Canucks News N Notes 24-25

[Megaterio Llamas]

Why fire the coach?

This is his fault?

In a cutthroat business like the NHL, this might be the easiest move. Is it fair? Hell no, Tocchet is a very good coach and will be back behind an NHL bench next fall.

In the words of a noted Vancouver hockey philosopher, it is what it is.

Firing the previous year's Jack Adams Trophy winner is an NHL tradition and not to be fooled with.

Absolutely. And it's a hell of a lot easier to do than to trade one of your star centers. And if we imagine for a minute this 'fued' is mostly media hype, the real issue here is Peter not playing for this coach.

[Cousin Strawberry]

And if we imagine for a minute this 'fued' is mostly media hype, the real issue here is Peter not playing for this coach.

Shit man you may be right there. I haven't even considered this...

[Topper]

I spoke of it early last season and Ricky recognized it post season as one of his faults. He stifles creativity.

[Chef Boi RD]

Tocchet is definitely old school in that regards. This style of coaching, although has shown its success, can definitely work against the coach using it. Players can get worn down by it.

[Meds]

The sad thing is, it was probably the best the team could do given the current roster.

1-0 then two empty netters and an outstanding game by Saros. The Canucks gave the effort on the back to back, but yeah, this is a pretty poor NHL team w/o Hughes, Hronek, and Pettersson.

So let’s trade Petey, right?

Depending upon the return…..yes.

Depends, to my way of thinking, on whether you think the core is good enough to build a championship team around, and whether they still will be good enough by the time you have built that team.

If the answer is "yes", then you hang on to a key piece that it would be difficult to achieve full present-day value for in a trade.

If the answer is "no", you say "thanks for hitting on a few draft picks, Mr. Benning", create your best pump 'n' dump lineup and deployment, and trade away the individually valuable assets for ones around which you can hope to centre a re-build.

But Chef will remind me that there's no way the current ownership would green light the latter strategy.

I was expanding upon my reply to UW while you posted this RG.....see that edit for my response to this.

[Meds]

It’s definitely not a great season for Joshua, although the cancer experience could have a lot to do with it. It was always going to be a risky re-signing. Time will tell.

His game is steadily improving as well.

Agreed. Last season he started as a bit of a question mark, as his game got more chippy, and he mixed it up, we saw more from him at both ends of the rink. The last 2 games Joshua has started to be more engaged, more of a chip on his shoulder again. I think production will start to come.

A caveat to that.....Joshua also benefited (along with Blueger) from the favourable matchups last season that were created because, for the first 4 months of the year at least, the Canucks had 2 scoring lines that opponents had to deal with. That alone gave Garland-Blueger-Joshua some room to work, and they made hay. The struggle surrounding our current top-2 centermen is massively effecting the entire team.

[Meds]

And if we imagine for a minute this 'fued' is mostly media hype, the real issue here is Peter not playing for this coach.

Shit man you may be right there. I haven't even considered this...

Interesting.This team did very well last year by buying into the system that Tocchet brought.

If this is true, then fuck him and trade him ASAP. No time for divas.

[Megaterio Llamas]

And if we imagine for a minute this 'fued' is mostly media hype, the real issue here is Peter not playing for this coach.

Shit man you may be right there. I haven't even considered this...

Interesting.This team did very well last year by buying into the system that Tocchet brought.

If this is true, then fuck him and trade him ASAP. No time for divas.

Some of this you can read between the lines in eatern media spots Bruce Boudreau has done. He doesn't step on anyone's toes but he mentions that he deployed Peter much differently than Ricky has, and he thought the 'fued' was squashed long ago.

[Strangelove]

Last year Dakota Joshua played with balls. This year?

Ball.

[Ronning's Ghost]

I was expanding upon my reply to UW while you posted this RG.....see that edit for my response to this.

Thanks for the redirect.

As for the other posts in the mean time, I agree that it is easier to change the coach than to re-tool re-arrange the core, so that seems to me like the more obvious place to start if you think the roster is underperforming.

In the modern NHL, it's easier to get the coach you need for the players you have than to get the players you need for the coach you have.
Noteworthy in that it appears to be more usually the other way around in the NFL.

I think that paying someone not to coach would be easier to sell to the Little Eagles than a roster do-over.

[Strangelove]

I think that paying someone not to coach would be easier to sell to the Little Eagles than a roster do-over.

I believe they can terminate Tocc's contract after this season if they choose.

(they have a mutual extra year option)

(could be wrong)

[donlever]

Last year Dakota Joshua played with balls. This year?

Ball.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Tocchet is definitely old school in that regards. This style of coaching, although has shown its success, can definitely work against the coach using it. Players can get worn down by it.

How would you feel about Willie Desjardins coming back behind the bench?

[Meds]

I was expanding upon my reply to UW while you posted this RG.....see that edit for my response to this.

Thanks for the redirect.

As for the other posts in the mean time, I agree that it is easier to change the coach than to re-tool re-arrange the core, so that seems to me like the more obvious place to start if you think the roster is underperforming.

In the modern NHL, it's easier to get the coach you need for the players you have than to get the players you need for the coach you have.
Noteworthy in that it appears to be more usually the other way around in the NFL.

I think that paying someone not to coach would be easier to sell to the Little Eagles than a roster do-over.

Tortorella - 1 season
Desjardins - 3 seasons
Green - 4 seasons
Boudreau - 1.5 seasons
Tocchet - 2 seasons (and counting)

Sure, it's easier. But unless the roster is constructed properly it is often fruitless. Also, any coach coming into a team with a superstar who pouts when he can't play the way he wants is going to have an uphill battle, and it's not going be easy to get the team to buy-in when that player is being coddled.

I don't think moving one core member automatically triggers a rebuild unless the players coming back are years away from contributing.

As Allvin said, Petterson could be, and SHOULD be, a number 1C. If you subtract a 1C and replace him with a 2C AND a 3D, you might have problems up front at first glance. However, when the back end of the team is so poor that the team can't advance with control up the ice consistently, well then the 1C is going to have a hard time producing at a 1C level. Now what happens if you can advance the puck with control, and maintain possession in the offensive zone but only have a 2C? I'd say it's a wash offensively but in theory you keep more pucks out of your own net so have a net improvement. Consider now that both the 2C and 3D buy-in to the system and you should definitely see overall team improvement.

The big IF in my scenario s actually JT Miller. If Petey out results in Miller going back to the player we've seen the past several seasons, then the loss of a 1C is negated completely because we would still have that player.

When I look at our current roster.....

Miller
Pettersson
Boeser
Hughes
Hronek
Demko

Are the core players.

Miller (31), Demko (29), and Boeser (28), are at the age where winning with them is a window of about 3 years in length.....including this season.

Hughes is 25 and provided he stays healthy has 10 years of great hockey left in him.

Pettersson is 26 and probably does not have the durability to be elite beyond 31. He certainly has not shown the mental fortitude to build around.

Hronek is 27 and should be effective as a top-4 guy for another 5 or 6 years.

Replace Pettersson with Cozens and Byram (just examples) and your team gets 3 years younger in two important positions, and both of them are at an age and stage of career where they could take big steps forward.

Shoot your shot.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Why should we be so surprised regarding Sprong. I worry about Allvin and Rutherford’s ignorance regarding the book on players, they seem to feel they can make players better here under Tocchet. Fuck the reclamation projects, read the fucking book on players oncr in while, trust the word on the street, ffs. Complete waste of time and money.