| Author |
 Topic  |
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
 Posted - 06/04/2012 : 21:36:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Alex, I am so so super duper glad you brought up the Kings.
Riddle me this, one who believe that AV is the man, how are the Kings better than the Canucks??
Are they better in net?? I don't think so.
Do they have a better group of defensemen?? Nope. I think other than Doughty that Vancouver's defensemen have it in spades over the Kings.
What about their forwards? I don't know. Maybe the Kings are better in this department but it's not by a whole bunch.
So why did the Kings win????
I'll give you a clue. That goofy looking suit behind the the Kings bench from Viking, Alberta installed a system. That system is effective and their players buy into the plans of that goofy SOB completely.
The Kings didn't out play the Canucks on skill. They outplayed the Canucks with their system and approach to the game.
That, my friend, is coaching.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!
1. The Kings are in fact better than VAN in net. Much better. I would swap Quick for either Luongo or Schneider in a second. Hell, I'd trade them both for Quick. As Alex posted, a 1.44 GAA and a .947 SV% over 16 games so far - playing against the best teams in the west? That is nuts. Quick outplayed both goaltenders all year long, and in the first round, period.
2. The Kings do have a relatively equal defense, although they do possess that one piece, the stud dman, that you have long professed that teams cannot win without. Vancouver does not have it, and LA does. The rest are similar.
3. The Kings have, IMO a better sized top 6 (although not better skilled), and a deeper bottom 6, than VAN does right now. LA's top 6 would be the envy of most teams in the NHL right now (it was not that way all year long), they are 2 solidly balanced scoring lines with size and grit through all 6. Their bottom 6 forwards are better than VAN right now, and have shown they are capable of.
As for the first round of the playoffs, I think VAN lost for several reasons:
- No Daniel Sedin for first 2 games - that is a big hole for VAN
- Ryan Kesler was seemingly playing with one shoulder - when he is not running well, the team generally does not run well as he owns the secondary scoring and second line effectiveness, as well as the PK
- some shockingly bad play by Alex Edler, consistently so. Our rising star and #1 dman played the worst 5 games I have seen him play. He was once seen as the near future #1 dman in Vancouver, and now his name pops up in trade speculation.
- LA effectively shut down the top guns of the Canucks - great tenacious forechecking, beating them to the puck.
- LA effectively outmuscled Vancouver's top forwards - they're a big squad, and VAN does not have much of a physical answer for big strong teams.
- Quick played unbelievable hockey - as he continues to do now. The Canucks were not without shots (avg over 30 per game) and not without chances, but he put up a wall all the way through.
I echo Alex - coaching is part of any sport, hockey is no different. But in a 7 game series anything can happen - injuries, bad play by key players, run into hot/streaky/lucky opponents. Even when you coach well, s*&t happens. |
 |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 08:41:33
|
First off, Alex, I certainly did not appreciate this comment.
But i do find it laughable when someone says he's not capable of winning a cup with the Canucks when they came as close as they did already.Sorry, but if you don't see how ridiculous that comment is, then you're too stubborn/biased to admit it, your not very intelligent or you just don't get it.
Last time I checked, I have the ability to share any opinion about hockey I want on this site. If it doesn't match your opinion or you don't agree with it, does it mean you have the ability to comment on peoples intelligence?? You, me, and everyone else still need to follow the forum guidelines. Please and Thank You.
But to answer your question, I have just two words to contrast how little making it to the 7 game of the Stanley Cup finals means. Craig MacTavish. Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. 2nd place is the first loser. Insert what ever other cliche you wish, not winning is not winning regardless of how it happens.
You know my points and my opinions. You will continue to view my statements how ever you wish. For example, I never once said that Darryl Sutter is a brilliant coach who can unseat the great Scottie Bowman. However, it is hard to argue that he is out-coaching his opposition in this year's playoffs. He did the same thing when Calgary went on their run in '05 and Craig MacTavish did the same thing in '06 during the Oilers run. I am not saying that either of those guys are elite coaches. But they did out-coach their opposition in those playoffs.
