Brad Marchand Suspended 5 Games, Criticizes Canucks Coach, Says NHL Doesn’t Know Rules of Hockey

 Blog  No Responses »
Jan 102012
 

After a phone hearing yesterday afternoon, Brendan Shanahan gave Brad Marchand a 5-game suspension for attempting to take out Sami Salo’s knees in Saturday night’s game. Here is his explanation:

Credit to Shanahan: he sent a strong message that these kinds of hits, ones that are predatory in nature and seriously injures another player, have no place in the NHL.

Of course, not everyone sees it that way. While almost everyone associated with the game of hockey applauded the suspension, people in Boston are still insistent that it was legal and that Marchand was protecting himself from big, bad Sami.

On the Bruins’ official website, GM Peter Chiarelli posted a statement:

While we respect the process that the Department of Player Safety took to reach their decision regarding Brad’s hit on Sami Salo, we are very disappointed by their ruling.

“While we understand that the Department of Safety is an evolving entity, it is frustrating that there are clear comparable situations that have not been penalized or sanctioned in the past.

“It is equally disappointing that Brad sought the counsel of the Department this past Fall for an explanation and clarification regarding this type of scenario so as to adjust his game if necessary. He was advised that such an incident was not sanctionable if he was protecting his own safety. Given our feeling that Brad was indeed protecting himself and certainly did not clip the player as he contacted the player nowhere near the knee or quadricep, today’s ruling is not consistent with what the Department of Player Safety communicated to Brad.”

But also, Marchand himself voiced his displeasure, writing on ESPN what he thinks of the officials and their ruling:

OK, the play with Sami Salo. It technically wasn’t a clip. Clipping is when you hit someone at the knees and I did not hit him at the knees. Anyone that has seen the video will see that I hit him in the upper thigh under the buttocks. They can call it a clipping, but they obviously don’t know the rules of hockey. (Emphasis mine.)

Pretty strong words. But wait, there’s more. In the same entry, he tells us what he thinks of Canucks coach Alain Vigneault:

Their coach [Alain Vigneault] came out and said I play to hurt players. He obviously wanted to take a shot at me and stir the pot for the hearing [Monday]. It just shows the class he has or lack thereof.

Because, you know, going after and criticizing the league and another team’s coach shows nothing but pure class.

Listen, I know Marchand is entitled to his own opinion, but in this case, I think it’s probably best he keeps them to himself. One, practically everyone in the hockey world agrees with the suspension and he just keeps looking like an ass by defending it. Two, remember that John Tortorella got fined just a couple of weeks ago for criticizing the officials after the Winter Classic. The CBA between the NHL and NHLPA also has a section dedicated to this sort of thing. The suspension is already going to cost Marchand more than $150,000 in forfeited salary; he should probably just choose to learn from this incident and save himself the fine – and some face – too.

Hits, Excuses and Hacks

 Blog  5 Responses »
Jan 092012
 

If you want to know where the lack of respect that’s infiltrating the NHL is coming from, look no further than Boston’s frothing-at-the-mouth reaction to Brad Marchand’s submarining of Sami Salo, a dirty, cheap, low hit that knocked Salo out of the lineup with a concussion.

It started with Marchand’s excuse:

The puck was going around the boards and I went to pick it up,” said Marchand. “I was looking over my shoulder and saw Salo coming. I just kind of went down. When you see a guy 6-foot-(3) coming in on you, your instincts are to protect yourself. It was very unfortunate that he was hurt on the play.

And punctuated with his coach, Claude Julien, defending him and then some:

We all have our opinions with what is going on with the game and the hits and everything else,” said Julien. “All I’m gonna tell you is that, I have always told my players that they need to protect themselves. The last thing I want my players to do is to get hit and then end up with a concussion, and they have to protect themselves.

“Whether it’s the right way or the wrong way, it’ll depend on how the league looks at it. But I’d rather have a guy take a two-minute penalty than turn his back to the play, stand up straight, and then get his face knocked into the glass, and be out for the rest of the year with a concussion, or maybe end a career, like Savard.

“In my opinion, if guys start protecting themselves the way Marchand did, maybe guys will stop taking runs at other guys.”

On the one hand, it’s admirable that the Bruins take matter into their own hands. There are many reasons they are the best team in the league and the physical intimidation they bring is just one of them. Julien pretty much admitted in his statement that his team will continue to play the way they do and force the officials to call the penalties if they commit them – nothing wrong with that. (You’ll recall the league chose not to do so in the Finals and it worked beautifully in their favor.)

