Speculation: Tocchet, do we really need him?

[sensodyne17]

I think you can [insert legend] as a HC and comments would be similar. Don't get me wrong though, Tocchet has certainly plied his trade.


Speaking of shots, at what point is the system or gameplanning to blame? DeBrusk is new but his shot rate this season is at a career low. Boeser is near career lows. Garland is at a career low. Suter is at a career low. Sherwood's shot rate was higher last season. Heinan's shot rate hasn't been this low since his time in Anaheim and his shot rate is higher since he got to Pittsburgh. Meanwhile, Chytil's shot rate is higher than his shot rate in NY.

We're all frustrated from the over-passing, reluctance to shoot, low % pass plays, dump and chase, not making plays etc.... including Tocchet. How many times has he complained to the media about these things? You can attribute the shot rate drop-off due to a various things. Having your 1C and best playmaker stink the whole year and go on leave of absence for a month and then ultimately is traded for some middling pieces is certainly going to hurt your offense. Having your other 1C completely lose his game and play like a shell of himself is also certainly going to hurt your offense. Losing your top two puck moving dman for extended period of times and/or playing hurt is certainly going to hurt your offense.

Last year was an anomaly in the sense everything went right and there were no material injuries. This year has been an absolute gongshow. Is this a system thing or has the team has completely imploded and we have to make due of what we can? I'm leaning on the accumulation of all the unlucky things that have happened over the course of the season that has completely sucked the life out the team.

Despite this... Tocch has us in a playoff spot. Firing him or letting him go just reeks of desperation and recency bias. The fact is this core does not deserve anymore coaches. Tocch has showed us his systems can succeed by taking what many thought to be a mid team, to a Game 7 Semi-Finals against Edmonton.

By all accounts, I've never heard anyone say anything bad about Tocchet and players seem to love to play for him. He's also a Stanley Cup champion and well respected given his achievements on the ice. He's sensible, stands up for his players, and embodies everything you want in a coach when it comes to leadership and accountability.

Yes, does he juggle his lines too much? Perhaps. Does his powerplay units make no sense sometimes? Perhaps. But generally, Tocchet is absolutely the right person for the job and there are few better. He's completely fixed the PK units, the overall structure, and has us competitive in every game against almost any opponent (other than a few bad apples). It's not pretty to the eyes but the players seem to be playing with synergy and know exactly what roles/spots they need to be in. The easy way to not over-think this is, the Canucks have probably the worst luck out of any team in the league when it comes to unfortunate events (injuries, drama, etc.) and are still in a playoff spot. Tocchet is not even in the top 20 list of problems right now.

 

[racerjoe]

The problem is there is levels... is tocchett a bad coach no. Is he a good coach yes. Does he have faults also yes.

As I said earlier he doesn't seem to be able to adjust and his system is not good at creating offense. We need to find him coaches to put on the team to fill those aspects.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

No, he said, quote, "you (and others) want us to lose 5-3".

Yeah, you're misquoting him. I don't know because you weren't reading his full posts or if you're trolling, but here's the full line:

"Like I said - you (and others) want us to lose 5-3 instead of 2-1?"

Here is what I said:

"He offered up a hypothetical on how playing more run and gun would lead to more 5-3 games than 2-1 games and then asked a question using similar verbiage."

That is a direct quote.

Getting offended on someone else's behalf that I interpreted someone's post as literally written is really something man.

Is this where I get to play your game and ask you to show me where I said I was offended?

I just said something because it seemed like you misread what was written, something which seems to be a trend given that I also asked you a question so that you could explain where this came from and instead accused me of 'being offended.'

 

[VanillaCoke]

Now we do know, the answer is clearly yes we do, give him the extension.

 

[bossram]

Yeah, you're misquoting him. I don't know because you weren't reading his full posts or if you're trolling, but here's the full line:

"Like I said - you (and others) want us to lose 5-3 instead of 2-1?"

Here is what I said:

"He offered up a hypothetical on how playing more run and gun would lead to more 5-3 games than 2-1 games and then asked a question using similar verbiage."



Is this where I get to play your game and ask you to show me where I said I was offended?

I just said something because it seemed like you misread what was written, something which seems to be a trend given that I also asked you a question so that you could explain where this came from and instead accused me of 'being offended.'

No. I'm not misquoting him. What you've copied is what I said he posted, I just cut off the "Like I said" portion. Unless you think that alters the meaning significantly.

No, you did not say you are offended. But you are clearly offended on his behalf. Why else are you jumping in? Just being a good citizen?

Apparently I've made an egregious mistake by copying and pasting someone else's own words. I asked the other poster very simple questions about his own argument and to prove I've said certain things, and he was unable to answer those questions.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Yes, I watch the games. Anyone can see this team is not creating offense, by design.
...
Anyone with eyes can see that the team does not even attempt to do anything interesting offensively. This is by design. The stats corroborate this.

Whether you like Tocchet or not, the above is plain as day: We should all be able to agree on this point.

VAN's offense is safe, predictable and done in a way so as to prevent chances against. It's why VAN is the lowest event team in the league.

 

[ManVanFan]

Whether you like Tocchet or not, the above is plain as day: We should all be able to agree on this point.

VAN's offense is safe, predictable and done in a way so as to prevent chances against. It's why VAN is the lowest event team in the league.

Only issue with the low event hockey is you have to dominate it not be dominated like the Canucks are 2 out of every 3 games.

 

[bossram]

Whether you like Tocchet or not, the above is plain as day: We should all be able to agree on this point.

VAN's offense is safe, predictable and done in a way so as to prevent chances against. It's why VAN is the lowest event team in the league.

Yes. They don't attempt anything offensively. Stats, eye test, everything shows this. They don't create anything on the rush. Very few cross-ice chances with movement. Very few shots/chances. It is by design. The only player who tries to carry it in is a new guy, Chytil.

Is playing the lowest-event style in the league the right strategy? Is that optimal for the team? Those are different questions. And open to debate.

But it is objectively true that the lack of chances and risk-taking is by design. This is how Tocc wants the offense to operate.

 

[F A N]

We're all frustrated from the over-passing, reluctance to shoot, low % pass plays, dump and chase, not making plays etc.... including Tocchet. How many times has he complained to the media about these things?

A coach complaining means nothing though. Part of the job is to get the right messaging to the players. Again, our top forwards' shot rates aside from Chytil are at or near their career lows.

You can attribute the shot rate drop-off due to a various things. Having your 1C and best playmaker stink the whole year and go on leave of absence for a month and then ultimately is traded for some middling pieces is certainly going to hurt your offense. Having your other 1C completely lose his game and play like a shell of himself is also certainly going to hurt your offense. Losing your top two puck moving dman for extended period of times and/or playing hurt is certainly going to hurt your offense.

Sure, but again, our top forwards' shot rates aside from Chytil are at or near their career lows. Without doing a deep dive, are the aforementioned players playing on the worst team and with the worst linemates in their careers to explain the at or near career lows?

Despite this... Tocch has us in a playoff spot. Firing him or letting him go just reeks of desperation and recency bias. The fact is this core does not deserve anymore coaches. Tocch has showed us his systems can succeed by taking what many thought to be a mid team, to a Game 7 Semi-Finals against Edmonton.

It doesn't necessarily have to be the way you're describing here. Rutherford didn't want to bring Boudreau back despite Bruce's success because he didn't like the way the team played under Boudreau. Maybe management thinks the team underachieved under Tocchet this season? We shall see.

By all accounts, I've never heard anyone say anything bad about Tocchet and players seem to love to play for him. He's also a Stanley Cup champion and well respected given his achievements on the ice. He's sensible, stands up for his players, and embodies everything you want in a coach when it comes to leadership and accountability.

You can say that about many coaches. I don't think Tocchet is lovable players coach that everyone likes though. As for standing up for his players, he didn't with Petey.

Yes, does he juggle his lines too much? Perhaps. Does his powerplay units make no sense sometimes? Perhaps. But generally, Tocchet is absolutely the right person for the job and there are few better. He's completely fixed the PK units, the overall structure, and has us competitive in every game against almost any opponent (other than a few bad apples). It's not pretty to the eyes but the players seem to be playing with synergy and know exactly what roles/spots they need to be in. The easy way to not over-think this is, the Canucks have probably the worst luck out of any team in the league when it comes to unfortunate events (injuries, drama, etc.) and are still in a playoff spot. Tocchet is not even in the top 20 list of problems right now.

I don't disagree with most of the points you made here. I don't think Tocchet has done a bad job and given the injuries and off ice circumstances we are currently in a wild card spot. I won't say that he's had us competitive every game against almost every opponent.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

No. I'm not misquoting him. What you've copied is what I said he posted, I just cut off the "Like I said" portion. Unless you think that alters the meaning significantly.

