All-Encompassing Coaching/Shot Blocking Discussion!!!

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Post Reply
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

ClamRussel wrote:Now this is one thing I'm 100% onboard with Tortorella:
Tortorella was frustrated at the lineup Gillis gave him and the complacency and sense of entitlement in some players.
http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/sport ... rel=813152
I think Fonzie was delusional. He knew what the roster was before he took the job.

BTW, it was virtually the same roster that did a HELL of a lot better under the previous coach. That same previous coach that took over his former team and did a HELL lot better @ the big apple then he managed to do in his last season (BTW, without alienating his highest paid player).

Even if he felt he was dealing with chicken shit, he was paid 2M to turn it into chicken salad and he failed miserably at it. It's on him. 8-)
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
Posts: 3992
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

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

Post by ClamRussel »

Betamax wrote:
ClamRussel wrote:Now this is one thing I'm 100% onboard with Tortorella:
Tortorella was frustrated at the lineup Gillis gave him and the complacency and sense of entitlement in some players.
http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/sport ... rel=813152
I think Fonzie was delusional. He knew what the roster was before he took the job.

BTW, it was virtually the same roster that did a HELL of a lot better under the previous coach. That same previous coach that took over his former team and did a HELL lot better @ the big apple then he managed to do in his last season (BTW, without alienating his highest paid player).

Even if he felt he was dealing with chicken shit, he was paid 2M to turn it into chicken salad and he failed miserably at it. It's on him. 8-)
Maybe he thought it was 2011 8-)

Not to defend Torts but AV would have done worse w/ the Canucks this year as well. These points comparisons don't hold water. Instead of feasting on Edm, Cgy & (then brutal) Colorado they had LA, Ana & SJ airlifted into their division. It's been well noted the Canucks feasted on weak divisional rivals for yrs. The Club Med vaco was over, but the players apparently didn't get the memo. Perhaps that fact snapped the Aquas back to reality because they obviously shared Torts' assessment & shit-canned Gillis.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

ClamRussel wrote:
Betamax wrote:I think Fonzie was delusional. He knew what the roster was before he took the job.

BTW, it was virtually the same roster that did a HELL of a lot better under the previous coach. That same previous coach that took over his former team and did a HELL lot better @ the big apple then he managed to do in his last season (BTW, without alienating his highest paid player).

Even if he felt he was dealing with chicken shit, he was paid 2M to turn it into chicken salad and he failed miserably at it. It's on him. 8-)
Maybe he thought it was 2011 8-)

Not to defend Torts but AV would have done worse w/ the Canucks this year as well. These points comparisons don't hold water. Instead of feasting on Edm, Cgy & (then brutal) Colorado they had LA, Ana & SJ airlifted into their division. It's been well noted the Canucks feasted on weak divisional rivals for yrs. The Club Med vaco was over, but the players apparently didn't get the memo. Perhaps that fact snapped the Aquas back to reality because they obviously shared Torts' assessment & shit-canned Gillis.
Wrong. You're wrong, so wrong, you couldn't be more wrong if you were Mr. Wrong, the Mayor of Toronto (who is allegedly in rehab, FYI, but is still calling into the Bro Show every Friday, WTF?).

The Canucks during their two Presidents' Trophy Championship seasons were also excellent *outside* of their division.

I'm gonna to be pulling a cyber bro dbr and be a lazy mofo that he is and cite an article I didn't thoroughly read (but pretend I did and act accordingly in a pretentious dick like manner) ... however, since it's from none other than the man, the myth, the Internet hockey blogging legend, CAM CHARRON, we can, duh, just "assume" it's accurate:

via: http://canucksarmy.com/2013/2/26/the-ca ... -northwest

THE CANUCKS AGAINST TEAMS OUTSIDE THE NORTHWEST

Cam Charron
February 26 2013 03:43PM

Here are his conclusions:
In the past two years, here's the team's record in and outside the division. Numbers grabbed from Hockey Reference:

GP Wins Losses OTL Pts/82 GF/82 GA/82 GD/82
Against Northwest 48 36 9 3 128 265 164 101
Against Other Divisions 116 69 32 15 108 252 203 49

In 116 games outside the Northwest in two years, the Canucks' points over 82 games would be pro-rated to 108. That would have won them the Presidents' Trophy in 2011 but left them one point shy in 2012. The +49 goal differential would have been beaten by three teams: the 2011 Bruins, the 2012 Bruins and the 2012 Penguins. Not bad company right there.

