider how the community is perceived by viewers from wherever who should quickly discern that this is a place to cheer, not to be serious.  IMO, it’s a shame and maybe some new moderators could entice back some of those who’ve been minused away, etc. For a few years here, it’s been awful, but in the past few months it’s seems to be less dog-piling on serious, critical posts of the team, mostly at the management of it, such as this thread attempts to do. 
 

Hate, quite the word to describe the way a fellow die hard fan feels towards their team, has been supported here so much now that we have a community vernacular which labels critical thought as hate. Incredible.  This is how far the knowledge-pendulum has swung over to the side of whatever the puck it is in here now.  
 

Sign-of-the-times, I know, but wow, I think we need some new representation here, from those who’d actually post something insightful for us goons to read in a post meant to describe why they think Greener is a good HC. Line combos?   
 

Bring back the self-hating trolls and whatever else the site’s chased away in its attempt to rid itself of “negativity” before CDC flips over on its side from being so ridiculously unbalanced these days (though it’s just stating to improve). 
 

Had there been even just a few posts in this thread which spoke to an assessment of the HC of the Canucks, I’d been satisfied and not need to ask the obvious question; what does TG do well as HC? By what metric? I think that’s a tough assignment.  It’s probably much easier to tackle his weaknesses. 
 

I just can’t think of anything at all that he does better than any other HC. If I do, I’ll post it. I hope someone does, and backs it up, so I can learn something, which is what first got me addicted to coming on here, way back. 

 

 

 

 

189lbs i respect every post you make - and most admit i'm probably a little too fanboy at times.   I get caught up in the wins, and feel then losses more then i should too.   Just glad i still do lol, it's been quite a long time since i've been excited about one of our teams.   Feel this one has a chance at something, maybe i should go see a doctor.   

 

I absolutely agree this forum doesn't need to be a cheerleading squad.    Also not fond of where this team, or the league is headed and has been headed for about 15 years now.   Feel it's lost some of its soul, your avatar says it all.   Also wish i could say i have not  been a coach and don't  know systems, i do not.    But i did lead construction crews from the age of 21 - 35, and we had to do some pretty nasty things under not so fun conditions for half the season.   So get what morale and motivation, and wouldn't ever ask anyone to do something i wouldn't (which was nothing really).... Wish i could say i won a cup or something.  Closest thing i ever came to, was second place in little league Island Champs.   We did beat a lot of good teams on the way.  Came close too.  But can say i didn't keep the momento (ribbon). 

[CupIsComing]

Hi OP...maybe make this thread a poll?

 

[Chesster]

If 5 is average I rate him a 3. I dont like his attitude towards us being kicked around. His press conference performance is the worst I've seen. He looks like a weak leader.

[*Buzzsaw*]

5 out of 10.... and any NHL coach should be a minimum of 6.5.

 

Maybe the players like him, but that doesn't make up for:

 

-  No offensive system...  Dump and Chase doesn't count.

 

-  No defensive system... Collapse to the net and run around doesn't count.

 

-  No offensive development of gifted players by creating a system which plays to their strong points... in fact he does the opposite... he forces gifted players into his unimaginative slogging up and down the wings/dump it in and crushes whatever creativity they might have.

 

-  Obvious playing of favorites... who are those who don't question his system

 

He needs to be fired before the damage he has done to the team becomes permanent.

[Dats hockey]

If I where to compare him to Trotz I’d give him a 2 you legit never know what you are going to get with him at the helm 

[Hairy Kneel]

IMHO He's too much like WD. 

I'd give him a 3.

[wai_lai416]

i'm going to say 5.. if ppl say he's good at developing players.. then he should stick to the ahl where they are developing players lol

[Ray_Cathode]

12 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

i'm going to say 5.. if ppl say he's good at developing players.. then he should stick to the ahl where they are developing players lol

One cannot measure a coaches success at developing young until you have some ‘scientific’ control, a foil to measure against. Let’s look at young players that we have drafted, who have had no success with us, but go on to succeed elsewhere. So let’s take a look at players we have drafted, but have little success with us, but go on to have success elsewhere. These players would include the following (I am here only concerned with the Benning era).

 

As best I can see, to this point, only three of Benning drafted players have gone on to have some measure of success elsewhere in the NHL: Jared McCann, Gustav Forsling, and Adam Gaudette. 
 

McCann struggled as a young player, achieving third or fourth line numbers through the first few years of his career. It took Pittsburg to bring out the best in the player. In 2019/20, in 66 GP he scored 14g 21a for 35pts - a little better than 0.5 Pts per game - quite okay for a third liner. In the current season, he in 39 GP, he has 13g 15a 28pts - a little less than 0.7 Pts per game. We traded him, a 2nd and a 4th for Gudbranson and a 5th. We subsequently traded Gudbranson for Pearson. In 129 games, Pearson has played 129 games, and scored 72 points - a little better than 0.5 Pts per game. Pearson is 28, nearing the end of his career, and McCann is 24, just entering his prime. Would the Canucks be better off over the next five years with Pearson or McCann?