You also cut off the end part that had a question mark. Do you know what a question mark is?

No, you did not say you are offended. But you are clearly offended on his behalf.

I'm not, and I tire of the perpetual state of 'being offended' that the Internet has devolved into.

Why else are you jumping in? Just being a good citizen?

Did you read the post? Because you wouldn't be asking this question if you had.

Apparently I've made an egregious mistake by copying and pasting someone else's own words.

Oh, get off the cross, we can use the wood. It's a simple misreading of what someone was saying. I've done it and just go 'my bad.' No need for histrionics and I really don't understand your hostile mood, lol.

 

[bossram]

You also cut off the end part that had a question mark. Do you know what a question mark is?



I'm not, and I tire of the perpetual state of 'being offended' that the Internet has devolved into.


Did you read the post? Because you wouldn't be asking this question if you had.



Oh, get off the cross, we can use the wood. It's a simple misreading of what someone was saying. I've done it and just go 'my bad.' No need for histrionics and I really don't understand your hostile mood, lol.

Hostile because you've decided to jump in for no reason, other than to chastise me for responding to and quoting another poster exactly as written. If you are apparently not offended, leave it alone. Talking about histrionics, you're making a crucifixion reference here, lol.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Hostile because you've decided to jump in for no reason,

Public discussion forum. If you don't like people saying something, take it to PMs or don't post.

other than to chastise me for responding to and quoting another poster exactly as written.

Okay, this is fruitless given this is like the fourth time you've just sidestepped not quoting the entire sentence. It's a minor ass thing. Relax.

If you are apparently not offended, leave it alone. Talking about histrionics, you're making a crucifixion reference here, lol.

You get I was making a funny remark characterizing your language/demeanor, yeah?

Anyway, get whatever remarks you want in. You're either trolling or have Zoomer-level reading comprehension skills and it's not really worth going around in circles. Namaste.

 

[VanJack]

Last year Miller had 100 points. This year he's gone. EP40 had close 100 points. This year he'll be lucky to get half that many.

Demko was a Vezina finalist last year. This year, he's barely played a month. HIoglander had 24 goals last year. This year he has five. Boeser had 40 goals last year. So far this year, he has 18. Soucy had a career year on the back-end. This year, he's been just plain bad. And from last year's team entering the playoffs, Cole, Lindholm and Zadorov are all gone.

The only guys on pace to match last year's results are Suter and Hughes--and even he missed the last six games.

So Tocchet didn't suddenly forget how to coach. But as the old saying goes: "You can't make chicken salad out of chicken feathers." This is really all on the front office.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

I am definitely growing increasingly frustrated with Tocchet’s post game interviews being some variation of “we didn’t play to our identity” or “we didn’t execute our plan” or “we just stopped playing our way”. At some point when those comments start to pile up, you start looking at the coaching staff and wondering if they’ve lost the room.

I’m not saying this team is good enough to have success in some sort of free wheeling offensive system. But I’m beginning to wonder if the players are finding themselves frustrated by the way they’re being asked to play.

(I don’t know the answers to any of that. Just thinking out loud)

 

[theguardianII]

I am definitely growing increasingly frustrated with Tocchet’s post game interviews being some variation of “we didn’t play to our identity” or “we didn’t execute our plan” or “we just stopped playing our way”. At some point when those comments start to pile up, you start looking at the coaching staff and wondering if they’ve lost the room.

I’m not saying this team is good enough to have success in some sort of free wheeling offensive system. But I’m beginning to wonder if the players are finding themselves frustrated by the way they’re being asked to play.

(I don’t know the answers to any of that. Just thinking out loud)

IMO Tocchet was never what he thought he was, "he is a legend in his own mind"
Tocchet's coaching record reflects his success, one winning season last year. 9 years of coaching.
He was riding the coat tails of winning teams as an 2nd or 3rd assistant.

Last year was a fluke and the results of the last of work Rutherford before handing the reigns totally to Allvin. That team still had his fingerprints all over it.
Allvin took over total control in late 2023.
This team was formed with Allvin's and Tocchet's vision at the end of 2024 season and in the summer.

Has anyone noticed that the good FAs have avoided Vancouver now.

 

[VanJack]

IMO Tocchet was never what he thought he was, "he is a legend in his own mind"
Tocchet's coaching record reflects his success, one winning season last year. 9 years of coaching.
He was riding the coat tails of winning teams as an 2nd or 3rd assistant.

