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

Alain Vigneault Discussion - Part 2

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-02-2013, 04:24 AM
  #951
The Optimist
Registered User
 
The Optimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SFU
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,254
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Shirokov View Post

The 2nd line really isn't working offensively and the Schroeder/Raymond line has shown a ton of glimpses. So why not switch Weise with someone and try to give it your best shot at getting some secondary scoring?
Weise gives that line some physicality and size. When Booth comes back I would be shocked if he wasn't placed on this line.

The Optimist is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:48 AM
  #952
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Optimist View Post
Weise gives that line some physicality and size. When Booth comes back I would be shocked if he wasn't placed on this line.
Burrows could bring that grit and physicality with more offensive skill.

I don't think Booth will be on that line myself, I think he will be on the 2nd with either Higgins or Hansen moving down. (Most likely Hansen IMO)

Sergei Shirokov is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:49 AM
  #953
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
No wonder you dislike him so much, he didn't even give you a chance to play

To be serious though, i agree with what you said but too bad he is not going anywhere soon, as long as he is our coach, we will have no chance to win the cup.
That is my feeling also.

And my biggest fear with this team.

Sergei Shirokov is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:54 AM
  #954
Soth
Registered User
 
Soth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,087
vCash: 500
AV is probably one of the top 10 coaches in the NHL. Granted, maybe near the bottom of the top 10, but still.We need to lash out at someone though, and I guess Luongo and Ballard are playing good this season so AV it is.

You don't consistently make the playoffs with a coach who is as bad as the fans seem to think AV is. You don't win Presidents trophy twice in a row. You can bet the nucks wanted to go after chicago tonight, but they respect AV and he was obviously warning them that they need the 2 points.

Soth is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 05:45 AM
  #955
Vancouver_2010
Go Canucks & Oilers
 
Vancouver_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soth View Post
AV is probably one of the top 10 coaches in the NHL. Granted, maybe near the bottom of the top 10, but still.We need to lash out at someone though, and I guess Luongo and Ballard are playing good this season so AV it is.

You don't consistently make the playoffs with a coach who is as bad as the fans seem to think AV is. You don't win Presidents trophy twice in a row. You can bet the nucks wanted to go after chicago tonight, but they respect AV and he was obviously warning them that they need the 2 points.
I think more like top 25 coach in the nhl, near the bottom 25. President trophies are meaningless when you don't win the cup, like i said before, do you rememeber who won the president trophy in 1993? But i can tell you who won the cup in the same year without googling (montreal). We have a veteran group of players, they can restrain themselves without AV, you are giving him too much credit.

Vancouver_2010 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 06:35 AM
  #956
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soth View Post
AV is probably one of the top 10 coaches in the NHL. Granted, maybe near the bottom of the top 10, but still.We need to lash out at someone though, and I guess Luongo and Ballard are playing good this season so AV it is.

You don't consistently make the playoffs with a coach who is as bad as the fans seem to think AV is. You don't win Presidents trophy twice in a row. You can bet the nucks wanted to go after chicago tonight, but they respect AV and he was obviously warning them that they need the 2 points.
Not a chance he is top 10, more like 25-30.

This guy is lucky he has a very good team that he can rely on to do all the work.

But on a team like the Islanders or Edmonton or Montreal or some of these younger teams that aren't very good and need good coaching, his issues would shine through.

No surprise he never had great NHL success before he came here, Luongo won him the Jack Adams, not a surprise that when Lu couldn't put this team on his back in 07/08 we missed the playoffs, then since 08/09 we have been good enough to make the playoffs every year without the goaltender stealing the majority of the games.

AV isn't the coach for this team. It's evident in our playoff collapses, we need someone who makes moves, makes changes, gets teams motivated, gets the intensity up and who can bring the best out of players.

AV's gotta go. Not the right coach if we want this team to win a cup.

Sergei Shirokov is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 06:46 AM
  #957
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
I think more like top 25 coach in the nhl, near the bottom 25. President trophies are meaningless when you don't win the cup, like i said before, do you rememeber who won the president trophy in 1993? But i can tell you who won the cup in the same year without googling (montreal). We have a veteran group of players, they can restrain themselves without AV, you are giving him too much credit.


Let's see your list then if that's your claim.

AV is 5th - 7th in the league IMO.

And Presidents Cups aren't meaningless. At all. How did you feel after the Canucks win tonight ? How do you feel after they lose ?

You forget so quickly what it's like to cheer for a losing team. Such ungrateful fans.

