HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

AV extension through 12-13

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-10-2009, 06:07 PM
  #51
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
to be fair, that was also a long time ago... it looks to me like he's acknowledged that to be a criticism of his, and has tried to change that opinion. He did coach the WJC and the W-U18 recently, and did very well working with young players in those tournaments. The players had nothing but great things to say about Quinn and both teams were champions.

Obviously it's not the NHL and we'll have to wait and see how he handles the young Oilers vs. the vets there... but for a guy who's been criticized about how he deals with young players in the past, the best thing he could have done was have that success with the juniors, and prove he could work well with young kids. We'll see if that translates to the NHL, but I believe, like players, coaches can evolve as well.

Not that I'm suggesting I'd rather have him than AV... just that I don't think it's fair to write him off based on his coaching style from years ago that saw him pushed out of the league.
This is way off topic, but the myth that Quinn can't coach young players was and is utter nonsense. He's had young players at every stop, he won U18 and U20 championships, and he'll do well with the younger players in Edmonton.

I'm on record as saying I would have preferred Pat Quinn to Alain Vigneault, but that ship has sailed. I'm ready to be on board with Vigneault, and I hope he's learned from past mistakes (there are plenty to choose from).

By the way, anybody praising the "strategy" that the Canucks put forth in Game Four needs to have their bloody heads examined. It was a disgrace. The Canucks tried the exact same thing earlier in the season against San Jose and got burned that time, too. You know what they say about the definition of insanity.

But again, that's water under the bridge.

I expect 2009/10 to be good year - for the Canucks and for the coach. The season can't begin soon enough.

Alan Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:10 PM
  #52
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
Why? Doesn't this pretty much cover it?

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=678644
Not IMHO.

YMMV

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:11 PM
  #53
Kid Canuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
This is way off topic, but the myth that Quinn can't coach young players was and is utter nonsense. He's had young players at every stop, he won U18 and U20 championships, and he'll do well with the younger players in Edmonton.

I'm on record as saying I would have preferred Pat Quinn to Alain Vigneault, but that ship has sailed. I'm ready to be on board with Vigneault, and I hope he's learned from past mistakes (there are plenty to choose from).

By the way, anybody praising the "strategy" that the Canucks put forth in Game Four needs to have their bloody heads examined. It was a disgrace. The Canucks tried the exact same thing earlier in the season against San Jose and got burned that time, too. You know what they say about the definition of insanity.

But again, that's water under the bridge.

I expect 2009/10 to be good year - for the Canucks and for the coach. The season can't begin soon enough.
If your defence can actually skate with the other team there is nothing wrong with it. All the good teams can hold a lead. How hard is it to get the puck from the other team, make a good first out pass, gain center and get it deep to get fresh troops out? Come on, that's day 1 stuff.

Now I'm not saying you play the entire game this way like a Jacque Lemaire style, but it doesn't hurt to incorporate this into our system and trust that we can hold and kill the remaining minutes of a game properly, something we have never really been able to do in Vancouver under any system.


Last edited by Kid Canuck*: 09-10-2009 at 06:16 PM.
Kid Canuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:16 PM
  #54
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
If your defence can actually skate with the other team there is nothing wrong with it. All the good teams can hold a lead. How hard is it to get the puck from the other team, make a good first out pass, gain center and get it deep to get frsh troops out? Come on, that's day 1 stuff.
Yes, all good teams can hold a lead. There's nothing wrong with holding the lead. The problem starts when you create absolutely no attack, and invite the other team to come at you in waves. A bad bounce, a flubbed save, and you're finished.

You can effectively take time off the clock when you have posession of the puck and at least try to extend that lead.

When you sit back, when you stop playing, when you concede pressure to the other team, you are doomed.

Alan Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:17 PM
  #55
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britton View Post
Considering Lemaire got his first NHL coaching job just three years before AV started coaching I find that doubtful. Lemaire also didn't become a prominent coach until 1993 when he was hired by NJ, and by that time AV was already an assistant in Ottawa.
Lemaire was coaching the Habs when AV was 22.

Coaching style is very similar: defense, discipline, line changes...

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wild/17647549.html

Generally, Lemaire is the most admired French Canadian coach even by Jacques Demers:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...4-demers_x.htm


Last edited by Outside99*: 09-10-2009 at 06:23 PM. Reason: put in 1 post all the reasons
Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:18 PM
  #56
Kid Canuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
Yes, all good teams can hold a lead. There's nothing wrong with holding the lead. The problem starts when you create absolutely no attack, and invite the other team to come at you in waves. A bad bounce, a flubbed save, and you're finished.

You can effectively take time off the clock when you have posession of the puck and at least try to extend that lead.

When you sit back, when you stop playing, when you concede pressure to the other team, you are doomed.
In the new NHL that is exactly right. In the old NHL not so much or in soccer not so much. Without the clutching and holding etc. you are most certainly doomed.

Kid Canuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:28 PM
  #57
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Lemaire was coaching the Habs when AV was 22.

Coaching style is very similar: defense, discipline, line changes...

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wild/17647549.html

Generally, Lemaire is the most admired French Canadian coach even by Jacques Demers:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...4-demers_x.htm
I must have missed the quote where Vigneault says that he admires Lemaire as a coach.

Are you sure he does not admire Scotty Bowman?

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:31 PM
  #58
hackey
You're Not Bored...
 
hackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: You're Boring
Posts: 2,839
vCash: 500
A 3 year extension is too long

1 or a 2 year contract would of been better

Gillis is too loyal to him, obviously someone who is now his friend. He did not treat this contract
for the betterment of the hockey club.

Why?
It's not that AV isn't a good or a bad coach, he is a very good one.

But all coaches have a certain shelf life... where the players get sick and tired of hearing the same voice,
the same system, over and over again.

A change is always needed every few years, not because they forget how to coach, but the players no
longer listen. Could see the players getting tired on AV's monotone voice in a year or two... and Aqua will
be stuck with the tab.

hackey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:36 PM
  #59
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey View Post
A 3 year extension is too long

1 or a 2 year contract would of been better

Gillis is too loyal to him, obviously someone who is now his friend. He did not treat this contract
for the betterment of the hockey club.

Why?
It's not that AV isn't a good or a bad coach, he is a very good one.

But all coaches have a certain shelf life... where the players get sick and tired of hearing the same voice,
the same system, over and over again.

A change is always needed every few years, not because they forget how to coach, but the players no
longer listen. Could see the players getting tired on AV's monotone voice in a year or two... and Aqua will
be stuck with the tab.
What does it matter if it's 3 years, 5 years, or 100 years for that matter? If he expires and loses the room, he'll get fired. As a fan, what difference does it make?

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:38 PM
  #60
Alan Jackson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlrsr View Post
What does it matter if it's 3 years, 5 years, or 100 years for that matter? If he expires and loses the room, he'll get fired. As a fan, what difference does it make?
Well, you could argue that management would be lessing willing to fire a coach they've just handed a three year extension to. One, the optics aren't very good (it doesn't reflect well on the GM that decided the coach was "his" guy). Two, the owner may not be willing to pay another coach when he's got one under contract already.

Alan Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:47 PM
  #61
hackey
You're Not Bored...
 
hackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: You're Boring
Posts: 2,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlrsr View Post
What does it matter if it's 3 years, 5 years, or 100 years for that matter? If he expires and loses the room, he'll get fired. As a fan, what difference does it make?
You as a fan, sitting in front of your 21' TV, eating popcorn and sucking down cheap beer, it doesn't mean
a damn thing, sweet piss all.

But this forum reflects on all angles... so this is from the business side of things. From all accounts,
his contract is in the $1M range over 3 years. If he is fired say in a year or two, Aqua will be stuck
with paying off the contract, along with the new coaches tab. Something he would not be happy with.

That's why you keep leashes short on coaches. Not because the coach suddenly turns bad, they all have a
certain shelf life. Something Gillis may of overlooked.

But then again, that does not concern you as a fan.

hackey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:53 PM
  #62
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,350
vCash: 500
I like AV when we are winning. I dislike him when we are losing.

Bobby Lou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:05 PM
  #63
Vancouver_2010
Go Canucks & Oilers
 
Vancouver_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
I like AV when we are winning. I dislike him when we are losing.
Nah, i like him more when we are losing.

Vancouver_2010 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:10 PM
  #64
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Jackson View Post
Well, you could argue that management would be lessing willing to fire a coach they've just handed a three year extension to. One, the optics aren't very good (it doesn't reflect well on the GM that decided the coach was "his" guy). Two, the owner may not be willing to pay another coach when he's got one under contract already.
I'd say that if anything, they'd be reluctant to fire him because they think he's a good coach, it wouldn't exclusively be because he was signed for one year longer than expected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey View Post
You as a fan, sitting in front of your 21' TV, eating popcorn and sucking down cheap beer, it doesn't mean
a damn thing, sweet piss all.

But this forum reflects on all angles... so this is from the business side of things. From all accounts,
his contract is in the $1M range over 3 years. If he is fired say in a year or two, Aqua will be stuck
with paying off the contract, along with the new coaches tab. Something he would not be happy with.

That's why you keep leashes short on coaches. Not because the coach suddenly turns bad, they all have a
certain shelf life. Something Gillis may of overlooked.

But then again, that does not concern you as a fan.
Has Aquillini demonstrated anything to date that shows he isn't willing to pony up the money for the betterment of the team? I think he's an idiot, but he signs the cheques. And, do you think AV would have a tough time finding work?

Maybe Gillis did overlook it, but then again, what are the shelf lives of coaches like Lindy Ruff, Barry Trotz, and to a lesser extent Jacques Lemaire? Regardless, in this case we're talking about an extra year from what would have been considered 'ideal'. Even from a business perspective, it's just not that big of a deal.

And whaddya mean 'cheap beer' ? I like the 21' TV though. And the popcorn.

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:51 PM
  #65
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey View Post

But this forum reflects on all angles... so this is from the business side of things. From all accounts,
his contract is in the $1M range over 3 years. If he is fired say in a year or two, Aqua will be stuck
with paying off the contract, along with the new coaches tab. Something he would not be happy with.

Vigneault is 2 years removed from winning the Adams award... he's won the division in 2 of his 3 yrs as coach in Vancouver.

Considering the number of coaching jobs that seem to open up every season, if he was to be fired, how long do you think Vigneault would be sitting on the sidelines with Aquillini paying him a salary, before he's hired by another team?

a lot of the coaches fired in recent years, from Crawford, Julien, Keenan, Martin, etc, have found jobs soon after being fired - most of them haven't had the recent success that AV has had... how long will he go without finding another job?

IMO it's a very low risk for ownership. You're basically betting on him failing here so miserably that no one will hire him after, despite his recent success before that.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:53 PM
  #66
Kid Canuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
Vigneault is 2 years removed from winning the Adams award... he's won the division in 2 of his 3 yrs as coach in Vancouver.

Considering the number of coaching jobs that seem to open up every season, if he was to be fired, how long do you think Vigneault would be sitting on the sidelines with Aquillini paying him a salary, before he's hired by another team?

a lot of the coaches fired in recent years, from Crawford, Julien, Keenan, Martin, etc, have found jobs soon after being fired - most of them haven't had the recent success that AV has had... how long will he go without finding another job?

IMO it's a very low risk for ownership. You're basically betting on him failing here so miserably that no one will hire him after, despite his recent success before that.
He doesn't win that award without Lui coming here that year.

Calgary pretty much choked last year and had cap issues at the end of the season.

So that is a little misleading I feel.

Kid Canuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:56 PM
  #67
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
He doesn't win that award without Lui coming here that year.
Boudreau doesn't win without Ovechkin.

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:57 PM
  #68
Kid Canuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlrsr View Post
Boudreau doesn't win without Ovechkin.
Very true, it's a shady award.

Kid Canuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 08:05 PM
  #69
mrmyheadhurts
Registered Loser
 
mrmyheadhurts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,141
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
He doesn't win that award without Lui coming here that year.
You could say that about any coach with a star player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
Calgary pretty much choked last year and had cap issues at the end of the season.

So that is a little misleading I feel.
Did you see the Canucks record from February on? Calgary had nothing to with the Canucks having one of the best records in the NHL during that time. Pretty weird argument to say that the Canucks only won the division the Flames were bad. There were 3 other teams in our division that couldn't catch them.

In fact, if Luongo is healthy the whole year the Canucks are probably challenging for the Presidents trophy and AV is once again in the conversation for the Adams award.

mrmyheadhurts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 08:08 PM
  #70
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Canuck View Post
He doesn't win that award without Lui coming here that year.

Calgary pretty much choked last year and had cap issues at the end of the season.

So that is a little misleading I feel.
doesn't matter how much weight you're going to give him on either accomplishment. The fact is that he did win an Adams, Luongo or not, and did win the division 2 of the 3 years, regardless of what Calgary did.

That's a better resume than many other coaches have, and have had prior to getting fired by a team. The chances are very good that he will get another job quickly, if he's fired in Vancouver. I have no doubt that he has a good reputation around the league overall, and like many experienced, and reputable, coaches who get fired by their teams, will find another job quickly.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 10:35 PM
  #71
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
Vigneault is 2 years removed from winning the Adams award... he's won the division in 2 of his 3 yrs as coach in Vancouver.

Considering the number of coaching jobs that seem to open up every season, if he was to be fired, how long do you think Vigneault would be sitting on the sidelines with Aquillini paying him a salary, before he's hired by another team?

a lot of the coaches fired in recent years, from Crawford, Julien, Keenan, Martin, etc, have found jobs soon after being fired - most of them haven't had the recent success that AV has had... how long will he go without finding another job?

IMO it's a very low risk for ownership. You're basically betting on him failing here so miserably that no one will hire him after, despite his recent success before that.
It depends what sort of termination clause Vigneault has in his contract.

Some coaches have a clause that pays them out in full or a pro rata amount. Other remain on the payroll until such time as they are offered another job they are willing to take at which time the payments cease.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 11:43 PM
  #72
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey View Post
You as a fan, sitting in front of your 21' TV, eating popcorn and sucking down cheap beer, it doesn't mean
a damn thing, sweet piss all.

But this forum reflects on all angles... so this is from the business side of things. From all accounts,
his contract is in the $1M range over 3 years. If he is fired say in a year or two, Aqua will be stuck
with paying off the contract, along with the new coaches tab. Something he would not be happy with.

That's why you keep leashes short on coaches. Not because the coach suddenly turns bad, they all have a
certain shelf life. Something Gillis may of overlooked.

But then again, that does not concern you as a fan.
as a fan, how long do you think AV is out of a job for if he gets fired? My guess is not a month.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 11:48 PM
  #73
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
He's out of a job for as long as he wants. Meaning if he felt like sitting out, doing a TV gig (which I think he'd be good at), and collecting $$$ from the Canucks then he could. If he felt like getting right back into coaching, he'd have a job right away.

Vigneault's got his faults as a coach but generally, I look at the roster on paper the last few years and he's exceeded expectations two of the three years. People going "Oh without Lui he'd be nothing" need a reality check. Would Bruce Boudreau be any sort of coach without Ovie? Where would the Flames be without Iggy? In a salary cap world, your superstar has to play well for your team to do well. The Canucks minus Luongo are a team minus $7 million in cap space. That's several quality players and a better goaltender than the backups we've had.

VanEric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 11:06 AM
  #74
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
AV Contract Not Done

According to Mike Gillis this is a case of premature negotiation.

In the Vancouver Sun today Gillis says the contract is not yet done:

"We're not talking about it because it's not done," Canuck general manager Mike Gillis said Thursday before Vancouver's prospects played here against the Edmonton Oilers' rookies. "We're very close, but nothing has been finalized."
http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/C...695/story.html

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.