[Report] Canucks fire Bruce Boudreau, Trent Cull; name Rick Tocchet as head coach, Adam Foote as assistant coach, Sergei Gonchar as defensive development coach

[TNucks1]

 

sounds flustered

EDIT: before i finished the video, wtf he is going on about lol... god speed tocchet.

Edited January 24, 2023 by TNucks1

[AnotherCanucksFan]

Firing Boudreau mid season makes no sense on multiple levels - we're not making the playoffs, but trying convince the team we are only lowers our sweepstake chances *and* we hired a sub .500 coach to replace Boudreau.

 

Rick Tocchet is a 6 year coach with .475 CAREER record. Bruce Boudreau is a 16 year coach with a .626 CAREER record! His .549 record for Vancouver is his worst of all his seasons.

 

How does hiring a below .500 coach with less years experience help the team in any way?

[IBatch]

13 hours ago, EdgarM said:

Thank you for pointing this out. I have been concerned for this for decades. We have been man handled over and over and people wonder why we aren't successful in the playoffs. Our stars have been pushed around and continue to be pushed around to this day.

Messier in 94, Marchand in 2011, Keith in 2012 and Ferlund in 2015 are some of the more notables and many of us know of others over the years.

These new guys coming in know 2 things we don't. They know snarly play and Cup success.

I have waited decades for these type of guys I just hope they can teach the team what they need to know to become successful, I am crossing my fingers.

94?   Well sure Messier cheap shotted Linden in game six, but it for sure wasn't a team that was "pushed around".   Actually most of the teams we had that weren't as good as our division rivals, still didn't get pushed around until the new century.   We had some big mean and tough players, even if we didn't have the star power (80's). 

 

Gino/Antoski/Hunter... our D was all big. Bure got "pushed around" by Churla, that didn't work out so well for him.     In 94, the Canucks got stronger as the series went on, game six we were as convincingly the better team as the Rangers were against us in Game 1 (which we won, that's to McLeans amazing play) ... CAL was the only team in 94 that gave us some issues, and that was mostly Roberts running McLean.   Gino sat a lot of 94 in favour of Antoski, a better skater.    Didn't start seeing the Canucks getting pushed around until the mid-late  2000's.    And even then, it's not like we were slouches in the department, just no longer the team others didn't mind playing in the alley with.   Boston definitely had us in that regard.  

Edited January 24, 2023 by IBatch

[Timråfan]

4 minutes ago, AnotherCanucksFan said:

Firing Boudreau mid season makes no sense on multiple levels - we're not making the playoffs, but trying convince the team we are only lowers our sweepstake chances *and* we hired a sub .500 coach to replace Boudreau.

 

Rick Tocchet is a 6 year coach with .475 CAREER record. Bruce Boudreau is a 16 year coach with a .626 CAREER record! His .549 record for Vancouver is his worst of all his seasons.

 

How does hiring a below .500 coach with less years experience help the team in any way?

What I’ve read is that BB isn’t a playoff coach.

He wins a lot during regular season but not in playoff.

Tocchet has coached 4 seasons in Arizona. 
That didn’t help his numbers.

 

If I take it further.

It was talk about safer environment for the players in the rink.

So it seems JR wants the team to be tougher than BB wanted so Tocchet might be that guy with his Gordie Howes hattrick record.

 

[DownUndaCanuck]

More and more reports coming out of Babcock nearly signing, yikes.

 

I don't think all of this will come down on Tocchet, I think he'll really manage by group - Foote and Gonchar will be interesting but sounds like he's using the Sedins a lot. Imagine having a team with the Sedins, prime Foote and Gonchar...

 

It's all well and good to say this, but this is a very different era and hockey game to when all these guys were playing. It's much faster, far more mistakes and there's much more offence. My only worry is they'll coach the way they played which was a long time ago. When you look at some of the sucessfull teams around the league, they've all got relatively young coaches. The BBs, Babcocks and Quinnevilles are gone.

 

This 3 game swing is going to be bananas and can't read much into it, but after a good 9 day break it'll be interesting to see what the coaches come up with.

 

I'm indifferent to the hire, I know BB had to go but honestly this should have been done when we were a .500 team and still had a chance to make the playoffs. Now, we might as well have waited for the off-season and let Bruce have fun out there. Stupid timing, couldn't be worse by management. They waited too long to make a decisive trade (never did), now they've waited too long to make a coaching change. With Green and BB last year they waited too long as well.