So even outside the Northwest, Vancouver's been pretty good and that's sort of surprised me, given how badly they've rung up Colorado and Edmonton particularly in the last couple of years.
They'll still be in a division with some of these teams, but also a couple of other real good squads. Rather than worrying about the strength of the division, Canuck fans should instead be worrying that the team is a few years older than a couple of years ago, have no players in their scoring prime years , and have had to rely more on their defence and goaltending over the last calender year.
What say you? 8-)
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
Posts: 3992
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

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

Post by ClamRussel »

I say there's a big difference in playing outside your division (vs strong & weak teams alike) and being hemmed in w/ all 3 California teams (1-9 I believe). Then again this lot also lost to some pretty bad teams as well but by then the season was in full implosion mode.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

ClamRussel wrote:I say there's a big difference in playing outside your division (vs strong & weak teams alike) and being hemmed in w/ all 3 California teams (1-9 I believe). Then again this lot also lost to some pretty bad teams as well but by then the season was in full implosion mode.
The point of my response was to address the sentence I've highlighted in bold:
ClamRussel wrote:Not to defend Torts but AV would have done worse w/ the Canucks this year as well. These points comparisons don't hold water. Instead of feasting on Edm, Cgy & (then brutal) Colorado they had LA, Ana & SJ airlifted into their division. It's been well noted the Canucks feasted on weak divisional rivals for yrs. The Club Med vaco was over, but the players apparently didn't get the memo. Perhaps that fact snapped the Aquas back to reality because they obviously shared Torts' assessment & shit-canned Gillis.
That implied that the Canucks' two Presidents' Trophy Championship seasons was overly inflated by "feasting" on the minnows in the NW division. Now, unless Internet hockey bloggin' legend, CAM CHARRON, completely fucked up his numbers in his article, the evidence clearly suggests otherwise. 8-)
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

Betamax wrote:
ClamRussel wrote:Now this is one thing I'm 100% onboard with Tortorella:
Tortorella was frustrated at the lineup Gillis gave him and the complacency and sense of entitlement in some players.
http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/sport ... rel=813152
I think Fonzie was delusional. He knew what the roster was before he took the job.

BTW, it was virtually the same roster that did a HELL of a lot better under the previous coach. That same previous coach that took over his former team and did a HELL lot better @ the big apple then he managed to do in his last season (BTW, without alienating his highest paid player).

Even if he felt he was dealing with chicken shit, he was paid 2M to turn it into chicken salad and he failed miserably at it. It's on him. 8-)
Why the New York Rangers should thank the Vancouver Canucks
By: Ronnie Shuker on May 17, 2014
The Hockey News

via: http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/why-t ... r-canucks/

As re-iterated in this thread:
Recall the hullabaloo in Van City over Tortorella’s increased ice time for Daniel and Henrik Sedin. Vigneault always kept them below 20:00 per game, because he wanted them fresh and focused on offense. Under Vigneault the Sedins were among the best players in the NHL. Under Tortorella they had their worst seasons in more than a decade.
Now, I'll just focus on the NYR elements in the following quote:
In New York, Vigneault has taken that same strategy and worked it to near perfection so far. The Rangers are Mariana Trench deep, and Vigneault has used every foot of the team’s depth that GM Glen Sather put together.

Throughout 2013-14, regular season and playoffs, not one forward has averaged 20 minutes of ice time or more. Only Ryan McDonagh, Dan Girardi and Marc Staal, all defensemen, have averaged more than 20 minutes per game. That’s why the Rangers were able to get through back-to-back seven-game series and yet still be fresh against the Canadiens Saturday.

More than that, though, Vigneault has the right players in the right roles. Take Benoit Pouliot, for example, a fourth-overall pick in 2005 who has never panned out offensively and likely never will. Instead of trying to force what’s just not there and putting him in the top-six, Vigneault has Pouliot on the third line where he’s thrived.

And there are others. Brad Richards has gone from a head-scratching healthy scratch last season to a solid second-line center again, McDonagh is showing Norris Trophy candidate potential and Mats Zuccarello has become an even more miniature version of Martin St-Louis – all under the watchful eye of Vigneault.

If you think owners have little impact on teams aside from cutting checks, think again. Their decisions filter down, positively or negatively, throughout an organization, and occasionally into another. The coaching flip-flop between the Canucks and Rangers is a perfect example. Exchanging Tortorella for Vigneault has to be the most lopsided de facto trade in NHL history. And New York has Aquilini to thank for it.
8-)
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
CC Legend
Posts: 18956
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

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

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Would you call that a lateral move, the Canucks and Rangers trading coaches?
DOYLE WOULD’VE RATHER HAD KEVIN HAYES AT 7 YEARS 7 MILLION PER INSTEAD OF J.T. MILLER FOR A LATE 1ST RD PICK
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

RoyalDude wrote:Would you call that a lateral move, the Canucks and Rangers trading coaches?
Nah, I'd call it the Canucks getting bent over ... kinda reminiscent to that scene in Pulp Fiction .......