Christina Woloski is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 06:49 AM
  #958
McLlwain
Trevor Forever
 
McLlwain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cologne/Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soth View Post
AV is probably one of the top 10 coaches in the NHL. Granted, maybe near the bottom of the top 10, but still.We need to lash out at someone though, and I guess Luongo and Ballard are playing good this season so AV it is.

You don't consistently make the playoffs with a coach who is as bad as the fans seem to think AV is. You don't win Presidents trophy twice in a row. You can bet the nucks wanted to go after chicago tonight, but they respect AV and he was obviously warning them that they need the 2 points.
This ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsBeReality View Post
Let's see your list then if that's your claim.

AV is 5th - 7th in the league IMO.

And Presidents Cups aren't meaningless. At all. How did you feel after the Canucks win tonight ? How do you feel after they lose ?

You forget so quickly what it's like to cheer for a losing team. Such ungrateful fans.
... and this.

McLlwain is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 08:05 AM
  #959
Vancouver_2010
Go Canucks & Oilers
 
Vancouver_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsBeReality View Post
Let's see your list then if that's your claim.

AV is 5th - 7th in the league IMO.

And Presidents Cups aren't meaningless. At all. How did you feel after the Canucks win tonight ? How do you feel after they lose ?

You forget so quickly what it's like to cheer for a losing team. Such ungrateful fans.
Do you remember who won the president trophy in 1993 without searching it on Google? No one is going to remember it? I can however, know Montreal won the cup in the same year. I am pretty sure a lot of people would have the same answer with me, that's why they are meaningless. I am sorry for repeating myself, but you don't seems to get what i am trying to say.

I cheer for the Oilers (and Canucks) for a long time, so i know what it is like to cheer for a losing team.

Let's just say in my opinion Marc Crawford is an upgrade towards AV, Crawford might not be the ideal coach with us, but at least an upgrade.

Vancouver_2010 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 09:16 AM
  #960
McLlwain
Trevor Forever
 
McLlwain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cologne/Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Looking at the Canucks' rosters AV had to work with in his early years in Vancouver, I doubt Crawford would have gotten the same impressive results.

Looking at our roster now and in the last couple of years, that sure would have fit Crawford's coaching style.
AV has done both, working successfully with little offence as well as teams that have decent firepower. I have yet to see that from Crawford.

Crawford won a Cup with Peter Forsberg, Joa Sakic, Valeri Kamensky and Patrick Roy on his team. I'm not convinced the Avs made it that year because of his coaching.

McLlwain is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 10:22 AM
  #961
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
How the hell do you rank coaches? And how the hell could AV be near the bottom with his resume?

Reign Nateo is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 10:27 AM
  #962
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
Do you remember who won the president trophy in 1993 without searching it on Google? No one is going to remember it? I can however, know Montreal won the cup in the same year. I am pretty sure a lot of people would have the same answer with me, that's why they are meaningless.
thats not actually a why. "not instantly memorable" isn't a good reason for "meaningless"

Verviticus is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 12:09 PM
  #963
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Didn't like AV's coaching during the game but thought he picked good shooters. Lappy was worth a shot as he was 4/8 in his careeer.

Feel the same way, but I'm not sure if it was coaching or the team still not looking right to me. Curious as to what you saw that was weak coaching? I didn't like some of the matchups he put out there at certain times for sure...


Why not give Lappy a try? Couldn't have been worse than Daniel.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 02:27 PM
  #964
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Here is my basic problem with AV.

He keeps trying to employ a gameplan that doesn't fit our players.

He wants us to be a top-6/bottom-6 team. Then he also wants a defense that contributes to the offense. Actually, sometimes I suspect he only has this because it was mandated to him earlier.

I don't think we have guys who fit a bottom-6 defensive chip-it-in style and you see it. You watch them try this and their forecheck isn't that effective, they don't have a cycle game, and they haven't been good at dump-in retrieval for at least the last two years. I think our bottom guys are fast and reasonably defensive-minded but besides the centers (Lappy and Malhotra) I don't think you would handpick these guys for these roles.

So you have a situation where you have a pinching/offensive defence core who is trying to play with a bottom-6 that doesn't get much puck possession time. If you chip it in and don't get it back, guess what - it ends up back in your zone. This exacerbates the fact that we have a gap control/contain defense.