On the other hand, I shudder at the implication that they think the best way for their players to protect themselves is by taking out another’s knees. There’s a difference between playing hard and hitting dirty. (If you’re not sure, Canucks Army and Pass It To Bulis have excellent articles on this very subject.) To anyone who follows hockey, what Marchand did was indefensible. It’s even more ridiculous – irresponsible even – that someone in Julien’s position would: a) defend such a dangerous hit, and b) even seemingly encourage it.

And you wonder where the lack of respect in the game is coming from.

Canucks GM Mike Gillis correctly calls it “a dirty hit by a dirty player“. Coach Alain Vigneault goes a bit further and calls Julien’s comments “stupid”.

“That’s a stupid comment,” said the Canucks coach. “What Marchand did there, you could end a player’s career doing that and I’ve never seen Sami Salo take a run at any player in the NHL. All I’ve seen Sami Salo do is play with integrity and play the right way.

“Marchand — this is just my feeling on this — some day he’s going to get it. Somebody is going to say enough is enough and they’re going to hurt the kid, because he plays to hurt players and in my mind if the league doesn’t take care of it, somebody else will.

“Sometimes it takes the league time to figure things out and there’s a difference between a good hip check when the player is coming down on you one-on-one with the puck and what we saw Marchand do with his definite attempt to injure. Something needs to happen.”

It was announced yesterday that Marchand has a phone hearing with NHL disciplinarian, Brendan Shanahan. A phone hearing means that if Marchand can face up a suspension of anywhere from 0 to 5 games. How serious – or how dangerous – of an infraction do they believe is it for a player to do something that could have potentially ended another player’s career?

*****

It looks like I’m not the only one who have had just about enough of the over-the-top homerism by the Boston media. If there’s something we’ve learned in the last few months, it’s that perhaps some of them have spent too much time on their knees lapping every word coming from the Bruins’ mouths.

Before the game, Ben Kuzma called out Joe Haggarty for Haggarty’s piece on Roberto Luongo.

Heard Haggarty called Luongo a “coward”. Really? And the #Canucks are arrogant? #giveyourheadashake

Without mentioning names, Ray Ferraro pretty much did the same.

Back in Van after WJC-i see goalies still the talking point. Also see the absurdity that Luongo asked out of Bos gm floated in Bos papers

After the game, Global TV’s Jay Janower was equally incensed.

Was truly embarrassing as a professional to see Boston “media” in action. Cheerleaders with mic’s and note pads. Bring on the suspension..

If you’re wondering where all this is coming from, here are a couple of articles on the game by Boston’s *ahem* professional media.

First is Haggarty’s on Luongo:

Maybe Roberto Luongo should stop wondering why nobody else ever wants to pump his perpetually saggy tires?

The Vancouver Canucks goaltender has once again created a firestorm of criticism by simply doing what everybody predicted “Bobby Lou” would choose in the first place: taking the easy way out.

No matter what the Vancouver coaching staff posited publicly as the reasoning behind it, Luongo opted out of the difficult challenge facing down his demons against the Bruins at TD Garden.

It’s the perfect example of “Bobby Lou just being Bobby Lou.”

With all due respect to Joe, he has absolutely nothing – nada, zilch, zero – to back up his claims in this article. Was it entertaining? Sure, if you consider reading the National Enquirer entertaining. Is it full of stuff that came out of his own ass? Yes.

Next up is this gem by the Boston Globe’s Dan Shaugnessy.

Playing the Vancouver Canucks is like playing a collection of A-Rods or a full squad of Bill Laimbeers. The defending NHL Western Conference champions are a virtual conga line of Claude Lemieuxes and Ulf Samuelssons.

They are posers and floppers, arrogant and cowardly. It’s hard to believe Cam Neely ever wore their sweater. Beating them up is just so much fun, and flipping one of them butt-over-tea kettle sweetens the day.

Never mind the guy they flipped butt-over-tea kettle – incidentally one of the classiest guys in the league – suffered a concussion out of it, and the flip was as illegal and dirty and dangerous as a hit could possibly be, this poor excuse for a writer also thought this was, well, fun and sweet.

