a bunch more injuries and maybe the NHL will realize that the slight money grab is not worth it and reduce the amount of preseason games.
Is it a money grab though ... or are they legit trying to get ready for the season? I mean if injuries during the pre-season are a serious problem to hockey clubs it wouldn't be very hard to just dress your AHL team the entire time or not try hard and put yourself in a dangerous situation like Doughty did.
I mean, this is pretty normal. A few guys get hurt in preseason every year just like any other similar sample size of games.
Yeah, this seems normal in hockey. Players get injured all the time. Should they shorten the regular season too or start flipping a coin for wins instead?
I'd argue a lot of that is overblown and romanticized. Dude wasn't winning any Selkes or have an Yzerman or Malhotra level reinvention. Like, c'mon.
So anything that puts him in a bad light isn't to be considered, while everything that could be cause for celebration is? Nothing I see from his coaching career really highlights a good coach, even the stuff you touted as positives, and everything I've heard/seen from him is just the same arrogant POS he was as a player.
I legit don't get what people see in him beyond someone who is part of the old boy's club. Good coaches have to contend with injuries, too, and they usually don't crater to the level they did under Green on numerous teams.
I know you didn't say that, but I'm still curious as to what constitutes a bad coach for you.
I don't see him as particularly sharp and is rather more of an outmoded dinosaur.
When reading your posts it seems like you're just out to vilify him. I know you didn't ask me but a bad coach is one who doesn't know the X's and O's, subtilties (finer points) of the game, or is unable convey them to his team, can't control his players, motivate them, keep the team on task, set up proper training, build them up, win games, and have care, concern and personally build relationships. Stuff like that.
The funny thing that I see when these criticisms come up is these are all things you can't see through your TV screen. You have absolutely no idea what he's teaching them, what his "pillars" are, how their training is set-up, what he's asking them individually, the finer points on instruction, and whether the players are responding appropriately or not on a losing team. In short it's very difficult to judge coaching through your TV. So whenever people start piling on like this it's usually just a bias or collective frustration they've formed, which appears to very prevalent with Green for Vancouver fans.
Just like any other coaching situation it would be fairer to start judging his results moving forward, not his first kick at the can with a horrible hockey team, or a mercy finish on an already floundering team. I can remember all the people calling RT garbage because of his previous record and "apparent" coaching ability too. Recall the same with Torts here and then he won the Jack Adams the next year with Columbus. You can gain hockey knowledge by watching ... coaching not so much.
I know he was part of that clique, whatever that means since we don't know the team from that era. All we know is that they were ostracized.
Not sure if it was at precisely the same time, but Corson did something terrible to betray a teammate around that time.
It may be that Green stuck by him, which helped lead to a fractured dressing room.
But I'm also willing to believe that over 20 year span a guy can mature in that way.
Yup, I absolutely hated him as a player. Partially because of how dimwitted that organization was to target him in the first place with all their money to spend.
I was impressed by how he became a student of the game during his later years and really bought into being a team player and student of the game. Surely people can mature.
I felt like a huge dickhead.