[Zerofaith]

The players aren’t magically gonna get better. 
 

we have a badly constructed team thanks to the incompetence of  management. 
 

the team we ice is too fragile to play a full 60 minutes, except for a few players the rest do not carry themselves like they want to win on any given shifts. We’ll still suck don’t you guys worry 
 

 

[KyGuy123]

If they shutdown Demko and run the tandem we have tanking will be no problem. The PK will not improve because we still have the same players and every team in the league pretty much plays the same system, it’s not a science. 
 

When we start trading off piece’s we will only get worse and I’m sure everyone involved with the team knows this. Management thinks we have a country club atmosphere with no structure so they are looking to change the dynamic around the team, a more professional approach. 
 

Their goal is to change the culture and create better Hockey players, their development team now has the Sedins, Komiserek, Samuelson, Gonchar, Foote, Tocchet.
 

They obviously have a vision to surround the players with ex smart players who have had success and can help develop the next core and current younger players into their best competitive self. I personally see the vision, it’s clearly in player development under the new coaching staff. 

[Gawdzukes]

13 minutes ago, AnotherCanucksFan said:

Firing Boudreau mid season makes no sense on multiple levels - we're not making the playoffs, but trying convince the team we are only lowers our sweepstake chances *and* we hired a sub .500 coach to replace Boudreau.

 

Rick Tocchet is a 6 year coach with .475 CAREER record. Bruce Boudreau is a 16 year coach with a .626 CAREER record! His .549 record for Vancouver is his worst of all his seasons.

 

How does hiring a below .500 coach with less years experience help the team in any way?

So someone with better stats than Bruce needs to be hired? That doesn't seem realistic.

[IBatch]

11 minutes ago, AnotherCanucksFan said:

Firing Boudreau mid season makes no sense on multiple levels - we're not making the playoffs, but trying convince the team we are only lowers our sweepstake chances *and* we hired a sub .500 coach to replace Boudreau.

 

Rick Tocchet is a 6 year coach with .475 CAREER record. Bruce Boudreau is a 16 year coach with a .626 CAREER record! His .549 record for Vancouver is his worst of all his seasons.

 

How does hiring a below .500 coach with less years experience help the team in any way?

In all fairness Tochett was the head coach of bad teams.   First TB when they ended up drafting big names, then with ARI...and one could definitely say those teams overachieved.     Said Green also overachieved with our team a couple years too.   

 

If he's going to help create a culture change in the right direction, then that's good.   Seems more personable than I thought he'd be, wanting to build relationships.    Sucks to lose a fan favourite,  had high hopes for Bruce and the team after our second half last year.   

 

Teams not worse on paper.    Goaltending isn't going to save us anymore, believe that's where he's going.    Team defense.   Won't happen overnight.   And wouldn't worry about team tank - that's still going to happen too. 

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

So someone with better stats than Bruce needs to be hired? That doesn't seem realistic.

Babcock?   About the only guy available.   And well, i'd rather have Tochett. 

[Gawdzukes]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Babcock?   About the only guy available.   And well, i'd rather have Tochett. 

Yup I'm happy enough with the move. The thing is there isn’t a group of elite coaches always hanging around, and if there are they are hard to identify. Previous records are often not the best indicator either. Coaches can come from anywhere and often surprise people. It's not the same as a hockey player which is much more linear.

[King Heffy]

11 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Babcock?   About the only guy available.   And well, i'd rather have Tochett. 

Guy Boucher would have been acceptable.

[AnotherCanucksFan]

2 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Yup I'm happy enough with the move. The thing is there isn’t a group of elite coaches always hanging around, and if there are they are hard to identify. Previous records are often not the best indicator either. Coaches can come from anywhere and often surprise people. It's not the same as a hockey player which is much more linear.

We won't know who is available, because we didn't wait until the end of the season when Coaches will be fired. 

To say records don't matter makes no sense to me, because a Coach's career record is a reflection of how consistent they are at staying at X or Y level of hockey performance. Sure they may be on a bad or good team, but did they elevate the team who was bad or just stay at the same level. If the team was good did they elevate the team or not.

 

Boudreau and Tocchet had consistent winning percentages for most of the teams they coached. If Tocchet coached a bad Arizona team and had a .475 winning %, then what logic is there that he will do better than that with a bad Canucks team? He never elevated the teams he coached, so that track record is relevant to me. If you think he'll somehow dramatically change his track record and get us into the playoff, only time will tell. 