Ultimately, we differ in opinions. But what is laughable is that for all of the times people accuse me of being biased it's amazing how little people can recognize bias in their views.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 16:16:32
|
Beans....my apologies, even though i don't think they are warranted. You must have missed the "or" in that statement. You see, i know you are intelligent AND therefore you "get" what i am/was saying, therefore the third option as to my read of your opinion is that you are too stubborn or biased to admit it. 
Either way, sorry for that, i respect you enough that i'm not about to call you unintelligent. However, i certainly am allowed to have an opinion of your opinion and i personally think that claiming a guy can't win the cup after making it to game 7 of the final is absolutely ludicrous. I'm assuming you must have made whack of money on game 7 last year betting on Boston, right? I mean, you are so sure that AV will never win a cup with Vancouver that it must have been an easy wager and win! 
I guess where we differ is that imo you give too much credit to the coach. System or no system the fact is, the Kings are playing the best hockey they've ever played as a group and the other teams didn't. Mix in the hottest goalie in a long time, arguably hotter than even Thomas last year, and a full compliment of their high end talent (Richards, Doughty, Carter, Kopitar) playing far better than ANY of them did all season and you'll see a team that you or i could prob have coached to the finals!
I guess we just see things differently on this? See, i recall Calgary's run to the final in '04 too. But i don't recall them winning because their coach implemented systems. I recall the Kipper playing lights out including 5 shoutouts in the playoffs and carrying the Flames on his back at times. Same goes for Edm. a couple years later. Roloson was a stud and going into the finals was considered a front runner for the Conn Smythe! My point is, goalie's are HUGE when it comes to winning the cup. Unless you have the fire power of the Pens or an Oiler's team from the 80's, you usually need to not just have a good goalie, but he needs to be playing extremely well to. Yes, there are exceptions of course, but for the most part that's what you'll see.
Again, i'm not saying a coach is not a valuable part of the success, i just don't think a coach deserves as much credit as some people think they do. The only evidence that possibly shows Sutter outcoaching any of his opposition is the wins, and while they're also the most important part at this point, i don't think he can be creditted with them. As far as i can see, he can't win without his players, but his players could still win without him.  |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 07:44:29
|
Alex, let me start by saying that I assumed your comments were in jest or at least not intended maliciously. Trust me when I say that I can stand the heat in the kitchen. However, I have to have my moderator hat on and although you and I may be able to have heated conversations including a few personal shots here and there, we all have to follow the same forum guidelines.
I really don't want to continue this discussion but I will say this. We do disagree. I completely disagree with the amount of value placed on coaching in the playoffs. I am not saying it's always a great coach who wins. But great coaching always wins. I can look back to each of the last 10-15 Stanley Cups and point specifically to coaching decisions that won or lost the Stanley Cup.
Once teams make it to the finals, it's unlikely there is a noticeable difference of talent on the ice. The difference is always coaching. What coach makes the right decision at the right time.
We shall agree to disagree.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 12:26:46
|
| I'm cool with that. But before we complete this, please don't go with 15 years, but tell me what Claude Julien did to outcoach AV in last years final. Is there one or two specific things or "systems" he implemented that maybe i missed? I'm not being sarcastic, i'm serious. Maybe i just don't see these things as well as others and i'd love to be enlightened. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 15:10:18
|
There were a few things that Julien did that also stand out. Firstly, after having the most anemic power play in the history of the playoffs, he made an attempt at getting Zdeno Chara as a screen in front of the net. Now, I think we can all agree this was not successful on the ice, however that did show the players that doing the same thing the expecting a different result is absurd. The fact that he quickly reshuffled his power play for game 2 and had results (1 for 3) also proved wise.
Secondly, and most importantly, it how well prepared for game 3 the Bruins were. I get they were coming home and had an advantage there, but after losing 2 games in OT and being down 2-0, most teams fold (see NJ this year). But the Bruins came out and beat down the Canucks and outscored them 12-1 in the next 2 games.
Contrasting, AV had no answer for Boston in games 3, 4, 6, or 7. Vancouver was never really in either game 6 or 7 and they looked defeated. 4 goals in 4:14 in game 6. No response. At times it's not the action that is incorrect, it's the lack of action. To that point, I don't think AV is a horrible coach for what he does. He's always been indecisive to me and does not take action when action is needed.
