CanucksCorner.com Forums

Thr Aquamen will always be a distraction, but our media takes it too far. Maybe we need to trade for a 13th forward who has a down syndrome brother, or some other distraction for the media to worry about. This team isn't nearly as ahitty as our media says

Anyways, while you all decide if the glass is half full or half empty, I am going to have another scotch.

Tciso wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 7:12 am I am going to have another scotch.

At 7:12am.

I like the cut of your jib!

I find it somewhat amusing that regulars like Reefer and Tciso are (unintentionally I hope) lumping Donny in with Vancouver’s local media.

The majority of the last couple pages here have been discussion surrounding what Leves passed along from NON-MEDIA sources that were in attendance at the season ticket holders meeting. He has been a season ticket holder for over 20 years, he certainly will have some acquaintances (at the very least least) whose information he would consider reliable…..at least enough so that he would pass it on to a squad of (19?) reprobates who may just be interested enough in this here hockey team to make the discourse worthwhile.

As he said, some of the things shared at this forum were not available online. So, NOT coming from media.

You've got a friend in Mëds
You've got a friend in Mëds
When the road looks rough ahead
And you're miles and miles
From your nice warm bed
Just remember what your old pal said
Boy, you've got a friend in Mëds
Yeah, you've got a friend in Mëds

Mëds is canceling SN.

Mëds wrote: ↑Sun May 11, 2025 3:33 pm So they gave the vault keys to a guy they knew didn’t have the required level of commitment (going back years) and then traded the guy who did and was leading the way and setting the pace.

What. The. Fuck.

But a player who breaks down because another player isn't performing or preparing to the first player's standard is not "leading the way" to anywhere good. Look at me "set the pace" by being frustrated, which I will express by failing to back check while failing to get of the ice when I am gassed in overtime! Preparation that doesn't translate to on ice performance or even endurance isn't worth all that much....

And I am not taking EP40's "side" on this. I don't like that EP40 didn't come prepared (if it was injury, as he intimated, then I don't like that management didn't sit him until he was fully prepared to play), and I don't like more that he wasn't very good this past season.

But Miller's breakdown was far from a normal and healthy response to an underprepared and underperforming teammate. It is indicative of a different kind of fragility than that shown by EP40, but it is fragility nonetheless. And it *will likely reappear again* even if EP40 gets his head and body together if there's a triggering event (losing), because there is almost never a world in which everyone in an organization is doing as much as Miller would likely do to prepare himself. That's the thing about the world -- you can only control yourself and your own responses to how other's control themselves. To be sure, you can influence others to control themselves better, but you are still fully responsible for yourself (Miller failed) and doing so in an ineffective manner can make a problem worse (here, splitting the room).

To be sure, things/people can get so dysfunctional in an organization (hockey or not) that "its him or its me" becomes the best way to address a problem -- or moving them both. Its a bad place to be, and players calling the shots on personnel is as bad as owners doing so instead of the people they hired. It would have been far better to identify that it would likely get to this place before it got there, before it was well known that it got there. Leves is right, the roi changed dramatically. Miller was moved first probably because all attempts to shake him of his fragility (the ten game leave was the final attempt) failed, and management understood that if it got to the "him or me" point on these facts, then it would *likely* get there again someday even if EP40 were gone, and a swallowable offer was made by the Rags. *If* management could have found an acceptable EP40 trade first, they might have made that move and let the season and maybe another play out with Miller. But they moved Miller, and so they will likely allow EP40 to have a chance to fix his shit. They almost have no other choice since the market's likely nonexistent (no thanks to management's treatment of the issue).

In any business they like to refer to in-house conflicts that are in need of being resolved like the Miller/Pettersson as a “conflict resolution”. This is the job of management (middle and/or upper mgmt) to “manage”. I see the whole disaster as a reflection on management with perhaps ownership running interference than I do with the players and coaches themselves. This IMO played a big factor in Tocchets decision. Read between the lines. Couple that with loose lips Rutherford and Allvin’s behaviour, and Palao’s weird as fuck departure, I’m seeing a very toxic organization at the front office level.

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sun May 11, 2025 8:06 pm The apparent love affair the coach, the GM , the President, have/had with JT begs the question, why? Why would they punt JT having so much respect for him, he who signed a team friendly deal. He who left his heart on the ice every game.

They fucked up, plain and simple. What I hear in all of this is a failure to accept responsibility. Somehow their moaning about this follows a pattern of throwing someone under the bus as an excuse for their own failings. By praising JT and leaking more of their version of what happened they are crucifying Pettersson.

And if ownership vetoed a trade then Rutherford is the biggest hypocrite out there. When he took this job he was asked about what autonomy he had and he said total. He wouldn’t have it any other way and could not operate without it. If ownership really did interfere he should have pulled a Linden and walked away.

Everything these guys say smacks of self serving noise. They couldn’t foresee this problem for four years? They couldn’t trade Boeser because you wouldn’t believe what they were offered.

In my eyes, they have both directly and indirectly thrown so much shade on Pettersson that they could never getting a fair return on a trade now.

This.

And re: Tocc, I would have wanted out of this media fueled shitshow as well.

Chef Boi RD wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 11:08 am In any business they like to refer to in-house conflicts that are in need of being resolved like the Miller/Pettersson as a “conflict resolution”. This is the job of management (middle and/or upper mgmt) to “manage”. I see the whole disaster as a reflection on management with perhaps ownership running interference than I do with the players and coaches themselves. This IMO played a big factor in Tocchets decision. Read between the lines. Couple that with loose lips Rutherford and Allvin’s behaviour, and Palao’s weird as fuck departure, I’m seeing a very toxic organization at the front office level.

You just said you were done with this team.


What kills me among some folks is that NONE of this is on JT or Tocchet. It's Pettersson for sure. And its the current management, because some are still butthurt that previous management got fired.

Chef Boi RD wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 11:08 am In any business they like to refer to in-house conflicts that are in need of being resolved like the Miller/Pettersson as a “conflict resolution”. This is the job of management (middle and/or upper mgmt) to “manage”. I see the whole disaster as a reflection on management with perhaps ownership running interference than I do with the players and coaches themselves. This IMO played a big factor in Tocchets decision. Read between the lines. Couple that with loose lips Rutherford and Allvin’s behaviour, and Palao’s weird as fuck departure, I’m seeing a very toxic organization at the front office level.

I am inclined to agree with you (and HW) on your conclusion about management, though I think the conflict resolution between the players first falls to the coach, not upper management. Not every conflict can be resolved, though. Employees can be pig headed and either resist or be constitutionally incapable of doing what it takes to perform together despite differences.

I think Tochett tried his best, but we don't actually know what he did, and he might have ended up pulling the wrong levers. What we know is that in camp and right away during the season, he was pumping JT's tires non-stop -- which JT might have interpreted as being an indication that he was "in the right"; we just don't know whether Tochett ever pulled him aside and said privately "but you need to knock your shit off because its bringing this group down more than EP40's offishness and subpar preparation.... Lead on the ice, lead by example, but let me talk to EP40; let Quinn talk to EP40, and don't let it get in between your ears. You are better than that."

I think the only place I differ with what seems to be the consensus on the board is that many admire Miller for being a "leader" and doing things how they should be done. I think this comes from the fact that good JT is a hell of a player that rises to occasions. But I see Miller as the opposite of a leader. That's because while EP40s failures are not excusable, they are common and they don't generally tear teams apart, especially when the failing player is not one to set a tone for others (either for the good or bad).

UWSaint wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 12:42 pm I think the only place I differ with what seems to be the consensus on the board is that many admire Miller for being a "leader" and doing things how they should be done. I think this comes from the fact that good JT is a hell of a player that rises to occasions. But I see Miller as the opposite of a leader. That's because while EP40s failures are not excusable, they are common and they don't generally tear teams apart, especially when the failing player is not one to set a tone for others (either for the good or bad).

A good leader adapts to his followers. Some leaders look good, but it could be in part because they led a bunch who were relatively easy to lead or who were amenable to that leader's style. Take that same leader and put them in charge of a bunch who don't respond the same way, and they may fall on their face because they have only one mode or style of leadership.

Miller was more of what I would call a 'peer leader', which takes a different approach than someone in Tocchet's or Quinn's shoes. Peer leaders who try to act authoritatively can be seen as bullies. Peer leaders who talk the talk - great if they walk the walk as well, but we've seen times when Miller didn't. I think you're right in that Miller would have been better-served by just leading with his play and shutting up, though that may have just caused him to bottle up his frustrations before blowing up. One can only imagine if he had received the C instead of Quinn.

I think Miller's heart was in the right place, but he evidently did not possess the skillset or mindset to be the kind of peer leader he envisioned for himself. He needs to be led, and told to lead through his play. Maybe it was a mistake to give him an 'A' and mislead him into thinking he's a leader. By those standards, Pettersson shouldn't have it either. Letters are for leaders, and he hasn't shown himself to be one either.

Quinn has shown himself to be a leader. He deserves the letter on his jersey. Myers would qualify as well IMO. Who else, though?

Lancer wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 1:14 pm Quinn has shown himself to be a leader. He deserves the letter on his jersey. Myers would qualify as well IMO. Who else, though?

Hard to know this without being part of the team, but we can see (mostly) consistency of effort and detail and willingness to take one for the team, which at least earns on ice respect of teammates. There, I'd include Hronek, Blueger, and Garland.

rats19 wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 9:44 am You've got a friend in Mëds
You've got a friend in Mëds
When the road looks rough ahead
And you're miles and miles
From your nice warm bed
Just remember what your old pal said
Boy, you've got a friend in Mëds
Yeah, you've got a friend in Mëds

Mockery will get you everywhere around these here parts.

Blob Mckenzie wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 9:58 am Mëds is cancelinged SN.

Yessir.

UWSaint wrote: ↑Mon May 12, 2025 10:41 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Sun May 11, 2025 3:33 pm So they gave the vault keys to a guy they knew didn’t have the required level of commitment (going back years) and then traded the guy who did and was leading the way and setting the pace.

What. The. Fuck.

But a player who breaks down because another player isn't performing or preparing to the first player's standard is not "leading the way" to anywhere good. Look at me "set the pace" by being frustrated, which I will express by failing to back check while failing to get of the ice when I am gassed in overtime! Preparation that doesn't translate to on ice performance or even endurance isn't worth all that much....

And I am not taking EP40's "side" on this. I don't like that EP40 didn't come prepared (if it was injury, as he intimated, then I don't like that management didn't sit him until he was fully prepared to play), and I don't like more that he wasn't very good this past season.

Mine was not a defense of Miller's behaviour. It was an indictment of management's ability to make a smart decision.

Considering.....

The issue between Pettersson and Miller allegedly goes back as far as 4 years.

Management has already chosen to commit to JT over the former captain (Horvat), and rightly so as Miller had been better than 1.0 ppg since arriving in Vancouver, playing with passion and in all situations.....there is no question that his emotions were not always perfectly channeled into his play. But still, commitment made, and Miller took a team friendly contract.

Pettersson was already holding out for max dollars despite sagging performance.

Pettersson already had a track record of NOT putting in the off-season work, and there are very few players who have their moment of awakening regarding this after 6 seasons. It usually comes after their first season or two of being a player the team is counting on to carry the load but the team isn't winning (that was clearly the expectation by the time his ELC was completed).

Clearly Miller was not the only guy who was less than thrilled with the commitment level of the Swedish scooterstar.

There is an alleged offer from Carolina for Pettersson that returned Necas, Kotkaniemi, Morrow, and a 1st round pick. This not a media rumour.

In what universe does an astute manager make the decision to commit massively and long-term to a guy, who still has not shown he can be "the man", in the face of some already troubling character issues as well as less than ideal interpersonal dynamics with other members of the team?

As much as I don't like Pettersson as a core player and leader, I'm not dumping on him. I'm dumping on management. If Aqualini was indeed the one who forced this, then it's on ownership instead.