Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Two things...

I agree that there are people here who could do a good job in the pro hockey world. That number though is in the single digits... low single digits and I bet my list would shock people.

Regarding the bold... Maybe it is a tad bit worse in hockey but that is true in any profession, not just professional sports.
We all know it's me you're thinking of
 
I'm somewhat torn on one of the issues brought up here.

I think there are a lot of people who think they'd make good coaches and GM's, right up until they actually jumped into the deep end. It's not as simple as trading for guys or sending them onto the ice to play. All the talent in the world doesn't equate to success without a good coach. We've seen that time and time again, in a number of sports.

On the other hand, I do believe that there are some people on here who could, with some training and experience, make for pro-caliber hockey professionals. Hockey, perhaps more than any other sport, tends to be a little incestuous. There are a lot of people who are employed only because they are "in."

Sounds like the Media and Hollywood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YearOfTheCat
Two things...

I agree that there are people here who could do a good job in the pro hockey world. That number though is in the single digits... low single digits and I bet my list would shock people.

Regarding the bold... Maybe it is a tad bit worse in hockey but that is true in any profession, not just professional sports.

Now I wanna here it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YearOfTheCat
Can anyone tell me what a coach actually does aside from dressing guys and dividing minutes between them that we can all point to and say this guy is trash or is very good?

This is a major issue too. I imagine that there are 3 equal components to what a coach does, but I could be wrong. I think of those three things as games, practice and people/group management. If I'm right, we only ever directly see a third of what a coach does, but what happens in the games are often a result of the other two things as much as they are the coach managing the games.

And this is why I can forgive certain faults if a coach has some flaws in game management, as long as I get the feeling that the other two components are being taken care of.

Where does that leave me with AV? Overall, positive. For one thing, I think the struggles we see right now, and often at the beginning of the season, are the result of a lack of practice time. I really don't like his training camp scheduling. That being said, clearly his practices are effective, as the team does figure out how to execute his system over the course of time. The people management aspect is something I think he excels at, as evidenced what I see as the team having overachieved their talent level on the roster as well as an overall sense of stability. Some of his in-game stuff leaves me wanting more, but overall, as I said, positive.
 
I think AV forgot to account for the fact that the metro and the east adapted to the system.

Its a cyclical thing in hockey.

Teams will adapt to the 1-3-1 again after Bouchers success.

The Rangers needed to adapt after the PIT series loss where that system started working well.

You will see teams carve up the rangers on switches on thw rush and plays off of the cycle.

Such is the price of complacency and stagnation.
 
Posted in GDT, but makes more sense here:

As tends to happens when coaches start feeling some heat, AV is playing it "safe." This means vets and known commodities over rookies and newcomers, as he knows his margin for error is diminishing. This is why every fan hates their coaches decision making after several years. We're in it for the long game, a coach in AV's position is in it for the next game.

A new coach with a long leash would experiment with ADA or Shatty w/ McD and show some patience. AV no longer has that leash and just isn't willing to take risks at this point (even though anyone of our RD's with McD is a risk at this point).
 
Posted in GDT, but makes more sense here:

As tends to happens when coaches start feeling some heat, AV is playing it "safe." This means vets and known commodities over rookies and newcomers, as he knows his margin for error is diminishing. This is why every fan hates their coaches decision making after several years. We're in it for the long game, a coach in AV's position is in it for the next game.

A new coach with a long leash would experiment with ADA or Shatty w/ McD and show some patience. AV no longer has that leash and just isn't willing to take risks at this point (even though anyone of our RD's with McD is a risk at this point).

I don't buy it. The first controversial thing AV did here was play Del Zotto as the 3RD because the guy was playing like junk.
 
Sounds like the Media and Hollywood.

Believe it or not, even among the four sports, I'd say hockey is definitely more exclusive - and I've worked in politics (don't recommend it).

With that said, once you're in, you're a lifer unless you royally screw it up.
 
This year has reminded me why I hate AV so much.


Fire this clown before it's too late (i.e. after tomorrow's game). My #1 choice would be Darryl Sutter, but I'm open to anyone but AV, including Lindy Ruff. Adam Oates, Dave Tippett, Paul MacLean, Bob Hartley...OK, maybe not the last one, but Hartley at least would light a fire under the players.
 
Last edited:
Comparing Desharnais to Glass is dumb. Glass is among the worst players in the NHL, Desharnais is a good 4th liner.
Him playing lots of minutes is an issue though, a good 4th liner should not play the 3rd most minutes of your forwards, that's obvious.
 
Believe it or not, even among the four sports, I'd say hockey is definitely more exclusive - and I've worked in politics (don't recommend it).

With that said, once you're in, you're a lifer unless you royally screw it up.

This is very accurate. Insular would be the term I use and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a matter of respect, there is a code that's abided by, and that is you step up for your guy and your guy to steps up for you and that's just the way it goes.
 
Comparing Desharnais to Glass is dumb. Glass is among the worst players in the NHL, Desharnais is a good 4th liner.
Him playing lots of minutes is an issue though, a good 4th liner should not play the 3rd most minutes of your forwards, that's obvious.

Comparing them is not the same as saying Desharnais is exactly the same as Glass. The comparison comes from we know AV loved Glass and way overplayed him. As you mentioned, Desharnais is being overplayed.
 
I've always been an advocate of firing a coach to shake things up. I'm getting close to being okay with that.
 
Am i the only one that thinks the current problems we have are very similar to the end of AVs time in Vancouver?

The Canucks were at the end of their window and the team was no longer good enough. The Canucks brought in John Tortorella and they were horrible. They fired him after one year. Willie Desjardins lasted three years. Travis Green is now the Canucks latest coach.

AV is not perfect. The Rangers issues run deeper than just AV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides and Edge
DD is not playing NHL caliber hockey right now. Deploying substantial minutes there is therefore a big problem. He did draw a penalty at the end that could/should have had a better outcome. But that was one of his few brighter moments. Kills momentum. Otoh Chytil drew a penalty in five minutes of ice time and gets benched and demoted
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ori
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad