Tortorella is just a passionate guy. Is a nice enough guy away from the rink, but he is really emotionally vested in every game and the team he's coaching. He wears that on his sleeve. I'm happy he ran the Canucks into the ground, but it is sad to see a guy with passion like that fall so hard so fast.
'What Went Wrong in Vancouver,' Dreger states that there was no reduction clause in Tort's contract and that the Canucks have to pay him his full $8M.
Torts just made $10M for running the Vancouver Canucks into the ground.
This changes my view of the Torts situation. I now see him as a specialized saboteur tasked to carry out the wishes of the international hockey community - Infiltrate the Canucks organization, gain there trust and then destroy them from within. Thereby knocking the entitled and universally hated Canucks organization and fan base down to the appropriate, laughing stock, level of which they deserve to be.
Kind of reminds me of Brendan Gleesons character in The Guard...Idiot or Genius?
Spoiler!
__________________
All hockey players are bilingual. They know English and profanity - Gordie Howe
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TurdFerguson For This Useful Post:
Who knows if he really supports the 'core' but he's stuck with most of them so he's got to talk them up in public. The team is set-up to fail by his predecessors with all the NTC/NMC and the Sedins declining.
He's at least not pulling a MacTavish and talking about BOLD moves and making ridiculous promises.
Tortorella is just a passionate guy. Is a nice enough guy away from the rink, but he is really emotionally vested in every game and the team he's coaching. He wears that on his sleeve. I'm happy he ran the Canucks into the ground, but it is sad to see a guy with passion like that fall so hard so fast.
He was a perfect fit for the Gillis led Canucks. The whole organization spent so much time worrying about being outmatched physically and Torts fit that mold as a wannabe tough guy coach. Hartley just poked the bear and watched him self-destruct because his ego wouldn't allow him to ignore the jabs.
Tortorella is just a passionate guy. Is a nice enough guy away from the rink, but he is really emotionally vested in every game and the team he's coaching. He wears that on his sleeve. I'm happy he ran the Canucks into the ground, but it is sad to see a guy with passion like that fall so hard so fast.
Totally false. Gillis ran the Canucks into the ground hence why he was fired.
...He's at least not pulling a MacTavish and talking about BOLD moves and making ridiculous promises.
I suppose. But to my ear it is equally ridiculous for him to be talking about returning to what made the Canucks successful in the same context of making adjustments to how they were coached. The problem with the Canucks is a matter of on-ice personnel, and it will only be corrected with dramatic changes to the core. Linden's comments—and specifically his rejection of Tortorella's characterisation of the roster as "stale" and "old"—strongly suggest that he is intent on building around the Sedins, Kesler, Hamhuis, and Bieksa. At this stage in their careers, this is a fool's errand.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Linden's comments—and specifically his rejection of Tortorella's characterisation of the roster as "stale" and "old"—strongly suggest that he is intent on building around the Sedins, Kesler, Hamhuis, and Bieksa. At this stage in their careers, this is a fool's errand.
yeah what's up with this...I head Craig Button basically agree this morning, saying that the Sedins, Kesler, etc. are still elite core pieces that they can retool around to get back on top. I thought we've seen this play out enough times that nobody would be fooled by it, but hell if that's how they wanna go then I'm super excited for them.
I watched this before I went to bed, and then came here to post the same thing. He looks and sounds overwhelmed in a position for which he is not well trained, and it shows—I was very surprised when he appeared before cameras, looking about 15 years older than he did the last time I saw him—much less than 15 years ago.
From everything he said, and from his answers to questions, it seems pretty clear that the plan moving forward is to continue to supplement the existing core, and to get back to whatever it was that made them successful in 2010–11. Linden mentioned a few times that the team was constructed to play a certain style, and alluded to problems with the coaching, noting that the plan is to return to an "exciting style" of play that proceeds from their strengths.
This all sounded like very good news to me as a Flames fan. But were I a fan of the Canucks, I would be really concerned.
Not to ruin the fun, but I think Linden was being asked a lot of questions that the media knew he couldn't answer. That, and Linden is as well spoken as a hockey player not as a lawyer. Darryl was horrible at interviews, but knew his job and did it well.
However I like that he's sticking with the core...... that part is good news.
__________________
"With a coach and a player, sometimes there's just so much respect there that it's boils over"
-Taylor Hall
I suppose. But to my ear it is equally ridiculous for him to be talking about returning to what made the Canucks successful in the same context of making adjustments to how they were coached. The problem with the Canucks is a matter of on-ice personnel, and it will only be corrected with dramatic changes to the core. Linden's comments—and specifically his rejection of Tortorella's characterisation of the roster as "stale" and "old"—strongly suggest that he is intent on building around the Sedins, Kesler, Hamhuis, and Bieksa. At this stage in their careers, this is a fool's errand.
I will say he doesn't have a lot of choice as he's kind of stuck with the core as most of them have NTC or are untradeable. Really all he can do is hope they draft some players that can come in and play sooner than later. A Kesler trade would probably be a big change but it's debateable if it would be for the better given he's the teams best overall forward.
I agree it's foolish to think they can still play the style of game that took them to the finals. That team is long gone and pining for the days of old makes them look like the West Coast Oilers.
Totally false. Gillis ran the Canucks into the ground hence why he was fired.
Completely disagree. It was Tortorella's coaching decision that sunk the Nucks. Gillis gave him the same team that was successful the previous year. Tortorella implemented systems and a style of play that didn't fit. Gillis would have had to completely retool the team. This is on Fonzie. Gillis was a sacrificial lamb. Ownership hired Tortorella and had to have a fall guy. Gillis worked. He was also a middling manager, but he was mostly a pawn. Tortorella caused the whole goaltending issue forcing the Luongo deal. Tortorella screwed the team over with his decision making.