:eh:
User avatar
BurningBeard
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

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

Post by BurningBeard »

Betamax wrote:Nah, I'd call it the Canucks getting bent over ... kinda reminiscent to that scene in Pulp Fiction .......



:eh:
When men bond over anal rape, it creates an unbreakable relationship that goes far beyond any other sort of friendship two men can have with each other... but I hardly think this is the appropriate time for me to talk about my pal Rummy. :look:
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 27056
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

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

Post by Strangelove »

Betamax wrote: Why the New York Rangers should thank the Vancouver Canucks

By: Ronnie Shuker on May 17, 2014

8-)
UMMMM who the fuck is Ronnie Shuker and why the fuck would anyone give a fuck about his hockey opinion?

(pardon my french)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache.
Wrong. (who the fuck knows)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final.
Wrong. (who the fuck knows... and Torts got the Rags exactly this far)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another.
Wrong. (firing AV was the right move)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: He and Rangers fans have Aquilini, owner of the Vancouver Canucks, to thank for their good fortune.
Wrong. (AV should not get all the credit and AV got himself fired by sucking severely in Vancouver)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll.
Wrong. (AV had to be fired or AV + Gillis had to be fired)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization.
Wrong. (Aquaman will pay somewhere between $1.7m and $9.7m and it's all part of the business)
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season.
Wrong (Babcock, Cooper, and Roy are the 3 finalists for the Jack Adams coach-of-the-year Award)

AV has a shelf-life and it had expired in Vancouver, just as it will in New York eventually.

I'm predicting that a hundred years from now all anyone will care about is

... Torts won the Stanley Cup and AV didn't. 8-)

Ronnie Shuker should stick to editing various magazines and keep his hockey thoughts to himself. :mex:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
Betamax
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:45 pm
Location: @betamax1080p

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

Post by Betamax »

Strangelove wrote:UMMMM who the fuck is Ronnie Shuker and why the fuck would anyone give a fuck about his hockey opinion?

(pardon my french)
Ronnie Shuker is an associate editor at The Hockey News and a regular contributor to the thn.com Post-To-Post blog. Follow him on Twitter at @THNRonnieShuker.
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache.
Wrong. (who the fuck knows)
Well, it's not exactly wrong ... since it can't be proven otherwise. But it's hard to imagine that anyone else behind the bench could have done worse. I mean, I would be confident that FIN would have done a better job "coaching" the team then having dumb and dumber behind the bench.

Ronnie Shuker wrote: Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final.
Wrong. (who the fuck knows... and Torts got the Rags exactly this far)
Well, not last year, Fonzie did not. I mean if we're going to be living in the past, we could relive AV's two b2b Presidents' Trophy Seasons with the Canucks, which included a SCF appearance that went to G7.

Ronnie Shuker wrote: Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another.
Wrong. (firing AV was the right move)
duh, firing AV was the right move if ownership could and would find someone better to take over as Head Coach. Fonzie was not a better option.
Ronnie Shuker wrote: He and Rangers fans have Aquilini, owner of the Vancouver Canucks, to thank for their good fortune.
Wrong. (AV should not get all the credit and AV got himself fired by sucking severely in Vancouver)
If making it to the Playoffs is "sucking severely" what the fuck do you call the debacle Fonzie led the team to this season?
Ronnie Shuker wrote: About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll.
Wrong. (AV had to be fired or AV + Gillis had to be fired)
Well, I think the wrong call was hiring Fonzie. Michael D. Gillis would have had a shot of saving his job if he didn't acquiesce (allegedly) to the desires from the powers that be to hire Fonzie.
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization.
Wrong. (Aquaman will pay somewhere between $1.7m and $9.7m and it's all part of the business)
Wrong, according to ‏@FarhanLaljiTSN #VERIFIED,

https://twitter.com/FarhanLaljiTSN/stat ... 9251708928
Torts gets paid in full. It was Gilly that had the buyout 8:28 PM - 15 May 2014
Ownership will likely only pay less if either or both are re-hired within the next four years.
Ronnie Shuker wrote: Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season.
Wrong (Babcock, Cooper, and Roy are the 3 finalists for the Jack Adams coach-of-the-year Award)
duh, the context in which Mr. Shuker made those comments could be identified with his follow-up paragraph which you curiously didn't include:
If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News for our annual awards, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner.He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver.
Interesting that.
AV has a shelf-life and it had expired in Vancouver, just as it will in New York eventually.
All coaches have a shelf life. Some longer than others as we've seen here.
I'm predicting that a hundred years from now all anyone will care about is

... Torts won the Stanley Cup and AV didn't. 8-)
Well, I don't give a fuck that he won and it's two decades later, in 2014 ... let alone a hundred years from now. It's a what the fuck did he do to make this team better? Only positive I see was this:

6th overall pick. That is his positive legacy.

On a side note, who the HELL cares that the Leaves have won the Stanley Cup back in '67 ... when there were only six teams' competing for it? LOL.
Ronnie Shuker should stick to editing various magazines and keep his hockey thoughts to himself. :mex:
I am of the opinion that Ronnie Shuker did a fine job with his analysis.



BTW, I'm not youtubing ... I'm just youtubing ... 8-)
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 27056
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

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

Post by Strangelove »

Betamax wrote: Ronnie Shuker is...
http://www.ronnieshuker.com/bio/

Like I say, I don't give a fuck about his hockey opinions.

I... might... be interested in some of his Systematic Christian Philosophy ideas though. :mex:
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache."


Wrong. (who the fuck knows)
Well, it's not exactly wrong ... since it can't be proven otherwise.
Part of my point actually.

Also, Aquilini actually would have had "a huge public relations headache" if he had kept AV.

Which, of course, makes your man WRONG.
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final."


Wrong. (who the fuck knows... and Torts got the Rags exactly this far)
Well, not last year, Fonzie did not.
Yes, but he did the year before amirite? :mex:

Exactly this far.

(last year Fonzie won a round - remember what THAT'S like? - before running into the scorching Bruins)

So who the fuck is your man (or anyone) to say the Rangers wouldn't be exactly where they are now with Torts?

Aren't you the it can't be proven guy?
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another."


Wrong. (firing AV was the right move)
duh, firing AV was the right move if ownership could and would find someone better to take over as Head Coach. Fonzie was not a better option.
Firing AV and hiring JT were two separate things, 5 weeks apart in time.

In the quote, your man is clearly talking about the first thing (firing of AV) as being "dumb".

Your man is wrong.
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "He and Rangers fans have Aquilini, owner of the Vancouver Canucks, to thank for their good fortune."


Wrong. (AV should not get all the credit and AV got himself fired by sucking severely in Vancouver)
If making it to the Playoffs is "sucking severely" what the fuck do you call the debacle Fonzie led the team to this season?
Hmmm... YOU SEEM TO BE GOING OFF ON A TANGENT. :mrgreen:

So you agree with my assertion your man was WRONG?
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll."


Wrong. (AV had to be fired or AV + Gillis had to be fired)
Well, I think the wrong call was hiring Fonzie. Michael D. Gillis would have had a shot of saving his job if he didn't acquiesce (allegedly) to the desires from the powers that be to hire Fonzie.
SO YOU AGREE WITH YOURS TRULY THAT YOUR MAN WAS WRONG? :mrgreen:
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization."


Wrong. (Aquaman will pay somewhere between $1.7m and $9.7m and it's all part of the business)
Wrong, according to ‏@FarhanLaljiTSN #VERIFIED,

https://twitter.com/FarhanLaljiTSN/stat ... 9251708928

"Torts gets paid in full. It was Gilly that had the buyout 8:28 PM - 15 May 2014"

Ownership will likely only pay less if either or both are re-hired within the next four years.
UMMMM if Gillis had the buyout wouldn't that make your man WRONG?

Wouldn't it be exactly as I said (somewhere between $1.7m and $9.7m) (depending on Torts being re-hired)?

THINK ABOUT IT :mex:
Last edited by Strangelove on Sun May 18, 2014 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 27056
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

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

Post by Strangelove »

Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season."


Wrong (Babcock, Cooper, and Roy are the 3 finalists for the Jack Adams coach-of-the-year Award)
duh, the context in which Mr. Shuker made those comments could be identified with his follow-up paragraph which you curiously didn't include:

"If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News for our annual awards, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner. He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver."
So AV could make a case if the criteria were changed... maybe?? :lol:

Wrong. (the writers of THN would disagree with their fledgling editor and have him horsewhipped)

"He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster" :lol:

UMMM.. isn't this the same core that, in the previous 2 seasons, "Fonzie" won 3 rounds with??

