Shareefruck
Registered User
I think he's doing a pretty good job with what he's got, personally. The faults I can point out are not that much more egregious than the faults that Vigneault or Crawford had.
[Official] Fire/Tolerate Travis Green Thread
- Thread starter Grub
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
- Status
Son of Petter
Who wants to walk with Elias?
It's too bad that so many Canucks regulars are out of the lineup. A healthy lineup up front is pretty much the type of team Green wants. The D he probably wants an upgrade.
Billy Kvcmu
Registered User
Green has been very good
Except he doesn't like retribution so ppl are mad
Except he doesn't like retribution so ppl are mad
Bump - just for irony
Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,362
- 16,340
Chimpradamus
Registered User
The fact that he told Pettersson to play as a center gives a lot of leeway from me. Now, if that call was his or someone else he trusted, who knows? Call it whatever you want, but he was responsible for the order, under the gut feeling that Pettersson would thrive more as a center... and his responsibility was right... if he continues to play Pettersson with Boeser, he has a job for many years. You can call it unqualified, but putting Pettersson at center was a genius move.
The guy was just voted in as the NHL coach of the month. Good luck explaining why he should go, when he can take credit for creating a star and the team is 9-6-1 (sort of, I don't care about details). It has been considered a bottom team for the season that's injury riddled, that's an overachievement. Pettersson might be the biggest reason, but he's responsible for making it happen.
He might not be suitable in the long run, but you're not getting rid of him soon.
The guy was just voted in as the NHL coach of the month. Good luck explaining why he should go, when he can take credit for creating a star and the team is 9-6-1 (sort of, I don't care about details). It has been considered a bottom team for the season that's injury riddled, that's an overachievement. Pettersson might be the biggest reason, but he's responsible for making it happen.
He might not be suitable in the long run, but you're not getting rid of him soon.
Last edited:
Chimpradamus
Registered User
I could see the criticism towards his faults as a coach as well. That it took this long to even try Pettersson and Boeser together - to which an argument is lenient towards him, was setback by Pettersson's concussion - is somehwat troublesome, but at least he did it somewhat early. Trying Eriksson on the first line, he has to find a better role for Eriksson. He's still good around the net, but other than that, meh, he just looks so mellow. I don't know if it's age, or confidence, or both.
Look, I can confess I don't watch enough VAN games live, so I don't see all the details, I can mainly stick to highlights and digging through the web for a lot of information, but is Green really that awful at so many aspects of the game? I mean, sure, Pettersson has saved this team basically single handedly, but... I don't know, I remain neutral.
I can see a scenario where he has been really bad, but Pettersson saved him, sure. But he still put Pettersson at center.
Never forget that, even if you think he's useless. At least he has eyes for reading talent, sometimes. As for him being a not good enough coach, ok, I don't argue against that.Now, trying Pettersson and Boeser might be an argument for "even a blind hen will eventually find a needle in the haystack", which might very well be a small amount of credit for pairing those two, so that doesn't give him much credibility.
Last edited:
I wonder if some of the folks posting in this thread are actually fans of the Canucks or just internet trolls posting for the "lulz"
Smeagoal
Registered User
I seriously doubt some of the B column guys even watch anything but highlights and google for stats and spreadsheets.
I've been shaking my head at this thread for some time, but then I tend to think differently about coaches than many posters.
I don't assume, until the coach has shown otherwise, that I know better than the coach who should sit or who should play with whom.
I don't assume the coach is an idiot when he sits a young player, the team does well in the young player's absence and the player then gets back into the lineup and succeeds.
I assume that lineups are fluid and depend in part on many things that, not being around the team, I can't know all that well about.
I even figure that his job is to win and that injury callups are first and foremost called up to provide depth.
I think Virtanen is a better player because of the work Green did with him.
I think Hutton and Baertschi are better players because Green was hard on them and insisted they play as he wanted them to, even though at times worse players got into the lineup instead of them, sitting them in favour of lesser players to push them to player better than they were.
I've noticed that Green's teams in Utica often had horrible rosters and started the season accordingly and that later in the season, with injuries and callups hurting the roster, the team would figure it out and play the way Green wanted, making a run at or making the playoffs despite their weak rosters.
I don't think Green is perfect, but I think he's been underrated by Canucks fans.
The team does rate to drop back to reality at some stage this season, but this is a roster that most objective (ie non-Canuck) prognisticators predicted would among the worst teams in the league. They are overperforming these days.
Early in the season their success could be attributed largely to luck-they were winning but were negative in goals for vs against, in shots, shot attempts and XGF%. The last 5 games, though, they've outshot every team but Minnesota and have 9 out of 10 possible points
despite missing, for all or some of those games, their two top defencemen in Edler and Tanev, their two defensive zone centers in Sutter and Beagle and their top two scoring wingers in Boeser and Baertschi-as well as their backup goalie, replaced with someone that isn't getting into games so Markstrom is playing full time.
Are they lucky to have 9 out of 10 points? Yes,there's no doubt about it, but on the other hand they've played well enough to have a winning record in those 5 games.
Those that want the team to tank have abundant reason to want the coach fired. He's not helping.
I don't assume, until the coach has shown otherwise, that I know better than the coach who should sit or who should play with whom.
I don't assume the coach is an idiot when he sits a young player, the team does well in the young player's absence and the player then gets back into the lineup and succeeds.
I assume that lineups are fluid and depend in part on many things that, not being around the team, I can't know all that well about.
I even figure that his job is to win and that injury callups are first and foremost called up to provide depth.
I think Virtanen is a better player because of the work Green did with him.
I think Hutton and Baertschi are better players because Green was hard on them and insisted they play as he wanted them to, even though at times worse players got into the lineup instead of them, sitting them in favour of lesser players to push them to player better than they were.
I've noticed that Green's teams in Utica often had horrible rosters and started the season accordingly and that later in the season, with injuries and callups hurting the roster, the team would figure it out and play the way Green wanted, making a run at or making the playoffs despite their weak rosters.
I don't think Green is perfect, but I think he's been underrated by Canucks fans.
The team does rate to drop back to reality at some stage this season, but this is a roster that most objective (ie non-Canuck) prognisticators predicted would among the worst teams in the league. They are overperforming these days.
Early in the season their success could be attributed largely to luck-they were winning but were negative in goals for vs against, in shots, shot attempts and XGF%. The last 5 games, though, they've outshot every team but Minnesota and have 9 out of 10 possible points
despite missing, for all or some of those games, their two top defencemen in Edler and Tanev, their two defensive zone centers in Sutter and Beagle and their top two scoring wingers in Boeser and Baertschi-as well as their backup goalie, replaced with someone that isn't getting into games so Markstrom is playing full time.
Are they lucky to have 9 out of 10 points? Yes,there's no doubt about it, but on the other hand they've played well enough to have a winning record in those 5 games.
Those that want the team to tank have abundant reason to want the coach fired. He's not helping.
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
You were just waiting for this losing streak to pop did you?
He's not gonna get canned because of it.
Grumbler
Registered User
- Oct 25, 2012
- 3,113
- 877
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
I know. They acted like our team was playing well early when they got off to that hot start when anyone could tell how unsustainable it was.
Dont get it why they pester us like that. We have it hard enough already.
Didn’t have to wait very long did I? I know it was a matter of time. What we did in October was not sustainable, same story every year.
Poulliot in our first PP for more than 5+ games
I heard Quineville is available.
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
Didn’t have to wait very long did I? I know it was a matter of time. What we did in October was not sustainable, same story every year.
Poulliot in our first PP for more than 5+ games
I heard Quineville is available.
Team can't afford to take another coach.
Doubt the team can afford his services.
..and it's up to him if he wants to coach again, logistics/travel/family wise.
The Canucks can "afford" it unless Aquilini is now gun shy after signing Torts. I think if the opportunity is there, Aquilini will pony up the cash for basically the most decorated coach available.
