Fire AV, Fire Sather. This is a bad hockey team.

[Machinehead]

Unlike the other Canucks fans who've come in here to gloat, I wanted to maybe elaborate a little bit on AV's philosophy and system strategy as a hope to quell your worries.

Vigneault is a brilliant tactician who took zone start utilization and really brought it to the forefront of NHL strategizing in 2009-10. This is still an effective and highly successful theory, and not the issue you guys are having with him.

What's going on is this: Vigneault has been known in Vancouver has having one of the most difficult systems (especially for defensemen) in the league. Now, I know you've heard this umpteen million times, but no one really has explained why. The reason it takes players so long to learn is because it is heavily reliant on decision making.

Consider it like this: if the D-man is skating in, he makes his decision based on 1) what type of players are around him (are they forechecking forwards? defensemen?) 2) the handedness of the player (does he shoot right or left?) and 3) position of his teammates. For players who have become accustomed to playing a more one-dimensional and simple system (much like Torts'), this is incredibly difficult to adjust to. We would have to allow a grace period of 2-3 months for new players to adapt. But, once they do become comfortable playing it, it's incredibly effective. However, the issue is when you don't have high IQ (but high talent) defensemen in your group. This is ultimately what doomed Ballard in Vancouver: as a puck rushing D man, he relied on instinct over decision making.

Also: AV's system relies heavily on stretch passes and strong outlet passes from the defense. This really elevated Vancouver to elite status by having a good chunk of secondary scoring come from the D. It ended up being neutralized in the end because the West plays so much tighter than the East. This aspect will really benefit the Rangers once their passing is cleaned up. They will have to space to make these plays.

Lastly, the only retractor I really have to say about Alain is, in the end, he played his team like he wanted them to play, not how they were built to. Gillis took a lot of flack for not providing him the tools he needed, and rightly so, but it is a two way street. Sather must make moves to acquire more skill players for your forward group and another defenseman with higher offensive capabilities. Gillis did do that with Garrison (booming shot) and Booth (injury prone) but unfortunately two 1st round exits don't allot you the leash to get another pass.

In the end you guys will be fine. You may have to struggle this year, but as long as you retain Hank and acquire some more skill you will be a force to be reckoned with. Don't let the AV Biased Canucks fans tell you otherwise, there is always a risk to a higher reward and it will be worth it.

Thanks for the input, it's much appreciated.

I'm not sure AV has much to do with our struggles, regardless. I think this roster needs alot of work.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

Unlike the other Canucks fans who've come in here to gloat, I wanted to maybe elaborate a little bit on AV's philosophy and system strategy as a hope to quell your worries.

Vigneault is a brilliant tactician who took zone start utilization and really brought it to the forefront of NHL strategizing in 2009-10. This is still an effective and highly successful theory, and not the issue you guys are having with him.

What's going on is this: Vigneault has been known in Vancouver has having one of the most difficult systems (especially for defensemen) in the league. Now, I know you've heard this umpteen million times, but no one really has explained why. The reason it takes players so long to learn is because it is heavily reliant on decision making.

Consider it like this: if the D-man is skating in, he makes his decision based on 1) what type of players are around him (are they forechecking forwards? defensemen?) 2) the handedness of the player (does he shoot right or left?) and 3) position of his teammates. For players who have become accustomed to playing a more one-dimensional and simple system (much like Torts'), this is incredibly difficult to adjust to. We would have to allow a grace period of 2-3 months for new players to adapt. But, once they do become comfortable playing it, it's incredibly effective. However, the issue is when you don't have high IQ (but high talent) defensemen in your group. This is ultimately what doomed Ballard in Vancouver: as a puck rushing D man, he relied on instinct over decision making.

Also: AV's system relies heavily on stretch passes and strong outlet passes from the defense. This really elevated Vancouver to elite status by having a good chunk of secondary scoring come from the D. It ended up being neutralized in the end because the West plays so much tighter than the East. This aspect will really benefit the Rangers once their passing is cleaned up. They will have to space to make these plays.