Listen, I understand this shit sells. I know we live in a world where Snooki is a celebrity and Toddlers and Tiaras is prominent on The Learning Channel. But, I do expect more of the professional media – for starters, I expect them to be able to look at facts and spew something more intelligent than your regular Internet troll – though, in Boston, maybe that’s expecting too much.

The Dave Bolland Backlash

 Blog  2 Responses »
Dec 142011
 

Well someone’s going to get a lump of coal for Christmas.

In case you’ve missed it, Chicago Blackhawks third-line centre Dave Bolland didn’t mince words in a WGN interview on Monday, chastising the Vancouver Canucks and calling out the Sedin twins:

“I hate all of them [the Canucks]… I don’t think we’d let [the Sedins] on our team. And yeah, they probably would still be sisters. I think they might sleep in bunk beds. The older one has the bottom one, the younger one got the top.”

Slow clap, Dave Bolland. Slow clap.

Maybe Dave Bolland played up to the laughter of the crowd during the interview. Maybe he himself embraces being public enemy number one in Vancouver, or maybe he wanted to see if he could get a rise out of some of the Canucks. Either way, Bolland succeeded in ruffling at least a few feathers.

For every fan who has come to appreciate the Sedins, there’s the troll who have followed the “Sedin sister” label, and Bolland’s latest comments allowed those trolls to come out of the woodwork in droves today. Some Canuck “fans” even suggested on the TEAM1040 that they’d rather have Bolland in their lineup than the twins. Bolland’s comments forced both Alain Vigneault and Mike Gillis to jump to the defense of their top players:

“Dave Bolland has an IQ the size of a bird seed and a face only a mother can love.”  – Vigneault

“If someone wants to take a shot at them after all they’ve accomplished, especially over the last three years, it rings hollow in my ears.” – Gillis

Dave Bolland can jab at the Sedins with his Stanley Cup ring all day, but it absolutely astounds me that anyone can actually hate the Sedins.

They’re twin brothers who were drafted into the NHL with the highest of expectations. They were burned at the stake in Vancouver when they didn’t produce in the early days of their careers, to the point where they were this close to going back to Sweden. Not only did they manage to train hard and prove those naysayers wrong, they exceeded our wildest expectations, becoming the first two Canucks to ever win Art Ross trophies (Henrik also won the Hart trophy). Their charitable work in the Vancouver area is also unrivaled; they donated $1.5-million of their own money to the B.C. Children’s Hospital.

If Dave Bolland or any of the Canucks chief rivals can’t (or don’t want to) see just how good the Sedins are on the ice or how genuine they are off of it, it’s probably best to turn the other cheek and ignore it.

The Sedins and the Canucks have never cared about what the media or other teams say about them, and they’re not about to start. They’ve got other, more important things to worry about, like winning the Stanley Cup. That’s the only thing that will shut up every last one of those critics.

Season Preview: The Impact of Coaching Changes Part 2 and Ranking the Western Conference Coaches

 Blog  No Responses »
Sep 072011
 

As discussed in yesterday’s post, changing a coach at mid-season, rather than in the off-season, seems to have a greater positive impact on team performance.

Examining all the coaching moves since the start of the 2005-06 season reveals some other interesting tidbits:

  1. Only four coaches hired at mid-season led their teams to a worse performance than the coach they replaced:
    • 2009-10 Philadelphia: Peter Laviolette (.535) replaced John Stevens (.540). One could argue these are almost equal results.
    • 2008-09 Tampa Bay: Rick Tocchet (.397 winning percentage) replaced Barry Melrose (.438). Funny how Melrose was ridiculed for his performance returning to the bench, while Rick Tocchet demonstrated himself to be just as incompetent.
    • 2008-09 Montreal: Bob Gainey (.500) replaced Guy Carbonneau (.583)
    • 2005-06 Los Angeles: John Torchetti (.417) replaced Andy Murray (.564)

  2. The best improvement by a coach hired in the off-season:
    • 2009-10 Phoenix: Dave Tippett (+28 points after replacing Wayne Gretzky)
    • 2009-10 Colorado: Joe Sacco (+27 points after replacing Tony Granato)
    • 2010-11 Tampa Bay: Guy Boucher (+23 points after replacing Rick Tocchet)
    • 2007-08 Boston: Claude Julien (+18 points after replacing Dave Lewis). You’re not likely to see any of the four names replaced on this list named as NHL head coaches ever again.

