[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at San Jose Sharks | Dec. 16, 2021

[CanucksJay]

1 hour ago, 13231 said:

Man nothing makes me cringe harder than those people who say "GreEn iS a gOod CoAcH" and @canuck73_3 insisting that he was is just plain delusion at this point. It's shocking that there are still people out there defending Green's preposterous coaching. I don't know how anyone can objectively refute any of the points you made here. And this doesn't even cover all of Green's incompetence. 

I am hoping Green defenders like @canuck73_3 just want the Green bashing to stop because they are nice guys and don't want any canuck current or former being lambasted in the forum. Problem is, they are not being objective and are completely going against what is actually happening on the ice since the coaching change and therefor are losing credibility and creating more arguments for insisting on a lost cause. 

 

[CanucksJay]

6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

These are pro hockey players that want to win a cup, it is delusional to think roster moves don’t affect team morale. 

You dont think players were pumped this year when we added OEL and Garland?

Will they continue to mope over lost former teammates until GM and Coach are fired? 

[canuck73_3]

9 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

You dont think players were pumped this year when we added OEL and Garland?

Will they continue to mope over lost former teammates until GM and Coach are fired? 

That is were the not a right fit in the coaching department comes, here’s the thing. I’m not absolving Green for his failures here, simply stating he was a good coach even if ill fit for this roster. 

[13231]

1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Just because he was no longer a fit here doesn’t make him an awful coach, which is all I have said he is a good coach you don’t get a job in the NHL as a head coach but not being a good coach. To say otherwise is truly delusional. Is he a great coach? Absolutely not, he is a good coach who was not and may never have been a good fit with the rosters we had though. 

Simply being employed by a NHL team does not automatically grant you the status of being a good NHL coach. He was a good AHL coach (even that's up for debate), therefore got promoted. What he did here with the team is completely bizarre and went against all common sense. It's no coincidence that Boudreau undid everything he taught and our team is now looking dramatically different. You also say he's a good coach but just not for this team, but how do you quantify that when he has only coached one NHL team and failed badly at it?

 

Mike Milbury was also a GM in the NHL, was he a good GM too by your definition? You judge someone's qualities based on what they've delivered, and the evidence for Green speaks for itself. 

[13231]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

I am hoping Green defenders like @canuck73_3 just want the Green bashing to stop because they are nice guys and don't want any canuck current or former being lambasted in the forum. Problem is, they are not being objective and are completely going against what is actually happening on the ice since the coaching change and therefor are losing credibility and creating more arguments for insisting on a lost cause. 

 

Ironically the Green bashing won't stop until Green defenders stop popping up trying to validate that "good coach" statement lol. And that's what bothers me too, a narrative being given weight that completely goes against all facts & objectivity. 

Edited December 18, 2021 by 13231

[canuck73_3]

4 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

I am hoping Green defenders like @canuck73_3 just want the Green bashing to stop because they are nice guys and don't want any canuck current or former being lambasted in the forum. Problem is, they are not being objective and are completely going against what is actually happening on the ice since the coaching change and therefor are losing credibility and creating more arguments for insisting on a lost cause. 

 

There is a lack of objectivity on the Green is an awful coach side though.  The truth is more in the middle whether you like it or not. 

Edited December 18, 2021 by canuck73_3

[iinatcc]

On 12/17/2021 at 2:48 PM, IBatch said:

According to "the reports".   Would that be the local media that often makes crap up out of thin air, or a reliable source?   Like the one that said there was a "rift" between the vets and the youth in the room?   That's absolute B.S.    Benning even brought it up.   And the players themselves also said it was false - and that they'd stopped even paying attention.   Go listen to Ebbs interview (Hamonic's agent).    Of course the players get down on themselves when things aren't going right and they lose over and over again.   Doesn't mean they lost faith in each other and their coach for that matter.   Sure Miller's statement ... lol "We don't know what we are doing!"  was a zinger.   Context matters always.   Could be a joke - could be emotion/venting could be a lot of things ... is that the "report" your referring too?  Unless it's actually coming from a reliable source - in this industry there aren't that many,  Ken Campbell, Friedman, McKenzie, Button, Larkin,  maybe a dozen or so others who aren't local media aside from Brendan Batchelor .... i'd probably spend some time before parroting it.   The Benning era was always going to be really tough. We just played a team who's at the same part of their cycle we were when he arrived - actually identical with the exception their re-tool actually worked.  But man when they pay the piper it's going to hurt - a lot.    Just like it has/did in Detroit.   2017 ... re-build started.   8-9 years between Nonis epic and only good draft and Horvat when JB started .... ugh.     JB lasted a lot longer then i thought he would.   That's because he actually delivered despite the mess we he had.    The only real criticism i have for that era is they never should have spent to the cap.    The re-tool was the option us as fans wanted too.    Two years away from our dominating years.   7th overall finish ...  Then the tires fell off.   Just be glad they did.    I am.   No GM would have come in and done things much differently given the structure of the team.   Id put money on both JB and TG getting jobs somewhere else IF they wanted them.  

