Tocchet Do We Really Need Him

[VanJack]

It would be a bit much, even for the Canucks, if Tocchet was sacked. It does happen--that a guy goes from winning the Jack Adams award to the unemployment line in a single season. But not a 'good look' if it happens.

Based on last season's breakthrough alone, he definitely should earn another deal in Vancouver. I cut him some slack on this season--where almost everything that could go wrong, has gone wrong.

Of course there's also a chance Tocchet simply 'chucks it' in Vancouver--and is hired to coach another NHL team as a coaching UFA. Certainly he'd be in demand in seven or eight current NHL markets.

 

[Bgav]

Where did EF say this?

 

[Coffee]

Where did EF say this?

96.9 Jack FM

 

[Joe Rogan]

If this isn't indicative of a systems issue, I don't know what is. Last year was a result of PDO. Something has to give

 

[Coffee]

View attachment 991965If this isn't indicative of a systems issue, I don't know what is. Last year was a result of PDO. Something has to give

Why don’t you ever bring any NHL players to your podcasts

 

[Moobles]

Tocchet's an excellent player development coach, and having him, Foote, Gonchar, etc. helped draw in our FAs last summer. He also delegates, which is a breath of fresh air in a league that still has a lot of hard asses. Tactically, I think Tocchet's implementation of the Torterella/Sullivan forecheck has the potential to be very entertaining, and I liked what Tocchet said this summer of generating more things on the rush and utilizing the team's speed more. I wish we got to see that.

This defensive pivot is deliberate, it basically shows a lack of faith in the team's ability to get things done. Speaks more to management and the players themselves I think. I do find several of Tocchet's tactical hang ups frustrating. Our dump and chase is abysmal—if players can't run it, I dunno, build the strategy to the team… don't force the team to be something it's not. I don't know if it's him or Foote who want d-man to be same hand/same side, but the amount of times I've seen Forbert or Juulsen bauble a ring-around-the-boards just invalidates the whole purpose of asking for that… just take the best d-man, side be damned. His time out usage is also baffling.

But despite all of that it's crazy to put 10 years worth of cultural, managerial, draft, and personnel issues on the guy. Personnel issues and injuries have sunk this season more than on-ice tactics. I think he's earned at least another year, so I'm not pitchforks up if they renew him, but if he goes you know it is what it is.

 

[kanucks25]

View attachment 991965If this isn't indicative of a systems issue, I don't know what is. Last year was a result of PDO. Something has to give

So last year was PDO.

This year they are last in the league in PDO since Christmas (about half of the season so far) and 22nd overall.

So does PDO only work one way or what?

 

[VanJack]

Count me as a guy who thought there was basically no way Tocchet wouldn't be behind the Canuck bench for next season. But now I'm not so sure.

I see Satiar Shaw on the post-game show is reducing the odds of Tocchet returning to 49 percent.....obviously less than 50/50.

And as this season limps to a painful conclusion, it seems to me that there's more and more of a possibility that there's a coaching change in Vancouver.

It probably isn't Tocchet's fault of course. But the GM can't fire himself--even if he is culpable.

It's been long reported that every NHL GM is given the latitude to make at least two coaching changes. Obviously Allvin didn't hire Boudreau, so if Tocchet goes then that's his first sacking.

So he'd better make sure he gets the second one right--for the sake of self-preservation.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

So last year was PDO.

This year they are last in the league in PDO since Christmas (about half of the season so far) and 22nd overall.

So does PDO only work one way or what?

It works both ways.

But Im so glad we are finally accepting last year as a PDO anomaly.

 

[Frostage]

Thought he got out coached in the playoffs last year

 

[racerjoe]

PDO doesn't just measure luck...

It also measures how good or bad a team is in general. A good team will have a higher shooting percentage as it most likely has more stars that convert at a higher clip. A good goalie putting up good numbers. Then the reverse for bad teams.

We have been closer to the bad team side, for many reasons, Petersson being bad, Hughes being out, bad team vibes, and yes coaching.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

The talent window for PDO is far smaller than the luck window. Like yes, the Canucks are probably a true-talent 98% PDO team. But they've been at 96% since Jan 31st, and 95% over the last week. They're not that bad.

 

[racerjoe]

The talent window for PDO is far smaller than the luck window. Like yes, the Canucks are probably a true-talent 98% PDO team. But they've been at 96% since Jan 31st, and 95% over the last week. They're not that bad.

True... but it is not designed to be accurate in the small sample size at all.

 

[pitseleh]

The talent window for PDO is far smaller than the luck window. Like yes, the Canucks are probably a true-talent 98% PDO team. But they've been at 96% since Jan 31st, and 95% over the last week. They're not that bad.

Agreed, though a middle of the pack possession team that is a true talent 98% PDO team is a bubble playoff team at best. Long way to go still, especially when last year’s success was based on being a true talent 102 PDO team.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

True... but it is not designed to be accurate in the small sample size at all.

It's not predictive, but it in a small sample size it's absolutely descriptive of luck.

 

[calnuck]

To me it seems like this team and Tocchet are at the 2007 season stage. Can management acquire players to take the team to the next level? And can Tocchet follow in AV’s footsteps and adapt his systems/ mentality to the talent he has? Currently, my opinion is no but a lot of us felt the same way about AV.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

PDO doesn't just measure luck...

It also measures how good or bad a team is in general. A good team will have a higher shooting percentage as it most likely has more stars that convert at a higher clip. A good goalie putting up good numbers. Then the reverse for bad teams.

We have been closer to the bad team side, for many reasons, Petersson being bad, Hughes being out, bad team vibes, and yes coaching.

In the end it kinda just does measure luck tho.

 

[VanJack]

According to Frank Seravalli, at least six or seven NHL teams with impending coaching vacancies, are waiting to see what the Canucks do with Rick Tocchet.

So I'm not surprised that Tocchet has stated that he isn't interested about talking about a contract extension until the season is over. And there's distinct possibility that it is the coach who might want to leave as the equivalent of a 'UFA'.

Canucks ownership is pretty parsimonious when it comes to paying for head coaches. And some Sunbelt team in a low-tax jurisdiction could throw huge dollars his way

Tocchet is now 60. Who could blame him for wanting to hit a financial home run in what might be his final coaching gig in the NHL?

 

[Quinton Byfield]

To me it seems like this team and Tocchet are at the 2007 season stage. Can management acquire players to take the team to the next level? And can Tocchet follow in AV’s footsteps and adapt his systems/ mentality to the talent he has? Currently, my opinion is no but a lot of us felt the same way about AV.

Vigneault is only 3 years older than Tocchet. In NY, the talk around Vigneault was that he was coaching an outdated system in an increasingly modern NHL. And that was closer to a decade ago. in 2008, AV was 47.

There's nothing to suggest in Tocchet's history and current eye test that suggest he knows how to coach a modern NHL system. Lets not forget all those sub-20 shot games in last year's playoffs. Or how we were 2 shots off from tying the record for lowest shot in a playoff game with 12. Against a piece of shit lottery team in Nashville. Getting outcoached in both rounds.

Tocchet is actually the 2nd oldest coach to achieve his first playoff series victory of all time, last year, at 60. The oldest 1st time Cup winning coach is only 58.

My suggestion would be to not allow a great coaching candidate pass us by while we struggle with optics and sunk cost. Bednar was 43 when he became coach for the Avs. Carbery for the Caps, 42. Lets find the coach that can come to define an organization for the next decade.

 

[calnuck]

Vigneault is only 3 years older than Tocchet. In NY, the talk around Vigneault was that he was coaching an outdated system in an increasingly modern NHL. And that was closer to a decade ago. in 2008, AV was 47.

There's nothing to suggest in Tocchet's history and current eye test that suggest he knows how to coach a modern NHL system. Lets not forget all those sub-20 shot games in last year's playoffs. Or how we were 2 shots off from tying the record for lowest shot in a playoff game with 12. Against a piece of shit lottery team in Nashville. Getting outcoached in both rounds.

Tocchet is actually the 2nd oldest coach to achieve his first playoff series victory of all time, last year, at 60. The oldest 1st time Cup winning coach is only 58.

My suggestion would be to not allow a great coaching candidate pass us by while we struggle with optics and sunk cost. Bednar was 43 when he became coach for the Avs. Carbery for the Caps, 42. Lets find the coach that can come to define an organization for the next decade.

I 100% agree

 

[VanJack]

With the Canucks poised to miss the post-season, and Tocchet not signed for next season, it seems to me more likely that either he will decide to move or the Canucks will be moving on from him, this off-season.

So a real possibility the Canucks will debuting a new team with a new coach next September.

 

[F A N]

According to Frank Seravalli, at least six or seven NHL teams with impending coaching vacancies, are waiting to see what the Canucks do with Rick Tocchet.

So I'm not surprised that Tocchet has stated that he isn't interested about talking about a contract extension until the season is over. And there's distinct possibility that it is the coach who might want to leave as the equivalent of a 'UFA'.

Canucks ownership is pretty parsimonious when it comes to paying for head coaches. And some Sunbelt team in a low-tax jurisdiction could throw huge dollars his way

Tocchet is now 60. Who could blame him for wanting to hit a financial home run in what might be his final coaching gig in the NHL?

Well if a deal wasn't done after the season the Canucks had last season then I think that both sides tabled the discussions to the end of the season with some sort of understanding. Keep in mind that management got extensions over the summer. Normally Tocchet could have expected a 2 year extension over the summer (with perhaps a deal where the last year was replaced so he gets a brand new 3 year deal) but that wasn't done so I think at minimum Tocchet either gets a 3 year deal or he walks but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a 4 year deal or he walks.

Our ownership hasn't employed the highest paid coach but I'm not aware of money being an issue with a head coaching hire.

Vigneault is only 3 years older than Tocchet. In NY, the talk around Vigneault was that he was coaching an outdated system in an increasingly modern NHL. And that was closer to a decade ago. in 2008, AV was 47.

There's nothing to suggest in Tocchet's history and current eye test that suggest he knows how to coach a modern NHL system. Lets not forget all those sub-20 shot games in last year's playoffs. Or how we were 2 shots off from tying the record for lowest shot in a playoff game with 12. Against a piece of shit lottery team in Nashville. Getting outcoached in both rounds.

Tocchet is actually the 2nd oldest coach to achieve his first playoff series victory of all time, last year, at 60. The oldest 1st time Cup winning coach is only 58.

My suggestion would be to not allow a great coaching candidate pass us by while we struggle with optics and sunk cost. Bednar was 43 when he became coach for the Avs. Carbery for the Caps, 42. Lets find the coach that can come to define an organization for the next decade.

I don't think a coach being older necessarily means that he is incapable of coaching a system suitable for today's NHL. I also question whether a more modern system is necessarily better. For example, Patrick Roy is older than Paul Maurice and I think most fans would consider Roy's system to be more "modern." Both systems do require the team to have the players to play the system to be effective. Coaching involves more than just systems. Player deployment, effective communications with players, and ability to adapt our important too. I don't think a coach is incapable of learning new things and making adjustments just because they are closer to 60 than 50. I also don't see an issue with the way Tocchet has communicated with his players.

But if you are to compare AV with Tocchet, AV started coaching in 1986. Tocchet started in 2002. Sullivan is an old school coach himself but Tocchet was last an assistant under him when they won two Cups. Plus, when AV was here, we often complained about AV being outcoached in the playoffs. Rangers' complaints are nothing new to us Canucks fans.

 

[VanJack]

I remember wondering a couple of seasons ago, whether Tocchet's coaching style might have a 'shelf life'. It was all 'wine and roses' in the first couple of seasons.

But in the back of your mind, you always wondered if the sheer effort and energy required to play 'Tocchet hockey' was sustainable over the long term. And I think we're getting our answer this year.

The 'canary in the mine' is the Canuck shot totals. Night after night, they're recording periods of five or fewer shots on goal. And they're consistently losing the zone-possession battle. When teams are spending far more time in your zone, than you are in theirs--it's only a matter of time until bad things happen.

Obviously I have no clue whether or not Tocchet and the Canucks are headed for a divorce. But as other posters have pointed out--it might be time.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I remember wondering a couple of seasons ago, whether Tocchet's coaching style might have a 'shelf life'. It was all 'wine and roses' in the first couple of seasons.

But in the back of your mind, you always wondered if the sheer effort and energy required to play 'Tocchet hockey' was sustainable over the long term. And I think we're getting our answer this year.

The 'canary in the mine' is the Canuck shot totals. Night after night, they're recording periods of five or fewer shots on goal. And they're consistently losing the zone-possession battle. When teams are spending far more time in your zone, than you are in theirs--it's only a matter of time until bad things happen.

Obviously I have no clue whether or not Tocchet and the Canucks are headed for a divorce. But as other posters have pointed out--it might be time.

All coaches have a shelf life. The Coopers of Tampa are a rare breed.

I really hope they can find a way to make it work with Toc. This is an above average coaching staff. Something we have not had since AV.

 

[strattonius]

Everything has gone wrong this year and moving on from Tocchet feels premature. Unless they have a replacement that is available that they've been looking in to, I just dont see the justification for laying Tocchet off.

If at the beginning of the season you said JT Miller would be traded, Pettersson was a 60 pt player, Boeser and Hughes with injuries keeping them out for a bit and Demko would play 5 games, you would say we were a lottery team.