  3. The worst performance by teams after hiring a coach in the off-season:
    • 2008-09 Colorado: Tony Granato (-27 points after replacing Joel Quennville)
    • 2010-11 New Jersey: John Maclean + Jacques Lemaire (-24 points after replacing Jacques Lemaire)
    • 2009-10 Edmonton: Pat Quinn (-23 points after replacing Craig MacTavish)
    • 2006-07 Los Angeles: Marc Crawford (-21 points after replacing Andy Murray + John Torchetti)

One final note – for all the talk that Pat Quinn’s coaching time had passed after that brutal 62-point performance for the Oilers, it’s worth noting Tom Renney led an stronger Edmonton team to exactly the same number of points the following season.

Here now are the coaching rankings for the Western Conference:

 A Grade

Mike Babcock – Detroit
Last Year (A)

The best coach in the game? Probably. The demise of the Red Wings has been increasingly predicted over the last few years, and yet it never seems to actually happen. Credit the coach, who knows exactly the right buttons to push to motivate each player.

Barry Trotz – Nashville
Last Year (B+)

Nashville fell a sniper short of upsetting Vancouver in the second round. That’s not Trotz’s fault, who clearly outcoached Alain Vigneault during the series. He’s among the best in the league.

B+ Grade

Joel Quenneville – Chicago
Last Year (B+)

Getting the Blackhawks – a team gutted by so many moves in the offseason that the players probably needed name tags in training camp – into the playoffs last year was an underrated coaching accomplishment.

Alain Vigneault – Vancouver
Last Year (B-)

You coach a team into the Cup Final you get to move up these rankings. Yet, he still has an inexplicable man-crush on Aaron Rome; has turned once-promising Keith Ballard into an ECHL’er; and is at least partially to blame for the unsportsmanlike attitude that permeates Canuck culture. Last year was likely the pinnacle of Vigneault’s coaching career.

B Grade

Randy Carlyle – Anaheim
Last Year (B)

Carlyle headed into last season at a crossroads, with whispers of his having lost the room heard around the league. Instead, the coach and team rallied to a playoff spot. He did a great job not only integrating Cam Fowler into the lineup, but protecting him and his confidence.

Dave Tippet – Phoenix
Last Year (B)

Performed another coaching miracle getting the Coyotes into the playoffs last year, but faces his greatest challenge trying to do that without Ilya Bryzgalov in 2011-12.

B- Grade

Tom Renney – Edmonton
Last Year (B-)

The Oilers featured stronger systems play and a better dressing room atmosphere last year, but failed to improve in the standings. A terrific coaching “teacher,” at some point Edmonton brass will have to ask themselves if Renney has the chops to take a team far into the playoffs. That’s a question that’s still a few seasons off though.

C+ Grade

Terry Murray – Los Angeles (FIRED WATCH)
Last Year (C+)

Let’s make it two years in a row for Murray to find his name on the “Fired Watch.” Expectations haven’t been this high for the Kings since Gretzky was in town. An adequate bench boss, he hasn’t coached a team out of the first round since the Flyers made the Stanley Cup in 1997.

Todd McLellan – San Jose
Last Year (C)

Won a classic series against the Detroit Red Wings (and coach Mike Babcock) and got his team to the Conference Final for the second year in a row. And yet, he still hasn’t really helped the team shed its underachieving label.

C Grade

Davis Payne – St. Louis (FIRED WATCH)
Last Year (C)

With the Blues expected to rise in the standings this year the heat is on Payne, who is also in the final year of his contract. Injuries crippled the team last year, but St. Louis was also inconsistent and prone to weak first period efforts.

Brent Sutter – Calgary (FIRED WATCH)
Last Year (C)

Still looking for the same success in the NHL that he had coaching junior hockey. He seemed a bit more flexible handling his roster once brother Darryl was out of the mix. Still, with a veteran-laden squad like the Flames, it’s playoffs or bust.

Joe Sacco – Colorado
Last Year (C+)

Sacco, heralded as a great communicator after his first year as coach, had a tough second season. The team looked unprepared at times and Sacco’s seemingly random benching of players was odd (Chris Stewart was a healthy scratch before being dealt).

Scott Arniel – Columbus (FIRED WATCH)
Last Year (C)

You know what the definition of a square-peg and round-hole problem is? Meshing Arniel’s puck possession gameplan with the Blue Jackets roster last year. It didn’t work. The personnel is stronger this year in Columbus, so now it’s up to Arniel to deliver some results.