Lastly, the only retractor I really have to say about Alain is, in the end, he played his team like he wanted them to play, not how they were built to. Gillis took a lot of flack for not providing him the tools he needed, and rightly so, but it is a two way street. Sather must make moves to acquire more skill players for your forward group and another defenseman with higher offensive capabilities. Gillis did do that with Garrison (booming shot) and Booth (injury prone) but unfortunately two 1st round exits don't allot you the leash to get another pass.

In the end you guys will be fine. You may have to struggle this year, but as long as you retain Hank and acquire some more skill you will be a force to be reckoned with. Don't let the AV Biased Canucks fans tell you otherwise, there is always a risk to a higher reward and it will be worth it.

I knew there were Canucks fans like you out there somewhere.

Your assessment while helpful is also very troubling considering our players collective IQ seems to be the same as the number of goals we've given up in the last two games.

Torts is similar in that he won't adjust his system to his personnel, he was still trying to play the gritty game that we had success with in '11-'12 last season when the players we had weren't suited for it. Had he adapted a little he might still be here, it was a big gripe around here. The funny thing is that he was right to an extent as this team seems devoid of talent. At least at this point, if they were playing up to their potential I think we'd be seeing some better results. But as constructed they don't have the talent to be an elite team.

 

[thepuckmonster]

I knew there were Canucks fans like you out there somewhere.

Your assessment while helpful is also very troubling considering our players collective IQ seems to be the same as the number of goals we've given up in the last two games.

Torts is similar in that he won't adjust his system to his personnel, he was still trying to play the gritty game that we had success with in '11-'12 last season when the players we had weren't suited for it. Had he adapted a little he might still be here, it was a big gripe around here. The funny thing is that he was right to an extent as this team seems devoid of talent. At least at this point, if they were playing up to their potential I think we'd be seeing some better results. But as constructed they don't have the talent to be an elite team.

It's really as simple as this: Torts is coach who's philosophy is much better suited to the west, and AVs is the same in regards to the east. Torts inherited a team that has the scoring, whereas AV is great for creating a team that does score.

Vigneault relies on stellar netminding, and you've already got that. The rest will be fine with some trades and lower end signings.

 

[Machinehead]

It's really as simple as this: Torts is coach who's philosophy is much better suited to the west, and AVs is the same in regards to the east. Torts inherited a team that has the scoring, whereas AV is great for creating a team that does score.

Vigneault relies on stellar netminding, and you've already got that. The rest will be fine with some trades and lower end signings.

Not so far, that's for sure

 

[aufheben]

Consider it like this: if the D-man is skating in, he makes his decision based on 1) what type of players are around him (are they forechecking forwards? defensemen?) 2) the handedness of the player (does he shoot right or left?) and 3) position of his teammates. For players who have become accustomed to playing a more one-dimensional and simple system (much like Torts'), this is incredibly difficult to adjust to. We would have to allow a grace period of 2-3 months for new players to adapt. But, once they do become comfortable playing it, it's incredibly effective. However, the issue is when you don't have high IQ (but high talent) defensemen in your group. This is ultimately what doomed Ballard in Vancouver: as a puck rushing D man, he relied on instinct over decision making.

Helps explain why Del Zotto's been playing like it's pond hockey.

 

[thepuckmonster]

Not so far, that's for sure

Luongo historically has craptastic Octobers. Many of us thought it was his conditioning or whatever, but he's been fine so far. Lundqvist will just have to adjust to a more agressive and pinching D and be prepared to face higher quality scoring chances at times. It is nonsense to discount his decade of stellar performances because of a few struggles early in the season.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Not so far, that's for sure

Bad defensive coverage, say...by a team learning a new system that is already operating at super-low confidence...can make any goaltender look awful.

At the end of the day you lost two games. It doesn't matter if you lose them 12-0 or 1-0, they're still losses. The goals don't roll over or anything. The Rangers will be fine.

 

[RiceCooker]

In Vancouver AV had the Sedins who can control the puck and make passes and plays like they have some sort of Twin telepathy, he also had better puck moving D-men who could make good break-out passes and get a point shot through to the net. The Rangers have none of these type of players and it worries me if AV will be able to adjust.
He even mentioned in his post game interview that making tape-to-tape passes was not about coaching.

 

[haveandare]

While there are literally no excuses for getting absolutely killed back to back like that, there are reasons, and good ones, for this team to be struggling. No Nash, no Hagelin, Stepan missed camp, new coach, a more complex system to learn, etc.

I really don't think the sky is falling yet. I have a feeling this thread will eventually be a good laugh a few months down the road. It'll be like everyone jumping on Stepan early last year.

 

[Garbage Goal]

This could end up being a bad team, but it's not this bad. It's not going to lose 0-8 every game or something like that.

On paper this team is far more talented and established then a team like Buffalo or Edmonton which are really the truly bad teams.

 

[thepuckmonster]

Also, I just wanted to contradict a few unfounded theories about AV that somehow keep coming up:

1) Vigneault can't develop young players: A lot of Vancouver players wanted AV's head because he misused Kassian last year. While true, Alain absolutely deserves full credit for the development of: Edler, Hansen, Kesler, Burrows, Tanev, Hodgson and Schneider. He has had his blips, but what coach hasn't? He expects rookies and youth to earn their roster positions by working their way from the bottom lines up. If they don't play well enough, they won't get their promotion. He should also receive some credit for elevating the Sedins to superstar status.

2) Vigneault is a laissez-faire coach: His first few year here, he was not. However as our leadership group got older, he did allow them some autonomy is policing themselves and holding each other accountable. There is no issue with this, as evidenced by the success Vancouver has had in the past 5 years. You are a young team, he's not going to do the same with the Rangers.

3) Vigneault treats players poorly: Commonly brought up is the Hodgson *****ing because apparently Alain ruined Hodgson's relationship with Vancouver because he called him out for poor play when he was injured. What's often forgotten is that third party physicians and Hodgson's own health professionals didn't diagnose his back injury, it was the Canucks doctors. Vigneault did put Hodgson in the greatest position to succeed and in the end he was traded because of the distraction he was causing off ice. Obviously, as shown by his hold out in Buffalo, Hodgson is more a spoilt brat than AV is a ruthless dictator.

The Rangers are very similar to the Canucks when AV took over. Luongo at the time was heralded as one of the best (and according to some, the very best) goaltenders in the league. Vigneault rode Lu hard while the team hammered out its issues. The same with happen with Lundqvist. Henke is not some Brian Elliot goalie who is a product of a system, he is truly the best (or at least Top 3). Luongo had his blowouts too, and they became less frequent as the team became more cohesive.

I am excited to watch the Rangers play once everything settles and the team gels. AV knows how to create exciting hockey. The issue lies with Sather and his team building philosophies. Alain will be vocal about acquiring the players he wants. As note, here's some players Vigneault would likely push for because he's a hockey numbers, moneypuck coach:

- Samuelsson for your PP
- Goc for your 3C
- Some of Nashville's younger players who have underachieved (Colin Smith) or David Legwand
- Versteeg (if healthy)
- Wideman

These are all AV type players, Samuelsson and Richards on your PP would be filthy.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

These are all AV type players, Samuelsson and Richards on your PP would be filthy.

I think Samuelsson's best before date has come and gone, alas.

 

[thepuckmonster]

I think Samuelsson's best before date has come and gone, alas.

He's still an effective power play specialist. I wouldn't count him out yet.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

He's still an effective power play specialist. I wouldn't count him out yet.

Three posts in a row by Canucks fans in a Rangers thread.

We still hate you guys for 1994. This is our revenge! Fear us!

 

[GordonGecko]

Three posts in a row by Canucks fans in a Rangers thread.

We still hate you guys for 1994. This is our revenge! Fear us!

next question

 

[thepuckmonster]

next question

I lol'd.

 

[chosen]

now we are going to have the Clark apologists come in and lay the blame at Sathers feet.

watch it happen

Sather hired Clark. He is the sole problem. Again, Torts understood the limitations of his personnel. AV will also figure this out or will be fired quickly.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

I knew there were Canucks fans like you out there somewhere.

Your assessment while helpful is also very troubling considering our players collective IQ seems to be the same as the number of goals we've given up in the last two games.

Torts is similar in that he won't adjust his system to his personnel, he was still trying to play the gritty game that we had success with in '11-'12 last season when the players we had weren't suited for it. Had he adapted a little he might still be here, it was a big gripe around here. The funny thing is that he was right to an extent as this team seems devoid of talent. At least at this point, if they were playing up to their potential I think we'd be seeing some better results. But as constructed they don't have the talent to be an elite team.

Woah, woah, woah. *********. Torts system was "Safe is Death" when he came here. He did a complete 180 because of the personnel. And as for how our roster changed, it's ****ing obvious right now that Torts was still right about the way we needed to play when he left even thought that means you, some guy, was wrong.

 

[chosen]

My question is this... we have a defensive corps and a goalie that should be just about the envy of the league.

McDonagh-Girardi
Staal-Stralman
Del Zotto-Moore

Lundqvist

or however we align them, should be a great set of defensive players.

How come we can't run an effective defensive system without collapsing our forwards down to block every shot?

Don't other teams run effective defenses with lesser defenseman and still have offensive systems that can put points on the board?

I don't get it.

Defensemen is the strength of our roster. We shouldn't need a system that helps the defensemen out to win.

We should be able to win with an offensive system because the defensemen are good enough on their own.

McDonagh and Staal are great defensively. Girardi is good. The rest are average and none of them are offensively gifted.

The envy of the league this ain't. They are a good group but not more.

 

[RangerBoy]

The blueprint is in Detroit and Chicago. Scotty Bowman. Hardworking skill guys for the bottom six. They all skate well. They can make a play. Even Boston with Kelly,Campbell and Paille.

 

[chosen]

People here are ridiculous. Have they played like garbage? Yes.
However, they're playing in the west coast against top notch teams.

Either way, 4 games in the NHL is like less than one game in the NFL. It's like a team going 0-1 and people crying that the world is ending.

Losing can be excused. Being obliterated cannot be ignored.

 

[chosen]

People here are ridiculous. Have they played like garbage? Yes.
However, they're playing in the west coast against top notch teams.

Either way, 4 games in the NHL is like less than one game in the NFL. It's like a team going 0-1 and people crying that the world is ending.

Losing can be excused. Being obliterated cannot be ignored.

 

[RangerBoy]

Pierre Lebrun wrote about the Oilers slow start

Finally, let’s not discount there’s a new coach behind the bench. That takes adjustment for the players.

I am reminded of a comment Troy Brouwer of the Washington Capitals made to me in mid-March last season regarding the team’s second-half turnaround after struggling early on under rookie head coach Adam Oates.

"This team has played a certain way and had an idea about their identity for quite a few years now, and when it gets changed a little, it was tough to embrace that," Brouwer said. "So I think we had a bit of trust issues at the beginning of the year, whether or not the new system would be a good fit for the team, and within the team to make sure guys were doing their part. As the season went on, we embraced it a little bit more and a little bit more, annd then finally we had full trust in Adam's system and the guys carrying it out."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/27117/oily-start-whats-wrong-in-edmonton

 

[TankLarkin]

might as well bring up McIlrath. can't play worse than Girardi and Del Zotto.

 

[Gordon Bombay]

I'm gonna give everything some time here before I get crazy but some of the things AV was talking about after the game such as passing tape to tape, or neutral zone play got me thinking. This team was never good at those things, most of our passes were more like slap the puck around up the boards and the neutral zone consisted of dumping it in most of the time. They've needed work for quite some time, watching any other game the last 4 years you could see that despite the results the Rangers severely lacked in those areas.

I think what we're seeing is a combination of things. An insane road trip to start would be the lack of effort I think.

But the biggest issue I think is the guys are playing a fusion of the 2 systems. I don't think they've grasped the positioning yet, you can obviously see it in the defensive zone coverage. The passing positioning is off as well, you can see the dmen try the little back passes where a forward used to be on the board and he's not there anymore. It needs time and as RangerBoy's quote from Browuer says it takes trust in the system.

AV's system looks like it stresses quick passes and everything at a more intense pace, unlike the sit back approach we've had for 4 years. It's a learning curve here and we're seeing the absolute worst from it. I think we all know what's gonna happen if it's still like this in a month or two, but I'd be very surprised if that happened. The kinks will be worked out and order will be restored.