Completely disagree. It was Tortorella's coaching decision that sunk the Nucks. Gillis gave him the same team that was successful the previous year. Tortorella implemented systems and a style of play that didn't fit. Gillis would have had to completely retool the team. This is on Fonzie. Gillis was a sacrificial lamb. Ownership hired Tortorella and had to have a fall guy. Gillis worked. He was also a middling manager, but he was mostly a pawn. Tortorella caused the whole goaltending issue forcing the Luongo deal. Tortorella screwed the team over with his decision making.
Gillis have him the same team from 3 years ago. The same team that went 2-12 in their previous 14 playoff games. A team that was on a clear decline who traded their younger better goalie for a pick and had a goalie who did not want to be there as number 1. The team went further into the tank when Luongo was traded for mediocre pieces.
The Canucks had no depth outside of their top line and when Torts played them heavily early in the year they were still a playoff team. Gillis is more to blame but they both share in the fall of the team
Poor guy learned nothing from the Flames. Supplementing a declining core is a sure fire way to crash and burn into a scorched earth rebuild. Asking aging, declining players to replicate their play of their prime years to provide that same exciting hockey is also a recipe for disaster. Linden needs to look past just this years stats to see that the team was declining under AV and it's simply not feasible to expect the same level of play as the way they were constructed three years ago especially now goaltending isn't a backbone of the team.
This is the potential pitfall of hiring a guy with zero management experience as he's acting more like a fan than an objective manager that knows that the style of play is dictated by the current talent/skills of your roster not how it was built years ago.
And a big LOL for him looking at coaches before hiring a GM. This whole thing is so Oilers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack
yeah what's up with this...I head Craig Button basically agree this morning, saying that the Sedins, Kesler, etc. are still elite core pieces that they can retool around to get back on top. I thought we've seen this play out enough times that nobody would be fooled by it, but hell if that's how they wanna go then I'm super excited for them.
I think Flames fans are far too single-minded about this.
Yes, the Flames' demise was pretty linear, but that doesn't mean that every team will deteriorate in such a direct and linear fashion.
Teams, like players, will ebb and flow with respect to production, confidence, etc. Just because a team is getting a bit older and things didn't go well last season, does not mean that they are necessarily on a downward spiral and should be torn apart immediately. Lets of teams, as well as players individually, experience renaissances and/or rekindle what had temporarily slipped away.
The Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis and the rest are still a solid core.
There is no law that says they will deteriorate in the same way that the Flames did.
I think Flames fans are far too single-minded about this.
Yes, the Flames' demise was pretty linear, but that doesn't mean that every team will deteriorate in such a direct and linear fashion.
Teams, like players, will ebb and flow with respect to production, confidence, etc. Just because a team is getting a bit older and things didn't go well last season, does not mean that they are necessarily on a downward spiral and should be torn apart immediately. Lets of teams, as well as players individually, experience renaissances and/or rekindle what had temporarily slipped away.
The Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis and the rest are still a solid core.
There is no law that says they will deteriorate in the same way that the Flames did.
If you're dealing in hypotheticals, yes, you can make that argument.
If you analyse their roster, you might think otherwise.
I get what you're saying about just because a team ages and doesn't trade players doesn't mean they will progressively get worse, but the problem with the canucks roster isn't that it's ageing, it's that it is being depleted of depth that made the team successful in previous years.
Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis may be a good core, but a good core for what? Consistent regular season play? Consistent first round exits?
The team is missing components like Right handed shots, top pairing defenders and secondary scoring.
It's not the age, it's the age in conjunction with the poorly assembled roster. In order to plug those holes, that core is going to have to be disrupted. If they don't disrupt it, they will be destined to slowly bleed out barring a couple of home run, mid-round draft picks.
The Following User Says Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
The Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis and the rest are still a solid core.
There is no law that says they will deteriorate in the same way that the Flames did.
I agree, but you have to admit, the future doesn't look very good and the Sedins can't be the hub of the wheel going forward. The sisters are 33, Bieksa is 32 (and plays a "high mileage" game) and Hamhuis is 31. Kesler may (IMO, likely) be on his way out via trade at his request (perhaps this was part of the canning Torts equation). They managed to let two #1 goalies go with questionable returns.
They're a mess. A couple more years that will mirror the Flames circa 2009-2012 where they'll acquire complimentary pieces to the Sedins and veteran defensemen. Then a steady decline after that.
Linden is in the opposite position as Burke. He has a bunch of veterans with term left on their contracts versus a virtual clean slate with a lot of the heavy lifting finished. Burke hired an up and coming hockey mind (results TBD) whereas Linden needs a veteran GM/retread. And ownership is very worried about the fickle Canucks fan not showing up.
I think you'll see the Canucks rebound slightly because they'll be out from under Torts, but will battle and end up 8-10th for a few seasons. Their division is just to tough to see that team having any success. Painful times ahead for the Canucks organization.
So even if they mostly successful in getting back to 2011 form, who is to say they will be anywhere near as good?
That team relied on diving and gaming the refs to get power plays, and cashed in on that. Also, as much as he is bashed they did have a proven top tier goalie in Lou.
Those are two pretty big holes, as Lack probably isn't going to be as good as Lou, and the NHL has wised up to their diving antics. I would even go so far as to say if they reassembled the exact roster from 2011 they still wouldn't get out of the first round. Their just too old, and the league has moved away from falling for their style of game.
Honestly, this is somewhat similar to San Jose in that they are two teams that have committed long term to a core that can't get it done, and there is little to do other than ride it out.