[TNucks1]

37 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

More and more reports coming out of Babcock nearly signing, yikes.

 

I don't think all of this will come down on Tocchet, I think he'll really manage by group - Foote and Gonchar will be interesting but sounds like he's using the Sedins a lot. Imagine having a team with the Sedins, prime Foote and Gonchar...

 

It's all well and good to say this, but this is a very different era and hockey game to when all these guys were playing. It's much faster, far more mistakes and there's much more offence. My only worry is they'll coach the way they played which was a long time ago. When you look at some of the sucessfull teams around the league, they've all got relatively young coaches. The BBs, Babcocks and Quinnevilles are gone.

 

This 3 game swing is going to be bananas and can't read much into it, but after a good 9 day break it'll be interesting to see what the coaches come up with.

 

I'm indifferent to the hire, I know BB had to go but honestly this should have been done when we were a .500 team and still had a chance to make the playoffs. Now, we might as well have waited for the off-season and let Bruce have fun out there. Stupid timing, couldn't be worse by management. They waited too long to make a decisive trade (never did), now they've waited too long to make a coaching change. With Green and BB last year they waited too long as well.

just googled the babcock hiring stuff, all i see is they interviewed 6 days ago.

EDIT: unless you meant they were thinking of signing him?, just the first statement was confusing.

Edited January 24, 2023 by TNucks1

[Gawdzukes]

28 minutes ago, AnotherCanucksFan said:

We won't know who is available, because we didn't wait until the end of the season when Coaches will be fired. 

To say records don't matter makes no sense to me, because a Coach's career record is a reflection of how consistent they are at staying at X or Y level of hockey performance. Sure they may be on a bad or good team, but did they elevate the team who was bad or just stay at the same level. If the team was good did they elevate the team or not.

 

Boudreau and Tocchet had consistent winning percentages for most of the teams they coached. If Tocchet coached a bad Arizona team and had a .475 winning %, then what logic is there that he will do better than that with a bad Canucks team? He never elevated the teams he coached, so that track record is relevant to me. If you think he'll somehow dramatically change his track record and get us into the playoff, only time will tell. 

So all coaches with bad records should never be hired again and any team looking should hire the coach with the best record. Hmmm, maybe but it seems like it could be more complex to me.

[UFCanuck]

4 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

Watching the interviews, I'm legit scared for a coaching bump especially with an easy schedule coming up. 

If we fall out of the Bedard sweepstakes to finish 10th in the west, I'll be so pissed. 

Sounds like Gonchar and Foote will be great for the defense. 

Only matter of time before Yeo gets canned. What will his responsibility be now? 

 

Toccchet isn’t about firing up the team. He’s a slow mover, build the discipline brick by brick. In his coaching history first years are usually pretty bad for his teams as they learn a new system. Tank you and goodnight 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, TNucks1 said:

 

sounds flustered
 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by iinatcc

[AnotherCanucksFan]

6 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

So all coaches with bad records should never be hired again and any team looking should hire the coach with the best record. Hmmm, maybe but it seems like it could be more complex to me.

What I think we can agree on is that Tocchet, Foote, and Gonchar had successful hockey careers. Tocchet coaching career hasn't translated well so far. Foote was fired in 2020 after head coaching in Kelowna, and Gonchar hasn't coached a bad team yet. So we'll see if the three can make a bad team into a playoff team, because so far none of them have done it yet with other teams.

[Goal:thecup]

5 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

Watching the interviews, I'm legit scared for a coaching bump especially with an easy schedule coming up. 

If we fall out of the Bedard sweepstakes to finish 10th in the west, I'll be so pissed. 

Sounds like Gonchar and Foote will be great for the defense. 

Only matter of time before Yeo gets canned. What will his responsibility be now? 

 

Designated Screamer

[Gawdzukes]

6 minutes ago, AnotherCanucksFan said:

What I think we can agree on is that Tocchet, Foote, and Gonchar had successful hockey careers. Tocchet coaching career hasn't translated well so far. Foote was fired in 2020 after head coaching in Kelowna, and Gonchar hasn't coached a bad team yet. So we'll see if the three can make a bad team into a playoff team, because so far none of them have done it yet with other teams.

That's definitely reasonable. I find it's quite hard to really understand the coaching landscape so I admit I take a wait and see approach. Even coaches you see for years on other teams are not exactly what they seem. It's also important to not let the entire team rot for another year. I totally see where you are coming from though.