Glen Gulutzan – Dallas
Last Year (N/A)

Another rookie head coach, this time taking over from “The Hair” (aka Marc Crawford). Despite team assurances, it does look like Gulutzan’s price-tag (ie. cheap) played a part in his being hired over other coaching options (Craig MacTavish, Ken Hitchcock, etc). Gulutzan has had an impressive minor league coaching career, particularly in the ECHL. You know who else had a pretty impressive ECHL coaching career? John Brophy, who’s actually in the ECHL Hall of Fame. Just sayin’…

Mike Yeo – Minnesota
Last Year (N/A)

Yeo takes over from Todd Richards, promising to bring offensive hockey to the Wild. The former Penguins powerplay coach is young (39) and, well, eager, as his visit to Finland to meet with Mikko Koivu can attest. He only has one season of head coaching experience though, and the ditches along the NHL highway are full of wannabe assistants who couldn’t make it as head coaches.

Out of Town Notebook: Thoughts on the Final Part 1 – “Spoiled Douchebags”

 Blog, Out of Town Notebook  1 Response »
May 312011
 

There has been a lot of chatter the last few weeks about the Vancouver Canucks’ status as “Canada’s Team.”

In particular, there seems to be a palpable desire on the part of some Canuck fans to see the hometown team embraced to the loving bosom of the rest of Canada. To no one’s surprise, this love hasn’t exactly been reciprocated.

A friend with roots to a different Canadian province explained this resistance pretty well. To paraphrase:

“The rest of Canada already looks at Vancouver with resentment. It’s Lotus Land – the land of wealth. It’s beautiful. You guys don’t have any winter. You’re a two-hour flight to Vegas. You just had the Olympics. Work/life balance actually matters here. And yet, now you spoiled douchebags get to have the Stanley Cup too? F-that.”

Even in all the talk about “Canada’s Team,” the consensus seems to be the Canucks are roughly 7-14 days away from enjoying their first Stanley Cup victory.

James Mirtle posted an interesting piece comparing Boston and Vancouver in a number of statistical categories.

To add some “sober second thought” to the local Cup hoopla, and in honour of Vancouver’s 17 years between Cup Final appearances, here are 17 reasons why Boston could win the Stanley Cup.

1. East vs. West Exhibit #1: The last four Eastern teams to win Game Seven in the Conference Final have gone on to win the Stanley Cup. Overall, Conference Final, Game Seven-winning teams are 7-2 in the Cup Final since the East/West format was introduced in 1994.

2. East vs. West Exhibit #2: Since the East/West Conferences were created in 1994, there have been four Stanley Cup Finals with a distance greater than 3000 kilometres between each team. The Eastern Conference Champion has won every Final:

Carolina over Edmonton in 7 (2006)
Tampa Bay over Calgary in 7 (2004)
New Jersey over Anaheim in 7 (2003)
New York over Vancouver in 7 (1994)

According to Google Maps, it is roughly 4028 kilometres between Vancouver and Boston.

3. Groin injuries, which Ryan Kesler is suspected to have, can be tricky to rehabilitate. An injured Kesler is a big break for Boston. Kesler is Vancouver’s most valuable forward. They need him healthy to neutralize David Krejci’s line. Just as importantly, Kesler is expected to win battles against Zdeno Chara in front of the Bruins net on the powerplay.

4. Tim Thomas. To sum: The likely Vezina Trophy winner just posted the best regular season save percentage of all-time. He also called his shot during the Eastern Conference Final, saying Boston would beat Tampa Bay. He backed this up, posting a shutout in Game 7 against the Lightning. Currently his post-season save percentage is higher than Luongo’s. A hot Tim Thomas could really cause Vancouver nightmares.

5. Small Sample Size Exhibit #1: Tim Thomas hasn’t lost to Roberto Luongo since March 27, 2006, when the latter was a Florida Panther. Thomas made 45 saves in a 4-3 shootout loss that night.

6. Small Sample Size Exhibit #2: It’s only three games but under Alain Vigneault Vancouver has never scored more than two goals against Claude Julien’s Bruins:

February 26, 2001: Boston 3, Vancouver 1 (Thomas over Luongo)
February 6, 2010: Vancouver 2, Boston 2 (Vancouver shoot-out victory, Luongo over Tuukka Rask)
October 28, 2008: Boston 1, Vancouver 0 (Oct 28, 2008: Bos 1-0, Thomas over Luongo)

7. Scoring Depth Exhibit #1 Tyler Seguin: There isn’t a bottom-six player on the Canucks who has anywhere close to the offensive talent Seguin has. He’s a game-changer hiding in the weeds of Boston’s third line.

