Page 9 of 10

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 8:30 am
by Chef Boi RD
Look at all that humble pie the Giggler Hater crew is sucking back like its going out of style. Listening to the local sports media morons who love to run coaches out of town led by Bones Gallagher the past couple days all chowing down on the same pie after last season holding hands singing in harmony about how it's all AV's fault and not the GM who had no previous scouting or assistant GM'ing experience before getting hired. If the Canucks had a proper man running the show here - AV would and should still be here. Woops did I say something bad about the players agent? Sorry guys

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 9:29 am
by Betamax
RoyalDude wrote:Look at all that humble pie the Giggler Hater crew is sucking back like its going out of style. Listening to the local sports media morons who love to run coaches out of town led by Bones Gallagher the past couple days all chowing down on the same pie after last season holding hands singing in harmony about how it's all AV's fault and not the GM who had no previous scouting or assistant GM'ing experience before getting hired. If the Canucks had a proper man running the show here - AV would and should still be here. Woops did I say something bad about the players agent? Sorry guys
The easiest move to make was to change the Coach and sell that to the fanbase for another year. When a team has repeated failures, somethings gotta give and the Canucks' ownership and Michael D. Gillis chose the path of least resistance, since it would have been a lot tougher to re-imagine the team with a decreased salary cap and all those NTC attached to their core players ... lest we forget that Mr. Gillis had not been doing too well in making significant deals, either. :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 4:49 pm
by Strangelove
RoyalDude wrote: If the Canucks had a proper man running the show here - AV would and should still be here.
:hmmm:

AV had a playoff team here.

In his last 14 playoff games his team won a grand total of 2 games.

In his last 14 playoff games his team was outscored 50-20.

AV was simply not working here and HAD TO GO.

The consensus here was that he is a good coach but HAD TO GO.

Get over it and GET OVER YOURSELF.

If they fired MoneyPuck a year ago, the new guy would also have fired AV and brought in his own coach.

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 9:04 am
by Art Vandelay
Island Nucklehead wrote: I'm done trying to interpret your gibberish.

:look:


:sly:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:34 am
by ukcanuck
Betamax wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:Look at all that humble pie the Giggler Hater crew is sucking back like its going out of style. Listening to the local sports media morons who love to run coaches out of town led by Bones Gallagher the past couple days all chowing down on the same pie after last season holding hands singing in harmony about how it's all AV's fault and not the GM who had no previous scouting or assistant GM'ing experience before getting hired. If the Canucks had a proper man running the show here - AV would and should still be here. Woops did I say something bad about the players agent? Sorry guys
The easiest move to make was to change the Coach and sell that to the fanbase for another year. When a team has repeated failures, somethings gotta give and the Canucks' ownership and Michael D. Gillis chose the path of least resistance, since it would have been a lot tougher to re-imagine the team with a decreased salary cap and all those NTC attached to their core players ... lest we forget that Mr. Gillis had not been doing too well in making significant deals, either. :mex:
It wasn't the path of least resistance for Gillis, it was the only path. Coming off getting smoked by the Kings the season before, and with a virtual roster freeze across the NHL due to the lock out. Gillis only had one choice.

He couldn't stand pat on the roster, but he couldn't make any real changes either. He had to either fire AV or fall on his own sword...

That really isn't a choice at all.

AV had to go, and deserve had nuttin ta do wit it.... :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:48 pm
by Betamax
ukcanuck wrote:
Betamax wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:Look at all that humble pie the Giggler Hater crew is sucking back like its going out of style. Listening to the local sports media morons who love to run coaches out of town led by Bones Gallagher the past couple days all chowing down on the same pie after last season holding hands singing in harmony about how it's all AV's fault and not the GM who had no previous scouting or assistant GM'ing experience before getting hired. If the Canucks had a proper man running the show here - AV would and should still be here. Woops did I say something bad about the players agent? Sorry guys
The easiest move to make was to change the Coach and sell that to the fanbase for another year. When a team has repeated failures, somethings gotta give and the Canucks' ownership and Michael D. Gillis chose the path of least resistance, since it would have been a lot tougher to re-imagine the team with a decreased salary cap and all those NTC attached to their core players ... lest we forget that Mr. Gillis had not been doing too well in making significant deals, either. :mex:
It wasn't the path of least resistance for Gillis, it was the only path. Coming off getting smoked by the Kings the season before, and with a virtual roster freeze across the NHL due to the lock out. Gillis only had one choice.

He couldn't stand pat on the roster, but he couldn't make any real changes either. He had to either fire AV or fall on his own sword...

That really isn't a choice at all.

AV had to go, and deserve had nuttin ta do wit it.... :mex:
duh,



Anyway, Michael D. Gillis' had to hire the proper coach if he went that route. Clearly he didn't. :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:51 pm
by Betamax
via: http://canuckscorner.com/forums/viewtop ... start=2527
SKYO wrote:
Betamax wrote:via: http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/hockey ... renzy.html

30 Thoughts: NHL defenceman cash in on free-agent frenzy
By Elliotte Friedman
Posted: Monday, July 21, 2014 | 12:38 PM
*Since this is the last 30 Thoughts of the season, I tacked on some bonus ones. Enjoy.
Here are the Canucks' related ones:
31. Canucks GM Jim Benning on how Daniel and Henrik Sedin will be used: "I want them to get back to worrying about offence...creating off the cycle. They are good offensive players."

32. It was interesting to hear how many other Western Conference teams feel Vancouver will be improved. "Everything went wrong for them last year," said one GM. "I can't imagine those guys just fell off a cliff," said another. (As always, no one quoted in this blog is used as an anonymous source.) Benning proved one thing so far: if you really want to make trades in this league, you can. He's concerned with depth, because the Canucks' travel schedule means you need it.

33. Benning on rumours he's not a Chris Tanev fan: "I don't know where this comes from. I'm a big fan of his, he made big strides last year."

34. Finally, he had a good line about his father, Elmer, a long-time scout. "He told me, 'I'll give you a report card on how you're doing,'" Jim laughed. Other advice: "Make sure that when you're trying to build teams, do it with high-character players. That's where you're going to win. When you have adversity, they figure out a way to fight through it."

35. Benning wasn't going there, but it is believed both Vancouver and Edmonton tried to pry Patrik Berglund from St. Louis. With Vladimir Sobotka gone, it's harder to see the Blues parting with Berglund. "We see our centre ice being big and the toughest to play against with Berglund in it," Blues GM Doug Armstrong said. "He gives us a lot of options." (Armstrong would not comment on specific teams that asked).
:mex:
I like that tidbit about the Sedins - just get em back to what they do best & just put up points! no penalty kill time, no blocking shots and BS like that, that will lead to injuries to your star players, that should be done by your depth players to which we have a lot of now.

If you look at the original post in this thread and contrast it to what has occurred. The one thing you have to give credit to Linden and Co. is that he and the rest of the management team are on the same page. I assume their general feelings were relayed to incoming Coach Willie D. and that he won't try to foolishly try to turn the Sedins into, duh "Complete" players.

The one thing that I found curious about the Michael D. Gillis' way of management is that it was my perception that he gave too much autonomy to the Coach to make key franchise altering decisions and wasn't more influential or on the same page. This has his positive and negative aspects as you want a certain degree of autonomy when it comes to personnel decisions but it had it's negative consequences when it came to how the two goalie situations were handled here and this was a major pox to the organization. :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:08 pm
by Hockey Widow
Betamax wrote:via: http://canuckscorner.com/forums/viewtop ... start=2527
SKYO wrote:
Betamax wrote:via: http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/hockey ... renzy.html

30 Thoughts: NHL defenceman cash in on free-agent frenzy
By Elliotte Friedman
Posted: Monday, July 21, 2014 | 12:38 PM
*Since this is the last 30 Thoughts of the season, I tacked on some bonus ones. Enjoy.
Here are the Canucks' related ones:
31. Canucks GM Jim Benning on how Daniel and Henrik Sedin will be used: "I want them to get back to worrying about offence...creating off the cycle. They are good offensive players."

32. It was interesting to hear how many other Western Conference teams feel Vancouver will be improved. "Everything went wrong for them last year," said one GM. "I can't imagine those guys just fell off a cliff," said another. (As always, no one quoted in this blog is used as an anonymous source.) Benning proved one thing so far: if you really want to make trades in this league, you can. He's concerned with depth, because the Canucks' travel schedule means you need it.

33. Benning on rumours he's not a Chris Tanev fan: "I don't know where this comes from. I'm a big fan of his, he made big strides last year."

34. Finally, he had a good line about his father, Elmer, a long-time scout. "He told me, 'I'll give you a report card on how you're doing,'" Jim laughed. Other advice: "Make sure that when you're trying to build teams, do it with high-character players. That's where you're going to win. When you have adversity, they figure out a way to fight through it."

35. Benning wasn't going there, but it is believed both Vancouver and Edmonton tried to pry Patrik Berglund from St. Louis. With Vladimir Sobotka gone, it's harder to see the Blues parting with Berglund. "We see our centre ice being big and the toughest to play against with Berglund in it," Blues GM Doug Armstrong said. "He gives us a lot of options." (Armstrong would not comment on specific teams that asked).
:mex:
I like that tidbit about the Sedins - just get em back to what they do best & just put up points! no penalty kill time, no blocking shots and BS like that, that will lead to injuries to your star players, that should be done by your depth players to which we have a lot of now.