ISN'T IT??!! :evil:

:lol:
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: AV has a shelf-life and it had expired in Vancouver, just as it will in New York eventually.
All coaches have a shelf life. Some longer than others as we've seen here.
UMMMM this is not a good example of Mr Tortorella's shelf-life.

Mr Tortorella's shelf-life is generally 4.5 - 8 years.

But yours truly is glad that YOU (seemingly) agree with yours truly that AV's shelf-life in Vcr was PASSED DUE.
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: I'm predicting that a hundred years from now all anyone will care about is

... Torts won the Stanley Cup and AV didn't. 8-)
Well, I don't give a fuck that he won and it's two decades later, in 2014 ... let alone a hundred years from now.
Wait... so YOU are saying that Tortsy has been an NHL head coach for "TWO DECADES"

.... and he's won the Stanley Cup?? :shock:

That's AWESOME dude! :thumbs:
Betamax wrote: It's a what the fuck did he do to make this team better? Only positive I see was this:

6th overall pick. That is his positive legacy.
Well maybe YOUR Vancouver Canucks should have given this CHAMPION a little more time then EH?

Surprised you missed the part where Johnny T gave this team a kick in the posterior they'll NEVER forget. :hmmm:

After all, exactly one year ago, most Canuck fans were SCREAMING for dat dere!

We should all be sure then to give Mr T... FULL CREDIT... for said kick... MOVING FORWARD.
Betamax wrote: On a side note, who the HELL cares that the Leaves have won the Stanley Cup back in '67 ... when there were only six teams' competing for it? LOL.
Only Leaf fans.

By way of contrast, surely EVERYONE admires Tortsy for winning the Cup exactly 10 years ago

.... in a 30-team league with a $34m payroll (average team payroll was $48m)!!!

ACTUALLY when you THINK ABOUT IT he's more like a GOD than a man!
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
Posts: 3992
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

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

Post by ClamRussel »

Strangelove wrote:
Betamax wrote:
Strangelove wrote: "Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season."


Wrong (Babcock, Cooper, and Roy are the 3 finalists for the Jack Adams coach-of-the-year Award)
duh, the context in which Mr. Shuker made those comments could be identified with his follow-up paragraph which you curiously didn't include:

"If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News for our annual awards, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner. He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver."
So AV could make a case if the criteria were changed... maybe?? :lol:

Wrong. (the writers of THN would disagree with their fledgling editor and have him horsewhipped)

"He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster" :lol:

UMMM.. isn't this the same core that, in the previous 2 seasons, "Fonzie" won 3 rounds with??

ISN'T IT??!! :evil:

:lol:
How much would Torts have loved the St.Louis trade while he was there, hmmm?
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

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

Post by dbr »

Betamax wrote:
In the past two years, here's the team's record in and outside the division. Numbers grabbed from Hockey Reference:

GP Wins Losses OTL Pts/82 GF/82 GA/82 GD/82
Against Northwest 48 36 9 3 128 265 164 101
Against Other Divisions 116 69 32 15 108 252 203 49

In 116 games outside the Northwest in two years, the Canucks' points over 82 games would be pro-rated to 108. That would have won them the Presidents' Trophy in 2011 but left them one point shy in 2012. The +49 goal differential would have been beaten by three teams: the 2011 Bruins, the 2012 Bruins and the 2012 Penguins. Not bad company right there.

So even outside the Northwest, Vancouver's been pretty good and that's sort of surprised me, given how badly they've rung up Colorado and Edmonton particularly in the last couple of years.
What say you? 8-)
This is a pretty poor attempt to support your position Betamax.

Check the three seasons prior to 2013-14 and compare their records against the teams leaving their division (Colorado and Minnesota) vs. those joining (Anaheim, LA, Phoenix, San Jose).. you can just eliminate the noise of their 22-8-3 vs Calgary and Edmonton over the same stretch.

The team was 0.765 against Colorado and Minnesota and .602 vs Anaheim, LA, Phoenix and San Jose over that period. They were .680 against the rest of the league. Doesn't really matter whether they racked up points against the Eastern Conference, or whoever.

The bottom line is that losing eight easy games a year (three each vs Colorado and Minnesota and one each vs the Alberta teams) and gaining eight against teams the Canucks have historically done worse than average against is a significant factor..

Obviously the wheels fell off this season and this team had (and has) several other significant problems. But they're now in a division where it's a dogfight just to make the playoffs every year, nevermind having to beat two divisional teams once they get there.
Post Reply