8. Scoring Depth Exhibit #2: If we go by the lineups posted by Matt, the bottom-six for Boston has scored 17 goals in the playoffs. Vancouver’s bottom-six? Just five goals. Boston might not have the Sedins, but their scoring depth (among forwards) trumps Vancouver’s.

9. Don Cherry always says if your team is winning you don’t mess with the lineup or team chemistry. The Canucks are about to do just that by returning Manny Malholtra to action. The romantic notion of Malholtra coming back to make an impact on the Cup Final should be tempered with the fact that he has two goals (for a total of two points) in 24 career playoff games.

10. Boston was the best team at 5-on-5 in the regular season and is the best team at 5-on-5 in the post-season.

11. If you look at the averages and norms of special team play, it is safe to assume Boston’s powerplay percentage (8.2%) will improve at some point.

12. Ghosts of Playoffs Past Exhibit #1: Given Ryan Clowe’s injury, this becomes the first playoff series in which the Canucks’ defense will have to handle a talented power forward. Actually, it should read power forwards, as both Milan Lucic and Nathan Horton will try and disrupt the crease around Roberto Luongo. Zdeno Chara might also get powerplay time in front of the net as well. Let’s not forget how Dustin Byfuglien’s dominance continues to haunt Vancouver fans.

13. Ghosts of Playoffs Past Exhibit #2: The Bruins feature many of the elements that have challenged the Canucks so far in these playoffs. Boston can lock down defensively as well as the Nashville Predators. Like Chicago, the Bruins have a top defensive pair (Zdeno Chara and Dennis Seidenberg) that can play against the Sedins. Like Chicago’s Dave Bolland, Boston’s Brad Marchand is also very skilled at becoming a distraction.

14. All the pressure is on Vancouver. Hard to believe, but a team from Boston is legitimately the underdog.

15. The all-time series is significantly slanted in Boston’s favour – they’re 66-25-17 against the Canucks.

16. When leading after two periods, Boston has yet to lose a game in these playoffs.

17. The Canucks won’t have played for a week since finishing off the Sharks on May 24th. Long layoffs have a tendency of coming back to haunt the teams that earn them. Just ask the Red Wings’ Mike Babcock, who admitted Detroit was rusty at the start of round two against San Jose.

Things That Make You Go Hmmm: Roster Changes, (Lack of) Discipline and Two-Man Advantages

 Blog, Things That Make You Go Hmmm  2 Responses »
May 212011
 

[Inspired by Arsenio Hall's "Things the Make You Go Hmmm…", Clayton Imoo talks about Canucks-related things that make him go hmmm… You can follow Clay on Twitter at (@canuckclay) or on his website, Clay's Canucks Commentary.]

Hello readers.  My name is Clayton Imoo and I am thrilled to join the talented group of passionate Canucks fans here at the CHB.  I do a regular video-blog called “Clay’s Canucks Commentary” that is featured on Canucks.com and I’m excited to take a different approach for my contributions to this site:  “Things That Make You Go Hmmm…”

If you were at least a teenager in the late 80s and early 90s, then you’ll likely remember The Arsenio Hall Show.  One of Arsenio’s regular features occurred when the host would ponder certain thoughts.  This recurring segment was the inspiration behind C&C Music Factory’s top 10 hit “Things That Make You Go Hmmm…” in 1990.

Similarly, I’ll be taking a regular look at the Canucks and aspects of their games that may make us wonder, whether it be a strange play, puzzling coaching decision, or bizarre call for example.

Looking back at the Canucks’ 4-3 loss to the San Jose Sharks in game 3 of the Western Conference Final, there are certainly a few Things That Make You Go Hmmm…:

  1. If it wasn’t broke, why did you try to fix it?  Canucks Coach Alain Vigneault surprisingly inserted Tanner Glass and Alexandre Bolduc into the line-up for Cody Hodgson and Jeff Tambellini, even after the team’s dominant 7-3 win in game 2.  Perhaps AV anticipated a rougher game and having nightmares about Ben Eager.  Ultimately, Eager didn’t even play and Glass (6:34 TOI) and Bolduc (4:34 TOI) played but not very much.  Granted, the number of Canuck penalties prohibited any type of flow, but Glass and Bolduc didn’t do anything to stand out.  While I don’t agree with AV’s decision to change the lineup, he does have one more Jack Adams award than I have.