If you look at the original post in this thread and contrast it to what has occurred. The one thing you have to give credit to Linden and Co. is that he and the rest of the management team are on the same page. I assume their general feelings were relayed to incoming Coach Willie D. and that he won't try to foolishly try to turn the Sedins into, duh "Complete" players.

The one thing that I found curious about the Michael D. Gillis' way of management is that it was my perception that he gave too much autonomy to the Coach to make key franchise altering decisions and wasn't more influential or on the same page. This has his positive and negative aspects as you want a certain degree of autonomy when it comes to personnel decisions but it had it's negative consequences when it came to how the two goalie situations were handled here and this was a major pox to the organization. :mex:

Too bad Garrison didn't agree to go to St. Louis. We had a one for one deal for Berglund on the table. Garrison chose lifestyle and no taxes. But then again, Tampa has a pretty good team and a healthy Bishop may have seen them go further in the playoffs.

Hard to say, Vey or Berglund????

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:41 pm
by mathonwy
Hockey Widow wrote:
Hard to say, Vey or Berglund????
There is absolute no question.. Berglund all the way.

Berglund is an actual NHL'er.
Berglund is 6'3, 217 versus Vey at 6'0, 189.
Berglund is the right age at 26 to help the Canucks become competitive again faster versus Vey at 23 who hasn't had a full season with the NHL yet.

Damn you Garrison!!

and damn you Mike Gillis for handing out NTC's like they were Snicker bars.

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:42 pm
by Betamax
mathonwy wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:
Hard to say, Vey or Berglund????
There is absolute no question.. Berglund all the way.

Berglund is an actual NHL'er.
Berglund is 6'3, 217 versus Vey at 6'0, 189.
Berglund is the right age at 26 to help the Canucks become competitive again faster versus Vey at 23 who hasn't had a full season with the NHL yet.

Damn you Garrison!!

and damn you Mike Gillis for handing out NTC's like they were Snicker bars.
Handing out NTCs to high profile UFAs is par for the course. If Michael D. Gillis' hadn't offered it to Garrison, GMJB wouldn't have had him to trade in the first place! :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:45 pm
by mathonwy
Betamax wrote:
Handing out NTCs to high profile UFAs is par for the course. If Michael D. Gillis' hadn't offered it to Garrison, GMJB wouldn't have had him to trade in the first place! :mex:
And if GMJB didn't have Garrison to trade, we wouldn't be having this conversation at this point of time.

Am I playing this game right?

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:51 pm
by Betamax
mathonwy wrote:
Betamax wrote:
Handing out NTCs to high profile UFAs is par for the course. If Michael D. Gillis' hadn't offered it to Garrison, GMJB wouldn't have had him to trade in the first place! :mex:
And if GMJB didn't have Garrison to trade, we wouldn't be having this conversation at this point of time.

Am I playing this game right?
duh, "semi-right."

Or maybe not. :mex:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:08 pm
by Betamax
So, yesterday on the Moj Show on TEAM Radio, he relayed a little anecdote on how Torts treated some of his players. Now it's been widely reported that Torts berated Booth for being late for a team meeting when he was was on time.

But the Moj told of another alleged incident where I've never heard reported where Booth along with Weise were the outcasts in Torts' mind. Apparently after the Canucks had their meltdown against the NYI and let in not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six but seven goals in the 3rd period last season, apparently Torts text messaged everyone of their players but the two aforementioned to give them some sort of positive message.

:hmmm:

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:49 pm
by Hockey Widow
Betamax wrote:So, yesterday on the Moj Show on TEAM Radio, he relayed a little anecdote on how Torts treated some of his players. Now it's been widely reported that Torts berated Booth for being late for a team meeting when he was was on time.

But the Moj told of another alleged incident where I've never heard reported where Booth along with Weise were the outcasts in Torts' mind. Apparently after the Canucks had their meltdown against the NYI and let in not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six but seven goals in the 3rd period last season, apparently Torts text messaged everyone of their players but the two aforementioned to give them some sort of positive message.

:hmmm:
Haven't heard that one but it would not surprise me if true. I do know, pretty certain anyway, that Weise detested Torts. He wasn't shy about saying so either. Past history there too. Weise wanted out and Torts wanted him gone. Torts is a throw back to a coach who needs a few public whipping boys, uses it as motivation, or so the theory goes, for the rest of the team. School of tough love, hard Knox and all of that.

There were early times where I felt pleasantly surprised by Torts but for me the end came during that fiasco of a road trip to California. The team played with no focus or discipline and tried to be tough guys. Totally lost their game during that trip and never got it back. Only to be followed up with the Calgary game fiasco. The season was lost right there.

MG should have fired Torts right then and there.

Re: All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:00 pm
by dbr
Wow, he texted Diaz and everything?