 

Gustav Forsling was traded by us for Clendenning, essentially a career AHLer. Forsling, is also 24 and entering his prime as an NHL defenceman. In 40gp with Florida, he is 4g 10a 14pts, averaged over 80 GP, that would be 28 Pts. His 14 Pts this year in 40 games is more offensively productive than any Canuck defenceman other than Hughes and Myers. His +14 buries any Canuck defender.

 

Adam Gaudette - a promising forward last year, was traded for Highmore - a player of no particular distinction - in yet another example of Canuck impatience. Gaudette also is 24, and had finally got a handle on his health issues, and entering his prime years - in 3gp with Chicago, he is 1g 3a 4pts. In an admittedly small sample, Gaudette is +1 in his new home.

 

Whether Vancouver’s impatience with its young players is driven by the coach or the gm is not known by me, but I concerns about how Rafferty, DiPietro, and other promising prospects are being treated. 
 

In another post, I will discuss Benning’s success at the draft - which I believe is very positive, but which I wish to confirm empirically.

[RU SERIOUS]

16 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

I'll admit because I don't like him anymore I was going to say 1 , but I'll be realistic and give him a 5, I'd give Willie Desjardins a 5 as well, because they're both mediocre coaches. Neither one is a great coach, and neither one is a bad coach, their systems are just mediocre nothing special, average. 

I'll second your comments .  TG is no more than a 4 or 5 (AT BEST)  .  Once he's gone after this season hopefully we'll finally get a seasoned NHL coach and not another rookie ECHL/AHL experimental/interim coach.    If JB doesn't "F-Up" and does not resign all the old/deadwood players on expiring contracts this year and next - he'll have $40M+ to go out and finally get some descent supporting players to compliment our few star players that will be moving into prime in the next 2-3 years.  Combine that with anew experienced coach and assistant coaches and we might actually have a hope in hell of doing something in the playoffs.  But if TG remains with those awful special team coaches and the old timers are resigned - expect years of the same losing results.

Edited May 2, 2021 by RU SERIOUS

[wai_lai416]

27 minutes ago, RU SERIOUS said:

I'll second your comments .  TG is no more than a 4 or 5 (AT BEST)  .  Once he's gone after this season hopefully we'll finally get a seasoned NHL coach and not another rookie ECHL/AHL experimental/interim coach.    If JB doesn't "F-Up" and does not resign all the old/deadwood players on expiring contracts this year and next - he'll have $40M+ to go out and finally get some descent supporting players to compliment our few star players that will be moving into prime in the next 2-3 years.  Combine that with anew experienced coach and assistant coaches and we might actually have a hope in hell of doing something in the playoffs.  But if TG remains with those awful special team coaches and the old timers are resigned - expect years of the same losing results.

but the question is.. will he even be gone? lol not sure how many GM out there get to live with hiring 3 coaches? and who wants to coach for the canucks if the GM is in the hot seat if they don't have success next season either and usually new GM will want their own coach?

[sassbs]

3.5

 

Overall coaching staff including brown and baumgartner = 1.3

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

On 4/29/2021 at 3:46 PM, grouse747 said:

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

 

 

Overall : 5

 

Current  season: 2.5

 

We look lost out there. He arguably beats all the creativity out of players by forcing players into following the same old systems and patterns. He 
waits too long to make adjustment and has trouble making adjustments during the games. EP40, QH43, BB6, NH36 would have succeeded with or without Travis. I could argue that he’s actually detrimental to players development. Furthermore He is not just the coach for the players but the head honcho of the coaching staff yet the defence, offence and pp, pk look ever more disjointed. He doesn’t appear fit to lead and coach at this level. 
 

With the same subpar coaching I expect we will get the same subpar results. 

 

It’s time for a complete overhaul to the coaching staff, Green, Blue and Brown. 

 

[DSVII]

On 4/29/2021 at 4:13 PM, DSVII said:

• 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.  

Quote

I think the best coaches should be able to identify the best parts of a player's game and adapt their coaching style to bring the best out of them. Not try to turn a square peg into a round circle. 

Case in point....

 

https://twitter.com/BenPopeCST/status/1388685940869193733?s=20

 

Edited May 2, 2021 by DSVII

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

12 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

I'll second your comments .  TG is no more than a 4 or 5 (AT BEST)  .  Once he's gone after this season hopefully we'll finally get a seasoned NHL coach and not another rookie ECHL/AHL experimental/interim coach.    If JB doesn't "F-Up" and does not resign all the old/deadwood players on expiring contracts this year and next - he'll have $40M+ to go out and finally get some descent supporting players to compliment our few star players that will be moving into prime in the next 2-3 years.  Combine that with anew experienced coach and assistant coaches and we might actually have a hope in hell of doing something in the playoffs.  But if TG remains with those awful special team coaches and the old timers are resigned - expect years of the same losing results.

I'd be pretty happy as a fan again tbh if Benning signs a new coach who has NHL experience under his belt who has also shown to have some success at the level already over resigning TG or trying an experiment again with a "green coach"(rookie). I really would like to see how these guys would respond, I do believe another coach could get some more out of these players, and hopefully it could give them some more jump in their game, they seem to lack this a bit under Green.