Last year was a fluke and the results of the last of work Rutherford before handing the reigns totally to Allvin. That team still had his fingerprints all over it.
Allvin took over total control in late 2023.
This team was formed with his vision at the end of 2024 season and in the summer.

Has anyone noticed that the good FAs have avoided Vancouver now.

So UFA's are avoiding Vancouver because of Tocchet? Seriously? Last off season, the Canucks brought in seven , count 'em seven UFA's.

Sherwood, Heinen, Desharnais, Forbort, Lankinen, Sprong and Debrusk were all signed. And if you include Myers as an impending UFA, that makes eight. Not really Tocchet's fault that three of them--Heinen, Desharnais and Sprong didn't work out. But this season, they did trade for Marcus Pettersson and O'Connor, who were both impending UFA's, and re-signed them both.

And reportedly they made serious efforts to re-sign both Lindholm and Zadorov at the end of last season--and they definitely 'listened' But they eventually left for Boston not because of Tochett, but for more money and term than the Canucks could live with.

And it wouldn't shock me if the Canucks are once again active in the off-season, bringing in another two or three UFA's.

So I think your theory needs a bit of a re-think.

 

[sensodyne17]

Last year Miller had 100 points. This year he's gone. EP40 had close 100 points. This year he'll be lucky to get half that many.

Demko was a Vezina finalist last year. This year, he's barely played a month. HIoglander had 24 goals last year. This year he has five. Boeser had 40 goals last year. So far this year, he has 18. Soucy had a career year on the back-end. This year, he's been just plain bad. And from last year's team entering the playoffs, Cole, Lindholm and Zadorov are all gone.

The only guys on pace to match last year's results are Suter and Hughes--and even he missed the last six games.

So Tocchet didn't suddenly forget how to coach. But as the old saying goes: "You can't make chicken salad out of chicken feathers." This is really all on the front office.

Mostly agreed but this is definitely not all on the front office. Not sure how they could anticipate Demko, Soucy and Petey being useless all year, Miller doing whatever he did to go on a leave of absence, Joshua getting cancer, most of our top guys getting hurt and never having a healthy lineup. I don't know how any management team could forecast all these events happening together simultaneously in a short amount of time. Management has navigated a series of tough moves and the team is still in a playoff spot despite the recent poor play.

To me this year is 60% on players/injuries, 30% on management and 10% on coaching. Hence why Tocchet is the least of our problems.

Petey is a ghost
Hoglander (who's been better) but also been mostly a ghost
Soucy fell off the map, been mostly unplayable this year
Miller imploded
Demko can't stay healthy
Hughes is playing injured and in and out of the lineup
Hronek missing a ton of time due to injuries

 

[bossram]

Public discussion forum. If you don't like people saying something, take it to PMs or don't post.



Okay, this is fruitless given this is like the fourth time you've just sidestepped not quoting the entire sentence. It's a minor ass thing. Relax.


You get I was making a funny remark characterizing your language/demeanor, yeah?

Anyway, get whatever remarks you want in. You're either trolling or have Zoomer-level reading comprehension skills and it's not really worth going around in circles. Namaste.

?

 

[ManVanFan]

Mostly agreed but this is definitely not all on the front office. Not sure how they could anticipate Demko, Soucy and Petey being useless all year, Miller doing whatever he did to go on a leave of absence, Joshua getting cancer, most of our top guys getting hurt and never having a healthy lineup. I don't know how any management team could forecast all these events happening together simultaneously in a short amount of time. Management has navigated a series of tough moves and the team is still in a playoff spot despite the recent poor play.

To me this year is 60% on players/injuries, 30% on management and 10% on coaching. Hence why Tocchet is the least of our problems.

Petey is a ghost
Hoglander (who's been better) but also been mostly a ghost
Soucy fell off the map, been mostly unplayable this year
Miller imploded
Demko can't stay healthy
Hughes is playing injured and in and out of the lineup
Hronek missing a ton of time due to injuries

Why is it coaches always take the fall though?

 

[sensodyne17]

Why is it coaches always take the fall though?

Easier to turnover a coach then the entire roster... also the new coach bump. Coaches can't coach forever either as the message gets stale and players tune them out.

I'm curious to know if the players are tuning him out or just failing to execute. If they are just failing to execute, then it's more of a pointer than we need better players.