  2. Where was the poise and discipline?  Coming into the game, the Sharks were a perfect 3 for 3 on the power play.  In game 3, they scored a couple of quick power play goals in the first period on their way to a 3 for 10 night overall with the man advantage.  These 2 quick goals meant the Canucks were playing a tough game of catch-up just 8 minutes into the game.  It’s clear to me that the tighter a game is called, the worse off the Canucks are.  Whistle-happy referees nullify the Canucks’ aggressive and high-flying style.  So why were the Canucks so undisciplined given both the proficiency of San Jose’s power play and seeing how Ben Eager hurt the Sharks in game 2?

  3. Can you decline a penalty?  The Canucks failed to score on back-to-back 2-man advantages in the second period.  Their futility with 2-man advantages is a great mystery to me, especially given their exceptional talent and that they own the best PP in the league.  This isn’t new. In the regular season, they converted on just 1 of their 9 2-man advantages. Last night, they seemed hesitant to shoot and often took too long to set-up their ideal shot(s).  The Sharks undoubtedly got a lift from killing off the penalties, while the Canucks missed a golden opportunity to get back into the game.  Though before we completely throw the PP under the bus, they at least scored a couple of goals on Jamie McGinn’s 5-minute major in the third period.

It will be interesting to see what the line-up for game 4 will look like given the incomplete marks for Glass and Bolduc and the injuries on the blue line to Ehrhoff and Rome.  It’s looking like Keith Ballard will draw into the line-up for the first time since game 2 of the Nashville series.  I’m not sure why Ballard hasn’t been playing more in the playoffs… yet another thing that makes me go hmmm.

The Emasculation of Roberto Luongo

 Blog  10 Responses »
Apr 252011
 

I’m still scratching my head over Alain Vigneault’s decision to start Cory Schneider in game 6 over Roberto Luongo.

Yes, Luongo got shelled for 10 goals in games 4 and 5, but how do you blame him exclusively for those losses when the entire team in front of him didn’t show up?

Yet, that’s essentially what Vigneault did when he decided to give Cory Schneider his first career playoff start. In the most important game of the Canucks’ season at the Madhouse on Madison.

AV is known to say that he’ll play the players he thinks will give him the best chance to win. By starting Schneider over Luongo, he’s basically said that the Canucks can’t win with their former captain, their Olympic Gold Medal winner, and Vezina and Jennings Trophy winner.

And that’s not right.

Even with their losses in games 4 and 5, the Canucks still held a 3-2 series lead on the Blackhawks, a lead they built with Luongo in net when he won the first 3 games of this series. He was arguably the best player in a Canucks jersey in 2 of those games. He was easily the best Canuck in the first period of game 4 before the team’s collapse in the second period.

The Canucks may have had a tough time against the Blackhawks generally-speaking, but Luongo has actually played well at the Madhouse on Madison recently. Before allowing 6 goals on 28 shots in game 4, he’d won 2 of his last 3 starts there and had made 93 saves on 96 shots; going back to last year’s playoffs, he has a pretty darn good 4-1-1 record and 0.959 save percentage (188 saves on 196 shots) in his last 6 starts in Chicago.

Does this sound like a good reason to lose faith in your starting goaltender? And if you were Luongo, how would you react to the very real thinking that your coach had lost faith in you?

If the Canucks had won game 6 – and their first round series against the Chicago Blackhawks – perhaps AV would’ve looked like a genius for having the balls to start Schneider over Luongo.

Unfortunately, the Canucks did indeed lose, and now, I think I speak for a lot of Canucks fans when I ask, “Now what?

If AV didn’t think Luongo was good enough to beat Chicago just 24 hours ago, then how can he think he’s good enough to beat them tomorrow?

Outcoached. Again.

 Blog  4 Responses »
Apr 252011
 

For much of the series, talk has been about how much the Chicago Blackhawks are in the Canucks’ players heads.

How else do you explain the Sedins’ play, who looked good in the first 3 games and then essentially outplayed once Dave Bolland returned? How do you explain getting outscored 16-5 in the last 3 games when a win in any of those games would have sent the Blackhawks home for the summer?