Didn't get to reply sooner but from what I read is that is that a) the media, or most in the media, are not reliable. And b) Benning inherited a difficult situation 

 

The first point is that yes while some reports maybe exaggerated I always believe if there's too many reports coming from the media "where there's smoke there's fire". Meaning there's too much of it just for it too be false. Reports from Friedmann that the front office management has dividend into caps, Hirsch saying Benning and Weisbrod isolated themselves from anyone else, the botched handling of the Covid outbreak where JT Miller had to speakout on behalf of the team, the way Linden was treated, the way Judd Brackett left the team, the reports on how little analytics Benning used to evaluate his team, to how he treated players like Tanev, Toffoli, and even Matthias during the offseasons they signed with another team. There's just too much there. 

 

As for the 2nd point GMs are sometimes brought into a team to fix a really bad situation and a good GM knows how to turn things around quickly regardless if it's a retool or rebuilt. Look what Lou Lamoriello did with the Islanders the same year the team lost Tavares in free agency, look what Bob Murray did for the Ducks with retooling and being patient with the process, look how the Leafs and Rangers turned things around in just a few years into their rebuild, not to mention what Yzermam is doing for the Red Wings. The fact Benning couldn't turn things around is on him 

 

I think people here are so jaded by how poor the Drafting was with Gillis and Nonis that just because Benning is better and even pretty good drafter (I say pretty good because most of his hits were in the 1st round and early 2nd and, as what Ray Ferraro said recently, a monkey can draft in the 1st round) that we forget there are other qualifications needed to run a team and be a good GM. Sadly it's qualities Benning doesn't have. And hey it's not his fault. I guess like us Canucks have drafted so poorly in prior regimes that ownership, we, and even Linden felt drafting and scouting was the top priority the team needed a GM unfortunately it was at the expense of other qualifications ( contract negotiations, overall planning and vision, communication, and heck the day to saht operations running the team)

 

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Didn't get to reply sooner but from what I read is that is that a) the media, or most in the media, are not reliable. And b) Benning inherited a difficult situation 

 

The first point is that yes while some reports maybe exaggerated I always believe if there's too many reports coming from the media "where there's smoke there's fire". Meaning there's too much of it just for it too be false. Reports from Friedmann that the front office management has dividend into caps, Hirsch saying Benning and Weisbrod isolated themselves from anyone else, the botched handling of the Covid outbreak where JT Miller had to speakout on behalf of the team, the way Linden was treated, the way Judd Brackett left the team, the reports on how little analytics Benning used to evaluate his team, to how he treated players like Tanev, Toffoli, and even Matthias during the offseasons they signed with another team. There's just too much there. 

 

As for the 2nd point GMs are sometimes brought into a team to fix a really bad situation and a good GM knows how to turn things around quickly regardless if it's a retool or rebuilt. Look what Lou Lamoriello did with the Islanders the same year the team lost Tavares in free agency, look what Bob Murray did for the Ducks with retooling and being patient with the process, look how the Leafs and Rangers turned things around in just a few years into their rebuild, not to mention what Yzermam is doing for the Red Wings. The fact Benning couldn't turn things around is on him 

 

I think people here are so jaded by how poor the Drafting was with Gillis and Nonis that just because Benning is better and even pretty good drafter (I say pretty good because most of his hits were in the 1st round and early 2nd and, as what Ray Ferraro said recently, a monkey can draft in the 1st round) that we forget there are other qualifications needed to run a team and be a good GM. Sadly it's qualities Benning doesn't have. And hey it's not his fault. I guess like us Canucks have drafted so poorly in prior regimes that ownership, we, and even Linden felt drafting and scouting was the top priority the team needed a GM unfortunately it was at the expense of other qualifications ( contract negotiations, overall planning and vision, communication, and heck the day to saht operations running the team)

 

Certain media types i will listen too, Friedman is one of them - as in he's actually heard something of relevance - because right now he's the NHL's number one insider taking over Mckenzie, who's still trusted but doesn't have the same platform.   Quite a bit of what you said is accurate but we still don't know for sure.    As far as those teams you've mentioned ... Holland started the rebuild around the same time we did drafting Larkin, or should i say when our re-tool started.   Detroit's the closest comp to our cycle.    SJ is what a successful re-tool looks like, also at the same cycle as we were when Benning took over (Thornton, Marleau etc) the Sedins etc)... NYR, went for the fastest turn around possible, and had the means to do it - unlike our team which was gummed up all the way down the list with clauses, even Hansen lol... don't know why anyone would think this wasn't going to be a long long haul as a result...

Panarin, Trouba and Zibanejad ... lottery luck for sure boosted their cycle,  they will keep doing that it's their MO.   Never enough though (buying UFAs plus a couple home grown guys), wouldn't be proud of that if i was a fan of their team (and i'm not proud of JB per say either, made his mistakes for sure).   Yzerman picking Seider was one ballsy move, it's the best thing that's happened to them in years.   They are on their second crack it too...would you say they are better, the same or worse then us?  Larkin/Horvat ... plus they had Bertuzzi earlier...

 

Personally was surprised JB lasted through that first couple of years,  media was really rough.   Even back East.   Funny how that changed Boeser first year, since then the Eastern media has left him alone for the most part, except a little recently but even then not really.  

 

Overall JB didn't time the kids cycles well, off by one year (aside from LE) and that's going to keep hurting us next year too.   Maybe longer with OEL, but at his wage/vet anchor isn't terrible.    Don't have any issues with his ELC deals other then how long they took maybe.   Said missing camp weighed heavy on them and wanted them done - but failed nonetheless.   Brock Boeser's agent was so far out in left field...hope Rutherford puts him in his place.   To me he went down with the ship by sticking with Green, but needed to go anyways.   Compared to other teams cycles - applies and apples would be Detroit, SJ and that's it when he came in anyways (top teams ready for a re-tool or rebuild)...   Other former top teams that worked on their next cycle before and during him was CAR.   9 years.     Maybe them too.   ANA and the NYR a are both works in progress still for sure.    ANA is a surprise, but highly doubt they end up a top 3 team in our division...last harrah with Getzlaf, they still have quite a lot of work to do, but Terry and Gibson are monsters.   Gibson probably stopped them from drafting closer to one the last three seasons, we also had issues with that because of goaltending and lottery luck.    Rules change after we've drafted most our core lol.   Can see why Benning said "f!ck it" and started trading his firsts (ok that's a joke).  

 

Don't think JB was a bad GM, or a good one, overall with what we needed him to do, he rushed it and that's the irony of those who think it should be a 2-4 year thing.   Re-tool actually worked at the start,  JB gave the Sedins and a 3 year life line to do something (Miller/Vrbata)...7th overall.   Absolutely they delayed our rebuild. The time for that was when the Sedins got their last deal .... we could have tanked and re-tooled around Kesler.   But he didn't want to be here anymore.   What a joke that entire thing turned into.   Back to the "8 long years".... 3-4 years isn't long enough for a full rebuild these days, not one that stands a chance to win a cup anyways.    A chance to make the playoffs?  Sure just like 80% of the league these days.   The worst possible thing to me is, mediocrity.   That's where i see the team JB headed without some really smart trades, and some seriously great drafting this year and the next.   That's when the JB core will need cheap great players coming in behind them the most.     We won't know how good JB drafting really was for another 4-5 years  ...

[IBatch]

On 12/18/2021 at 2:25 PM, CanucksJay said:

I am hoping Green defenders like @canuck73_3 just want the Green bashing to stop because they are nice guys and don't want any canuck current or former being lambasted in the forum. Problem is, they are not being objective and are completely going against what is actually happening on the ice since the coaching change and therefor are losing credibility and creating more arguments for insisting on a lost cause. 