If he lost the locker room then there's really no choice but to go with a new coach. But...I think the roster needs major surgery though so I think it would make more sense to do that and keep Tocchet in the interim.

Getting a 4th coach in 4/5 years is just awful for the org... absolutely zero continuity. Imagine your manager/boss is switching once a year and each one wants to implement different processes and systems - no employee would want to stay in that environment.

Add into the fact that Hughes absolutely loves Tocchet... if the plan is to keep Hughes all costs, why would we let go of a coach that he loves and he's flourished under?

Even if we let Tocchet go... who's a good replacement? I think Tocchet has built enough goodwill with his success last year to stay for another

 

[ManVanFan]

Easier to turnover a coach then the entire roster... also the new coach bump. Coaches can't coach forever either as the message gets stale and players tune them out.

I'm curious to know if the players are tuning him out or just failing to execute. If they are just failing to execute, then it's more of a pointer than we need better players.

If he lost the locker room then there's really no choice but to go with a new coach. But...I think the roster needs major surgery though so I think it would make more sense to do that and keep Tocchet in the interim.

Getting a 4th coach in 4/5 years is just awful for the org... absolutely zero continuity. Imagine your manager/boss is switching once a year and each one wants to implement different processes and systems - no employee would want to stay in that environment.

Add into the fact that Hughes absolutely loves Tocchet... if the plan is to keep Hughes all costs, why would we let go of a coach that he loves and he's flourished under?

Even if we let Tocchet go... who's a good replacement? I think Tocchet has built enough goodwill with his success last year to stay for another

I think Quinn is a great kid.

“He brings a lot of energy,” Hughes, set to turn 23 next month, said at the recent NHL/NHLPA player media tour.

“You want to run through a brick wall for him.”

Hughes on Bruce Boudreau.

IF you ask Arizona fans, they would say this is Tocchet hockey.

 

[VanJack]

NHL coaches usually mold their systems based on the players they have available to them. And Tocchet is no different.

Nobody was complaining about a lack of offense last year, when the Canucks had two, 100-point centers and a 90-point Norris Trophy winner on the blueline.

This year, because of injuries and absences, or a dramatic fall-off in performance, the Canucks have no real choice than to try and lock it down. They simply don't have the horses in their lineup to play any other way.

I get the fact that it's a bit unfair to heap this all on the front-office. A lot of unforeseen crap has happened. But they did bring in seven UFA's in the off-season, which is a pretty dramatic turnover for a team coming off a Division Title.

 

[theguardianII]

So UFA's are avoiding Vancouver because of Tocchet? Seriously? Last off season, the Canucks brought in seven , count 'em seven UFA's.

Sherwood, Heinen, Desharnais, Forbort, Lankinen, Sprong and Debrusk were all signed. And if you include Myers as an impending UFA, that makes eight. Not really Tocchet's fault that three of them--Heinen, Desharnais and Sprong didn't work out. But this season, they did trade for Marcus Pettersson and O'Connor, who were both impending UFA's, and re-signed them both.

And reportedly they made serious efforts to re-sign both Lindholm and Zadorov at the end of last season--and they definitely 'listened' But they eventually left for Boston not because of Tochett, but for more money and term than the Canucks could live with.

And it wouldn't shock me if the Canucks are once again active in the off-season, bringing in another two or three UFA's.

So I think your theory needs a bit of a re-think.

Geez, look at those players. Sherwood was a part time player making league minimum, Deharnais was making league minimum and a part time player, Forbort was the #8 defenceman on Boston, Sprong didn't have a contract at all and is now out of the league, Lankinen was a very late signing after all the other teams didn't bother, he took almost the league minimum, DeBrusk, really wanted out of Boston for a few years now the chat and been well known and public but a legit signing and he has 35 pts in 59 games, Hienen has been traded away.

But Guentzel, Zadorov, Lindholm and other top FAs didn't sign here. DeBrusk is a borderline top six complimentary guy. Lindholm would not sign after the season for months, personally I wasn't unhappy about that due to his age but he was a desired FA by most teams in the league.

The game is not just about signing FA players or players in their last year of the contracts. They have to fit. O'Connor is way too soon to evaluate.

So this team has a 11.6 mil guy solidified in a top center role and after that, DeBrusk. Even if Boeser is used as an own rental what is there ot entice a good FA and which one? Not all are just out there for the money Marner? Rantenen? Even if both signed here that isn't enough. The team would be more than capped out with no top six depth.