In reality there are situations that are better fit for Quenneville.
A new GM will bring in a new coach..hopefully Q. Personally i dont think Quenville would take a job under Bennbrod.
Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 78,613
- 33,424
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
Honestly my biggest gripe with Green is player deployment, and a lot of that is solved by having a decent roster. AV had some absolute head scratchers but it's not like he was running with his BFF Glass on the first line.
I didn't like Green's treatment of Hutton, but if it was just an off-ice issue which we had no idea about at the time it's fine. Even if Hutton was a lazy fatty he was an effective player, at least more so than a lot of the other players on the roster, but giving him a boot in the ass is fine.
Pouliot getting top unit PP time is awful, but he's on his last legs in the NHL and you might as well drop him in the one situation he should thrive in. Juolevi isn't ready, sure we don't expect him to be a great two-way / defensive defenceman in the NHL but he has to at least be somewhat competent 5 on 5 and playing in the AHL is the best place to learn that.
If Pouliot was playing over others on a team that is actually looking to compete it would be inexcusable, but while it sucks for guys like Pettersson having to play with this schmuck, I think it's fine to give him some time to try to do something. Similarly to wanting prospects to get as many minutes as possible in the AHL, we may as well give Pouliot those minutes here up until the very last moment when we're forced to waive him. I think that moment will come soon as well as Green has shown to the world he's useless and will almost certainly clear waivers.
Gaunce not getting 4th line time ahead of some other losers on this team is pretty bad IMO, he's always been pretty slow at development but he's no liability defensively and I think he was somewhat unlucky last year. He set up his linemates for a few excellent chances off the rush that weren't converted. He should have had closer to 10 points IMO which would be around a 20 point pace which is fine for a very solid defensive player.
He's giving Goldobin and Virtanen the chance to actually play and develop as well rather than burying them on the 4th line while we have injuries to free up some space. I would prefer Horvat with Pettersson to see what they can do as we do not have any linemates for these players, but having Horvat and Pettersson does give some of those wingers a chance to find some chemistry and find their NHL game.
He also had the balls to sit Del Zotto and waive Gagner which is obviously a management action but it's an action done at the behest of the coach.
Gaudette should be in Utica developing, but maybe he's using the injuries as an opportunity to give him ice time before sending him down once players return. Gaudette has found himself on the PP a few times this year and there is zero chance Green isn't doing this to try to get him some points and develop his offensive game at the NHL level.
I'm really not sure if the lineup and deployment we complain about, and rightly so as they're the wrong decisions to win, aren't made with development in mind rather than winning. I am concerned about Gaudette if he isn't sent down, Gaunce not getting ice time, and the very real possibility that he thinks Gudbranson is good. These, aside from Gudbranson which is an unknown situation, are not a huge deal and IMO it's fine to see how it plays out. Remember that we're a developing team rather than a competing team and I believe Green is making decisions based on that reality. This is not Willie 2.0, this is dumping Torts for not winning when Torts is a coach that would probably have been extremely good for a rebuilding team to pick up Willie. Coaches also have an expiry date to some extent and I would rather get that "win now" coach when we're actually in a position to do so.
Green is fine until we have a better team to judge his deployment decisions.
Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,362
- 16,340
I think that Green is an excellent coach for where this team is at in its evolution...Good points about Goldoblin and Virtanen, a lot of other coaches would not have had the patience to deal with these players inconsistencies.
The bottom of our lineup isn't the greatest,so its a bit like shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic.
Willie D and Torts were brought in to 'salvage' a veteran group (I thought the players tuned out both of these coaches after a while)...Green seems to have the ear of the players,and gets the most out of the little that he's got.
Svencouver
Registered User
The biggest question mark with Green for me is his line shakeups. The team has incredibly suspect chemistry and it shows. Nobody really knows what to expect from their linemates on any given night, which means you get a lot of signals crossed and passes in skates. Hopefully this problem doesn't persist beyond either this season or when we get healthy.
- Status