 

Boudreau will get his chance to get severely critiziced too.   Let's just hope his fans won't be relying on the "Bruce Bump" for their arguments.   Of course Green was a coach - he's been doing that since 2008.    Bet half the lives of a lot of posters.   Will reserve judgement on Green for awhile yet, but do think he spent too much time over analyzing and trying to put square pegs in round holes.  Of course that's also a lot to do with Benning.   Just look at the roster he gave him until this year lol.  

[CanucksJay]

42 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Boudreau will get his chance to get severely critiziced too.   Let's just hope his fans won't be relying on the "Bruce Bump" for their arguments.   Of course Green was a coach - he's been doing that since 2008.    Bet half the lives of a lot of posters.   Will reserve judgement on Green for awhile yet, but do think he spent too much time over analyzing and trying to put square pegs in round holes.  Of course that's also a lot to do with Benning.   Just look at the roster he gave him until this year lol.  

Yes BB will at one point have to coach the team when they are in a slump. I do wonder what that'll look like. I thought it might be starting in the columbus game as the boys looked flat much like they have looked under Green. It was good to see them rally and then follow up with another win against SJ

As for Green, it's a poor argument to blame previous rosters for his inability to coach the team this year.

I gave him the benefit of the doubt previous years as the roster wasnt good but this year, the roster looked really good and thats when i started seeing a pattern of poor/bizarre decisions starting from training camp. 

It then continued throughout preseason and then a massive hole was dug in the first 25 games of the season and he was rightfully fired. 

If we reserved judgement of previous years and finally only looked at this year when he was given a solid roster, you would have to admit it was a huge fail on the part of Green. It is a stretch for people to say he was a good coach because in previous years, the team didn't perform well but we dont fully know if that was coaching or a poor roster. You can't make a decision either way whether he was good or bad. At best you can say he was average because roster was bad and he got bad results. He didnt make the team any better. Although i do wonder aftwr seeing guys like Edler, Schmidt, Tanev, Chatfield leave the team and playimg better whether he was even an average coach. 

This year though, it was evident he was bad. 

 

 

[*Buzzsaw*]

On 12/17/2021 at 11:25 AM, DeNiro said:

Baertschi is a great comparison.

 

Do you think Flames fans are still whining about losing him? 
 

I don’t know why Canucks fans still care that he’s gone. We have better players than him in our top 9. That’s all that matters.

No, Baertschi is not a good comparison.

 

Baertschi was a legitimate top six player... who had his career destroyed by a series of concussions.

 

He was not a fringe player, he was more than capable of producing, had the skating and puck handling skills, even had enough size.  The season he had with Horvat and Boeser was an excellent one, and there was no reason not to expect to see that level of play continue if Baertschi wasn't the target of a cheap shot aimed at the head.

It doesn't matter who you are or what size, if you get multiple hits to the head it will negatively affect you... and some, like Baertschi, never recover.

[13231]

On 12/19/2021 at 5:23 AM, canuck73_3 said:

There is a lack of objectivity on the Green is an awful coach side though.  The truth is more in the middle whether you like it or not. 

Coming back to the boards after a while and seeing your post now. You are yet to present a single fact/stat/pattern to affirm your statement. Not a single thing you said can be qualified as an objective statement. Your whole argument is contingent on a single sentence, basically stating that because Green made it to the NHL as a head coach, it unequivocally makes him a good coach. Furthermore, you have not reverted to a single point myself or the other member who's a part of this conversation has made, points which are based on analysis of systems and roster deployment, supported by relevant numbers. 

 

Unless you can reply to any of the above with a comprehensive post, with a rebuttal relevant to facts and something other than "Green is a good coach because that's how I feel", then I'm sorry it is just plainly foolish to engage in any further conversation with you. 

[canuck73_3]

3 hours ago, 13231 said:

Coming back to the boards after a while and seeing your post now. You are yet to present a single fact/stat/pattern to affirm your statement. Not a single thing you said can be qualified as an objective statement. Your whole argument is contingent on a single sentence, basically stating that because Green made it to the NHL as a head coach, it unequivocally makes him a good coach. Furthermore, you have not reverted to a single point myself or the other member who's a part of this conversation has made, points which are based on analysis of systems and roster deployment, supported by relevant numbers. 