Our d-core is schizo when it comes to offense as well. Our defence doesn't rush it that much, but when they do at least 3/4 of our forward lines have no idea what to do. We alternate between this and being super lazy and constantly trying long bomb passes. I was angry for at least half the season last year when you literally could not see forwards on the screen because they had all released out of the zone and were providing ZERO puck support. This happened for games on end.

Actually this year they are doing a better job of forward puck support, but I don't know how we could be that predictable for that long last year. And this is not the first time the team has lapsed into bad/weird habits on offense that then start affecting team defense. All that early releasing last year led to turnovers and more d-zone time.

Let's not even talk about how this top/bottom system leads to overplaying the first two lines and IMO having nothing in the tank/injuries in the playoffs. Or how if kesler is healthy, the second line is suddenly a do-everything line that takes away from the bottom-6 icetime.

I think our team is built to be constantly pressing the attack with three lines and speed, with the fourth line on there to be a crash/bang/energy contributor. But that's not how we play, and that's why we see all those leads evaporate on us.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 02:34 PM
  #965
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
I think more like top 25 coach in the nhl, near the bottom 25. President trophies are meaningless when you don't win the cup, like i said before, do you rememeber who won the president trophy in 1993? But i can tell you who won the cup in the same year without googling (montreal). We have a veteran group of players, they can restrain themselves without AV, you are giving him too much credit.
I think you need to at least try and back up your opinion if you want any credibility at all.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 02:38 PM
  #966
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Shirokov View Post
Not a chance he is top 10, more like 25-30.

This guy is lucky he has a very good team that he can rely on to do all the work.

But on a team like the Islanders or Edmonton or Montreal or some of these younger teams that aren't very good and need good coaching, his issues would shine through.

No surprise he never had great NHL success before he came here, Luongo won him the Jack Adams, not a surprise that when Lu couldn't put this team on his back in 07/08 we missed the playoffs, then since 08/09 we have been good enough to make the playoffs every year without the goaltender stealing the majority of the games.

AV isn't the coach for this team. It's evident in our playoff collapses, we need someone who makes moves, makes changes, gets teams motivated, gets the intensity up and who can bring the best out of players.

AV's gotta go. Not the right coach if we want this team to win a cup.
He got a lot out of those Montreal teams that just weren't any good.

VanEric is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 02:49 PM
  #967
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanEric View Post
He got a lot out of those Montreal teams that just weren't any good.
They weren't that bad - they had a young Koivu, Corson, Damphousse, Recchi, Rucinsky, Savage when he was still good, Brisebois on the back-end, etc. They didn't really get bad player-wise until his third year, and just like us in 2008-2009, the low talent level caught up to him. He also had solid goaltending in that time with Hackett and Thibault, so that's not an excuse. I was a Montreal fan back then, so I watched a lot of those games.

All this 'ranking' business is difficult because we don't really know what he would do on a mediocre team - just a very talented one or a not very talented one. Or, a team without a decent goalie. Anyways, it's not very useful considering that we have fixable problems on this team right in front of us - that he could be fixing himself.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 02:52 PM
  #968
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanEric View Post
He got a lot out of those Montreal teams that just weren't any good.
I should also mention that Therrien came in afterwards with almost the same team and coached it to the essentially the same record.

The Montreal days were too long ago and a whole different era IMO but as a fan then I wasn't impressed.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 03:51 PM
  #969
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Here is my basic problem with AV.

He keeps trying to employ a gameplan that doesn't fit our players.

He wants us to be a top-6/bottom-6 team. Then he also wants a defense that contributes to the offense. Actually, sometimes I suspect he only has this because it was mandated to him earlier.

I don't think we have guys who fit a bottom-6 defensive chip-it-in style and you see it. You watch them try this and their forecheck isn't that effective, they don't have a cycle game, and they haven't been good at dump-in retrieval for at least the last two years. I think our bottom guys are fast and reasonably defensive-minded but besides the centers (Lappy and Malhotra) I don't think you would handpick these guys for these roles.

So you have a situation where you have a pinching/offensive defence core who is trying to play with a bottom-6 that doesn't get much puck possession time. If you chip it in and don't get it back, guess what - it ends up back in your zone. This exacerbates the fact that we have a gap control/contain defense.

Our d-core is schizo when it comes to offense as well. Our defence doesn't rush it that much, but when they do at least 3/4 of our forward lines have no idea what to do. We alternate between this and being super lazy and constantly trying long bomb passes. I was angry for at least half the season last year when you literally could not see forwards on the screen because they had all released out of the zone and were providing ZERO puck support. This happened for games on end.