Ultimately, CJ did things and some of them proved successfull while others did not. AV did the same thing he always does, which is often not enough of anything.
Just my humble opinion.
From your side, did AV did anything that stands out for you from last year's final???
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 16:38:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
There were a few things that Julien did that also stand out. Firstly, after having the most anemic power play in the history of the playoffs, he made an attempt at getting Zdeno Chara as a screen in front of the net. Now, I think we can all agree this was not successful on the ice, however that did show the players that doing the same thing the expecting a different result is absurd. The fact that he quickly reshuffled his power play for game 2 and had results (1 for 3) also proved wise.
Secondly, and most importantly, it how well prepared for game 3 the Bruins were. I get they were coming home and had an advantage there, but after losing 2 games in OT and being down 2-0, most teams fold (see NJ this year). But the Bruins came out and beat down the Canucks and outscored them 12-1 in the next 2 games.
Contrasting, AV had no answer for Boston in games 3, 4, 6, or 7. Vancouver was never really in either game 6 or 7 and they looked defeated. 4 goals in 4:14 in game 6. No response. At times it's not the action that is incorrect, it's the lack of action. To that point, I don't think AV is a horrible coach for what he does. He's always been indecisive to me and does not take action when action is needed.
Ultimately, CJ did things and some of them proved successfull while others did not. AV did the same thing he always does, which is often not enough of anything.
Just my humble opinion.
From your side, did AV did anything that stands out for you from last year's final???
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!
I see your points, but honestly, putting Chara in front of the goalie? Not only did it have little to no affect, it's been done countless times before. He's not the first coach to put a big body in front of a goalie, heck, he's not even the first to do so with big Z! AV mixed his PP up too, but it's similar to things he did during seasons past or even earlier in 2011 when the PP went into mini slumps.
Now, how well they were prepared for game 3 is a good example. It'd be even better if we had some sort of proof that he deserves the bulk of the credit. From everything i heard last year, it was Aaron Rome who riled up the big bad Bruins and handed them game 3 with his suspendable hit? Also, you mention that AV did nothing in the series to "answer back" to those lopsided lossed in Boston. Well, it's not like he sat back and waved a white towel, his team put up 41 shots in game 3. This is in an 8-1 loss! Seems to me that the goalies had a big say in the outcome of this one.
Game 4 saw Tim Thomas stop every shot (40ish i believe?) that the Canucks threw at him. At the other end of the ice, Luongo was stopping just 16 of 20 before being relieved in the net by Schneider. Maybe one could argue that AV should have started Schneider but it's easy to throw out that 8-1 drubbing and assume Lu had an off night so why not come back with your #1. Personally, i'd have started the 3rd with Schneider rather than wait for Lu to give up a 4th goal, but with the way Thomas was playing that night, it prob wouldn't have mattered. Again, goaltending was key.
You ask what AV did that maybe stands out? Well, to be honest, nothing in particular, but then i don't think anything you mentioned about CJ stands out either but look back to game 5. After being pulled in back to back poor performances in games 3 and 4, there was a ton of pressure on AV to start Schneider when they returned home. The airwaves around town here were going crazy with callers demanding he start Schneider! What did AV do? Started Luongo. How was he rewarded? Lu posted his 2nd 1-0 shutout of the series, that's how.
I can't recall specific's like when AV called time outs in those blow out losses or what exact line changes he made, but believe me, line juggling is one thing that many find he does too much around here. So to say he sits idle and doesn't react to situations is not really accurate.
I have to say as well, that looking back and chatting to some people, many are pissed that he didn't play Schneider more. BUT, let's not forget, this wasn't the Schneider we saw this season. That's not to say he wasn't good last year, but with another full season on his resume with many more starts including big games like the return to Beantown in Jan and this kid came a long way since then. Last year you had a Vezina finalist in Luongo and a very unproven backup in Schneider. Too many, Canucks fans especially, look at the success Schneider had this season and revert back to '11 and claim he should have been our playoff goalie and that AV screwed up. Again, imo, that's not fair blame to be thrown his way. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2012 : 20:33:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I have to say as well, that looking back and chatting to some people, many are pissed that he didn't play Schneider more. BUT, let's not forget, this wasn't the Schneider we saw this season. That's not to say he wasn't good last year, but with another full season on his resume with many more starts including big games like the return to Beantown in Jan and this kid came a long way since then.