 

Unless you can reply to any of the above with a comprehensive post, with a rebuttal relevant to facts and something other than "Green is a good coach because that's how I feel", then I'm sorry it is just plainly foolish to engage in any further conversation with you. 

His system of collapsing and allowing perimeter shots worked really well against teams like Minnesota, St. Louis and Vegas as we saw in the playoff bubble. It was instances like that where we had a slight speed advantage it could work. 
 

Where he did fail the team was finding a different strategy against quicker teams because they used their speed to nullify any benefit of his collapse strategy. 
 

The pairing of Pearson and Horvat together was good for both of them but he leaned on them too much and would not mix them up when it wasn’t working. Like all coaches he had his good with the bad in his game decisions. 
 

At the end of the day he is a good coach who was kept a season and a 1/4 too long in hindsight. I was ok with him getting a fresh start this season as the covid season was just weird on all angles but I would have pulled the trigger on his firing sooner this season as it was beyond evident the players needed a new voice. 

[Baggins]

On 12/20/2021 at 3:00 PM, *Buzzsaw* said:

No, Baertschi is not a good comparison.

 

Baertschi was a legitimate top six player... who had his career destroyed by a series of concussions.

 

He was not a fringe player, he was more than capable of producing, had the skating and puck handling skills, even had enough size.  The season he had with Horvat and Boeser was an excellent one, and there was no reason not to expect to see that level of play continue if Baertschi wasn't the target of a cheap shot aimed at the head.

It doesn't matter who you are or what size, if you get multiple hits to the head it will negatively affect you... and some, like Baertschi, never recover.

Neither of Baers two concussions were the result of cheap shots. That's simple homerism. Both were Baers own fault for not paying attention to what's happening around him. Both times he turned into an oncoming players path without looking. Let me ask you this: If a player is skating in a staright line towards the puck/play and another player turns into his path who is guilty of interference, the player going straight or the player that changed his course thus getting in the way? It's always the person that changed direction to get in the way. In both of these cases it was Baer that changed course into the path of another player. What do you expect to happen when a player suddenly changes direction into the path of another player that's skating hard? Well, a collision occurs, and the player travelling in the straight line is not the one at fault. Both times Baer was focused entirely on the puck and oblivious to what was happening around him. In neither case was the player skating at Baer. Rather in both cases Baer blindly turned directly into the other players path.

 

I do agree with you Baer was a legit NHL player. But I don't agree he was the victim of cheap shots. That was his own fault. Or more realistictly - the result of no fault collisions.

[Baggins]

On 12/18/2021 at 7:36 AM, CanucksJay said:

Yup thats exactly it. 

The idea of players not playing at their best due to roster decisions is asinine. 

Taffoli was a trade deadline acquisition where canucks were missing boeser but was trying to make a push to make the playoffs. 

In hindsight yes we should have signed him over JV in the offseason. 

Tanev was replaced by Schmidt where ppl were thrilled becuase it had looked like an upgrade on paper. It looked like a flop last year but I do wonder watching his success this year in Winnipeg whether BB would have gotten better performance from him and the team last year and made ppl forget about Tanev? Up until then, ppl were complaining that Tanev was an injury prone one dimensional player whondoesnt deserve a long term contract. It makes sense that Schmidt saw how he was being deployed bybTG and wanted to gtfo. Also weird to see Tanev healthy playing for a different coach and better strategy. Another black mark on TG? 

Markstrom was also not traded because we were trying to make the playoffs. Demko didnt emerge until Vegas series so it's quite stupid to say we should have gotten something for Markstrom which would have meant to sell before playoffs. 

In hindsight, i am Happy to have kept Demko at his age and contract over Markstrom. 

Yes maybe we could have gotten a late pick for Markstrom's rights but we're really splitting hairs

 

Anyway, the notion of these 3 players leaving being the reason for an unhappy locker room which then resulted in giving up on the season last year and this year is laughable.

If that's the case, none of these guys should be playing pro hockey. 

 

 

 

JV wasn't chosen over Toffi. He was signed 10 days after Toffoli signed with the the Habs. Signing JV after Toffi was off the table is not choosing him over Toffi. Far more likely JV was bridesmaid in who they preferred to re-sign.