Actually this year they are doing a better job of forward puck support, but I don't know how we could be that predictable for that long last year. And this is not the first time the team has lapsed into bad/weird habits on offense that then start affecting team defense. All that early releasing last year led to turnovers and more d-zone time.

Let's not even talk about how this top/bottom system leads to overplaying the first two lines and IMO having nothing in the tank/injuries in the playoffs. Or how if kesler is healthy, the second line is suddenly a do-everything line that takes away from the bottom-6 icetime.

I think our team is built to be constantly pressing the attack with three lines and speed, with the fourth line on there to be a crash/bang/energy contributor. But that's not how we play, and that's why we see all those leads evaporate on us.
at least wrt to playing time, this year is going to tell us (and presumably MG) a lot about whether AV is really what a lot of us have been complaining about for four years now, or whether it was the hands he'd been dealt.

finally, we have young guys contributing on ELCs. if kes and booth not only make it back into the lineup but also at something approximating full speed, the roster is going to dictate that AV puts together a speedy defensively competent but not shutdown third line. probably some combination of schroeder, raymond, and another winger, whether that's booth, kassian, higgins, or hansen.

if AV does the reasonable thing and gives the kesler line the tough defensive match ups and rolls the third line for timely scoring against lesser competition (as opposed to, say, building a third line around lapierre, hansen, and higgins/deadline acquisition as a shut down unit), then i'll be happy. if not, then it'll be clear that AV will always try to adapt what he's given to his own vision, as opposed to vice versa and we'll know 100% he needs to go.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:14 PM
  #970
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
I should also mention that Therrien came in afterwards with almost the same team and coached it to the essentially the same record.

The Montreal days were too long ago and a whole different era IMO but as a fan then I wasn't impressed.
Therrien's also obviously another really good coach. His personality just wore on players more.

VanEric is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:23 PM
  #971
Finkle is Einhorn
Registered User
 
Finkle is Einhorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
Do you remember who won the president trophy in 1993 without searching it on Google?
If I told you it was Pittsburgh and they lost to the Islanders in the playoffs that year, does it matter? Who won the cup in '71?

Finkle is Einhorn is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:30 PM
  #972
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
AV has done about as well as could be expected in coaching and adapting to the player he has and the philosophy of the GM.

When Dave Nonis was the GM, Crawford got the boot because his team couldn't play a lick of defense and had poor goal tending. Nonis brought in Luongo and gave Vigneault a mandate to tighten up the D.

So Alain Vigneault's team lead the league in GA.

Nonis got the boot, and is replaced by Mike Gillis who right from the start was very clear about his team playing a more attacking style. If you recall, before he actually settled on keeping AV, the two of them met almost daily for about 2 weeks discussing hockey philosophy and approach.

So all of a sudden the Canucks are among the top offensive teams in the league.


Also - if you are comparing Vigneault's tenure in Montreal - the year he was fired his team was devastated by injuries and he was a Jack Adams finalist.

Things that I think are under-appreciated about Alain Vigneault:
  • Players earn their ice time; there are very few passes given.
  • Players are treated like adults and held accountable for their play.
  • Players are able to earn their way out of his "dog house".
  • When players are frequent fliers in the doghouse, he gets rid of them.
  • He's very pragmatic - his roster is made up of the players he thinks will give him the best chance of winning each night.
  • All of his players know their roles and what he expects of them.
  • He is, personally, extremely disciplined and rarely "loses it" behind the bench (except maybe breaking up laughing).
  • He respects the game. There are respectable ways to play the game - a code or unwritten rules. He expects his players to play that way (Matt Cooke)


These things sound very basic, but if you have been through the various eras of coaching in Vancouver, you will understand that these things haven't always characterized Vancouver coaches.
  • Mike Keenan was constantly playing head games. He coached by trying to manipulate players through some of the most bizarre tactics.
  • Under Keenan - players didn't know what to expect. He would bench one player to send a message to another.
  • Marc Crawford, regularly "lost it" behind the bench. How can you expect your players to be disciplined when the coach isn't?
  • Crawford was also famous for playing favorites. Bertuzzi could get away with anthing, and when Bert played undisciplined, Crow took it out on Morrison.
  • Many coaches favour veterans, but Crow was horrible with young players.
  • Quinn was actually a very good coach. Good with young players, respected by veterans.
  • Bob McCammon was a pretty good coach, but he didn't have the best tools to work with.
  • Bill LaForge was a disaster. He was immediately hated by the players for treating them like children. His "gauntlet" drill resulted in a back injury that ended Darcy Rota's career.
  • Roger Neilson was a very good coach. He was an early innovator in using video as a coaching tool. He was well liked and respected by the players.


Last edited by LeftCoast: 02-02-2013 at 04:36 PM.
LeftCoast is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 04:49 PM
  #973
freakydave
Registered User
 
freakydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanEric View Post
Therrien's also obviously another really good coach. His personality just wore on players more.

Seriously this is funniest post in the entire thread.


AV has been riding Luongo's coattails since the day Nonis brought him in &
the fact that the Canucks won 3 games in the SCF while scoring 8 goals in 7 games
proves it.
Now look at the current situation with booth & kesler out 4 of the 8 games have gone to a SHOOTOUT in low scoring affairs.AV is being carried by the goaltending.

freakydave is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 05:00 PM
  #974
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by freakydave View Post

Seriously this is funniest post in the entire thread.


AV has been riding Luongo's coattails since the day Nonis brought him in &
the fact that the Canucks won 3 games in the SCF while scoring 8 goals in 7 games
proves it.
Now look at the current situation with booth & kesler out 4 of the 8 games have gone to a SHOOTOUT in low scoring affairs.AV is being carried by the goaltending.
The canucks are also playing stingy d around the net. Chicago was getting nothing off rebounds or second chances. The canucks were boxing the hawks out well.

Crows* is offline  
Old
02-02-2013, 05:07 PM
  #975
freakydave
Registered User
 
freakydave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
AV has done about as well as could be expected in coaching and adapting to the player he has and the philosophy of the GM.

When Dave Nonis was the GM, Crawford got the boot because his team couldn't play a lick of defense and had poor goal tending. Nonis brought in Luongo and gave Vigneault a mandate to tighten up the D.

So Alain Vigneault's team lead the league in GA.

Nonis got the boot, and is replaced by Mike Gillis who right from the start was very clear about his team playing a more attacking style. If you recall, before he actually settled on keeping AV, the two of them met almost daily for about 2 weeks discussing hockey philosophy and approach.

So all of a sudden the Canucks are among the top offensive teams in the league.


Also - if you are comparing Vigneault's tenure in Montreal - the year he was fired his team was devastated by injuries and he was a Jack Adams finalist.

Things that I think are under-appreciated about Alain Vigneault:
  • Players earn their ice time; there are very few passes given.
  • Players are treated like adults and held accountable for their play.
  • Players are able to earn their way out of his "dog house".
  • When players are frequent fliers in the doghouse, he gets rid of them.
  • He's very pragmatic - his roster is made up of the players he thinks will give him the best chance of winning each night.
  • All of his players know their roles and what he expects of them.
  • He is, personally, extremely disciplined and rarely "loses it" behind the bench (except maybe breaking up laughing).
  • He respects the game. There are respectable ways to play the game - a code or unwritten rules. He expects his players to play that way (Matt Cooke)


These things sound very basic, but if you have been through the various eras of coaching in Vancouver, you will understand that these things haven't always characterized Vancouver coaches.
  • Mike Keenan was constantly playing head games. He coached by trying to manipulate players through some of the most bizarre tactics.
  • Under Keenan - players didn't know what to expect. He would bench one player to send a message to another.
  • Marc Crawford, regularly "lost it" behind the bench. How can you expect your players to be disciplined when the coach isn't?
  • Crawford was also famous for playing favorites. Bertuzzi could get away with anthing, and when Bert played undisciplined, Crow took it out on Morrison.
  • Many coaches favour veterans, but Crow was horrible with young players.
  • Quinn was actually a very good coach. Good with young players, respected by veterans.
  • Bob McCammon was a pretty good coach, but he didn't have the best tools to work with.
  • Bill LaForge was a disaster. He was immediately hated by the players for treating them like children. His "gauntlet" drill resulted in a back injury that ended Darcy Rota's career.
  • Roger Neilson was a very good coach. He was an early innovator in using video as a coaching tool. He was well liked and respected by the players.
Aside from passing off personal opinion as fact-what do you really offer?
You think AV is a good coach not many in this thread disagree-but it's about winning in the playoffs &every year they come up short -it's not enough to make the playoffs it's about winning & AV has had every opportunity with this group & hasn't been able get it done.Why will it be different this year?Why should he be given chance after chance while the best Canucks team in franchise history gets older & older?


Last edited by freakydave: 02-02-2013 at 05:09 PM. Reason: clarity
freakydave is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:55 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.