Good points Alex, and I agree with your post. AV did not sit back and do nothing, and he tinkers with things as much as other coaches do. That they fell short, by a single game no less, is hard to pin on coaching.
The one thing that I did not agree with is game 4 and Schneider - I am one of those that strongly felt AV made a mistake in not starting him in game 4 of the finals. When your starting goalie gives up 8 goals in a game, you give him a rest the next night - even in the finals. AV played the Schneider card with some success in the first round against CHI - they didn't win that game 6, but he played well enough that coaches should have had some faith in him. I sometimes wonder how that series might have been different had Schneids gotten that start. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2012 : 06:15:36
|
Well, again we agree to disagree. To the point of Julien putting Chara infront of the net. I know he wasn't the first guy to do it and I agree that it didn't work. I didn't say a coaching decision has to be trailblazing to be good, did I?? He made a change and it didn't work. My point was his actions told his team they would not rest on their laurels and expect a different outcome. I agree that the Aaron Rome hit was likely the tipping point to the series. But I still think Julien deserves some credit for his team crushing Vancouver on the scoreboard as well as trying to take it to them physically. The penalties that game were 12-15 with Boston having more. That being said, 15 of those penalties were 'coincidental' and if you look at the list of the players involved, many of those Canucks were Kesler(17 min), Burrow(14 min), and the Sedin (10 min) compared with Boston who had only Lucic and Seidenberg with more than 10 min in PIMs.
That is a great example of the lack of discipline of the Canucks. 3 of their top 4 players tool a combined 41 PIM's.
Personally, I don't recall a pile of line juggling and changes to anything the Canucks did. And I get they made it to the 7th game. It's a tired coversation. Let's not forget the Canucks won their games all by 1 goal and all scored late or in OT. They never 'dominated' a single game in that series and I don't think AV did anything to impact the series. I believe he did rest very firmly on his laurels.
But we will have to agree to disagree.
Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!! |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2012 : 07:51:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
But I still think Julien deserves some credit for his team crushing Vancouver on the scoreboard as well as trying to take it to them physically. The penalties that game were 12-15 with Boston having more. That being said, 15 of those penalties were 'coincidental' and if you look at the list of the players involved, many of those Canucks were Kesler(17 min), Burrow(14 min), and the Sedin (10 min) compared with Boston who had only Lucic and Seidenberg with more than 10 min in PIMs.
That is a great example of the lack of discipline of the Canucks. 3 of their top 4 players tool a combined 41 PIM's.
Agree to disagree may be all we can do after reading the above. You're telling me that Julien deserves credit for his team's aggressive play that resulted in Vancouver's top 3 taking undisciplined penalties??? C'mon, go back and look at the boxscore again. Pay some attention to the time and the score when most of those penalties were taken. It was the 3rd period of a game the Canucks were losing 4-0!!! Aside from the Burrows "unsportsmanlike conduct" minor, they were all with under 13mins left in the game too! Even the misconduct to Burrows can't be looked at in a bad way considering Chara got the same thing. That's a trade off the Canucks would have taken ANY time!
The only thing worse than either creditting Julien for this or blaming AV would be had the Canucks not done anything to fight back, people would be claiming they didn't stand up for themselves! Blowouts often come to this and we usually call it "setting the tone" for the next and future games! Sorry Beans, but calling these penalties a lack of discipline is really grasping for support of your argument as far as i'm concerned.
Either way, that was just one year i was asking about as you claimed you could point to specific "coaching moves" that either won or lost teams the cup for the past 10-15 years, another point that i think is unsubstantiated. I guess you can claim that, but you really can't prove it, nor can i prove any theory wrong so we're wasting our time. I'm done with this........... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Vigneault re-signs with the Canucks 