But it’s not just the players.

After watching the series build and piss away a 3-0 series lead, it’s obvious the Blackhawks are in coach Alain Vigneault’s head as well. For the third straight playoff season, Chicago coach Joel Quenneville has outcoached AV.

With a chance to sweep the Hawks in game 4, the Canucks came out with about as much emotion as Freddie Prinze Jr. does in his movies. After building a 3-0 series lead because of their physical play and an aggressive game plan, they suddenly decided to instead sit back and wait for the Hawks to take the play to them. In fact, watching game 4 last Tuesday was eerily reminiscent of watching game 4 against the same Hawks in 2009. So if it ain’t broke, then why did AV fix it?

With control of the series, AV should be forcing Quenneville to change Chicago’s game plan.

Instead, AV panicked and took Keith Ballard out of the lineup and replaced him with Aaron Rome in game 5. And when Rome crapped the bed, he came back and put Andrew Alberts in the lineup before Ballard in game 6.

So far this postseason, we’ve seen Mikael Samuelsson playing the point on the first-unit powerplay when having Alex Edler and Christian Ehrhoff there proved to be so successful in the first four months of the regular season. And of course, there’s the decision to play Cory Schneider over Roberto Luongo (which I’ll address in my next post).

For all the talk this week about sticking to their game plan, the opposite has played out. Certainly, they talked all season long about sticking to the process only to abandon the process with a 3-0 series lead. And if the coach abandons the process, then how does he expect the players to stay with it?

My Case for Alain Vigneault to Win the Jack Adams

 Blog  2 Responses »
Apr 052011
 

With the Canucks putting the finishing touches on their 40th anniversary regular season, there has been much talk about the various awards and trophies the Canucks are going to add to their cabinet. Like his brother did last year, Daniel Sedin is on the verge of locking up the Art Ross and is also a solid candidate for the Hart. (Only two players outside of the top two in NHL scoring have won the Hart in the modern era, his odds are good.) Kesler has made his case for the Selke again this year, Luongo would not be an unreasonable Vezina finalist, and the Canucks have sealed the deal on the Presidents Trophy.

But amidst the trophies and records, there is, in my mind, one man responsible for the Canucks successes this season: coach Alain Vigneault.

It seems like just yesterday that fans were calling for Vigneault’s head with almost as much vehemency as they did Bieksa’s. Now, all seems to be forgotten as the former Jack Adams award winner has lead the Canucks to the top of the Northwest Division, Western Conference and NHL – locking up all three titles before any other team in the Western Conference had even clinched a playoff spot. His work to give the Canucks their fourth Northwest Division championship in five seasons, their first President’s Trophy in their 40-year history, their first 50-win season, a franchise record for points in a season has been impressive.

Some of his off-ice moves have been equally impressive and even more impactful. He had input on Mike Gillis’ decisions to bring in Newell Brown and replace Ian Clark with full-time goalie coach Roland Mellanson. With AV’s coaching, Brown has helped the Canucks’ special teams – both the powerplay and penalty-kill – establish themselves among the league’s best while Mellanson has helped Roberto Luongo to the most consistent season of his career and has trained the Canucks netminders to be the best one-two punch in the NHL.

Significant kudos need to be given to his in-season coaching to get the Canucks to the point they are today. After losing six defenceman in three weeks, Vigneault’s team went 7-2 in that span. Rotating through 14 blueliners this season, Vigneault has fostered a system that boasts the leagues lowest goals against per game and highest goals scored per game. Now, while part of that is due to an improved goalie tandem, there is no doubt his blueline has been responsible as well. Despite a rash of injuries and issues and a rotating cast on the fourth line, he has consistently iced a team that amplifies their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

Some of the players we’ve seen Vigneault’s biggest impact on have been guys like Andrew Alberts. After being brought in during last year’s trade deadline, Alberts played like a deer in headlights and Canucks fans were calling for his head. Vigneault’s attention to Alberts has helped him fit the blueline mould. Until his injury, Alberts has been moderately consistent this season and has given the Canucks a physical element in front of Luongo; despite missing 37 games, he still leads all Canucks’ d-men in hits. Vigneault’s created synergy between the players’ styles and transitioned guys like Ballard into a new role with minimal side effect.

There’s no doubt the Canucks successes this year have been in large part to their superb play, but there’s even less doubt in my mind that Vigneault is directly responsible for it.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries