Chasing the playoffs is fine, but the big picture should be on the long term development of guys like JV and Juolevi.

Realistically this team isn't ready to make noise in the post season. I'd rather see the kids dominating at lower levels until they have rounded out their game 100%
- Vanoxy

If we are not chasing the cup this year then I would rather see the young players keep developing with the Canucks.

I am curious to see how he performs at camp, but I am still torn as to what is best. He needed to learn and get better at the little things, but his corsi stats showed him on the positive end of shot differential. So if he comes into camp trying to earn a spot, I would say keep him and give him more opportunity. If he comes in like he already has a spot, you send him down.

Sven was down there and came close to "dominating" after moving to Utica and even with his 66 games of NHL experience (more than JV has) it still took him time to make any sort of impact last season. Because of that, I lean towards keeping him so he learns the NHL, but early camp performance would dictate that for me
- WhiteLie

Just saying I was a little surprised to get such lack of respect from you in the last article. I was giving you the benefit of every doubt and you turn around and call me stupid.

I am not going to drag this on but Sheesh man, this place is for sharing thoughts, not to be lectured to by self-described educators. Maybe I am a little hurt by your lack of basic respect. If you were actually in education, you would see that my comments come from the school of Dr. Brene and the study of Vulnerability and that of Nodding and the Ethics of Care. You want to go toe to toe with me on education, bring your pedagogy to the table and we will discuss it... but you should stop calling people stupid because they disagree with you.
- Beatle_john

I wasn't calling you stupid, it was said more in jest than anything, just hard to articulate emotion on a keyboard. In my opinion the ideology that Cloutier would be a bad coach simply because he wasn't the greatest player is preposturous! I said, as a general statement, "that's stupid", not, you're stupid. I also said, "you can't fix stupid", which was said in jest. I respect your opinion along with everyone else's.

I guess I can get frustrated at the 'train-of-thought' that you're a bad player so you're a bad coach. Most good coaches I've had or that are currently in the NHL were fringe players, on the flip side, some of the greatest players to ever play, Gretzky & Roy, were/are terrible coaches imo.

The merits of a player's on-ice performance have little to nothing to do with their ability to teach the game. I think your angle was two-fold, one that the fan base won't let him do his job because he let in bad goals during the playoffs, and two, that he's shown no ability to be a good coach.

I personally think that line of thinking is ridiculous! Cloutier has been coaching for several years and is seemingly very good at the technical and communication side of things. From what I've read. I can only go by what I've read.

Secondly, as I've said, a persons ability to coach has nothing to do with their abilities as a player….that's my opinion. Some of the most fierce competitors I've encountered on the ice were absolutely the most intelligent well mannered people off the ice. Stu Grimson being an example.

- Marwood

I dont rely heavily on those types of stats, but I think in the way we used to judge a player's defensive ability by their +/-, the shot differential is another indicator that shows he could stand to be put out there a little more often

I wasn't calling you stupid, it was said more in jest than anything, just hard to articulate emotion on a keyboard. In my opinion the ideology that Cloutier would be a bad coach simply because he wasn't the greatest player is preposturous! I said, as a general statement, "that's stupid", not, you're stupid. I also said, "you can't fix stupid", which was said in jest. I respect your opinion along with everyone else's.

I guess I can get frustrated at the 'train-of-thought' that you're a bad player so you're a bad coach. Most good coaches I've had or that are currently in the NHL were fringe players, on the flip side, some of the greatest players to ever play, Gretzky & Roy, were/are terrible coaches imo.

The merits of a player's on-ice performance have little to nothing to do with their ability to teach the game. I think your angle was two-fold, one that the fan base won't let him do his job because he let in bad goals during the playoffs, and two, that he's shown no ability to be a good coach.

I personally think that line of thinking is ridiculous! Cloutier has been coaching for several years and is seemingly very good at the technical and communication side of things. From what I've read. I can only go by what I've read.

Secondly, as I've said, a persons ability to coach has nothing to do with their abilities as a player….that's my opinion. Some of the most fierce competitors I've encountered on the ice were absolutely the most intelligent well mannered people off the ice. Stu Grimson being an example.
- LeftCoaster

Well said.

I wasn't calling you stupid, it was said more in jest than anything, just hard to articulate emotion on a keyboard. In my opinion the ideology that Cloutier would be a bad coach simply because he wasn't the greatest player is preposturous! I said, as a general statement, "that's stupid", not, you're stupid. I also said, "you can't fix stupid", which was said in jest. I respect your opinion along with everyone else's.

I guess I can get frustrated at the 'train-of-thought' that you're a bad player so you're a bad coach. Most good coaches I've had or that are currently in the NHL were fringe players, on the flip side, some of the greatest players to ever play, Gretzky & Roy, were/are terrible coaches imo.

The merits of a player's on-ice performance have little to nothing to do with their ability to teach the game. I think your angle was two-fold, one that the fan base won't let him do his job because he let in bad goals during the playoffs, and two, that he's shown no ability to be a good coach.

I personally think that line of thinking is ridiculous! Cloutier has been coaching for several years and is seemingly very good at the technical and communication side of things. From what I've read. I can only go by what I've read.

Secondly, as I've said, a persons ability to coach has nothing to do with their abilities as a player….that's my opinion. Some of the most fierce competitors I've encountered on the ice were absolutely the most intelligent well mannered people off the ice. Stu Grimson being an example.
- LeftCoaster

Those who can't do, teach.

Beattle - I also think you're one of the more quick-witted, intelligent & funny posters on here. Some of the trolling you used to do on the Leafs board was epic!

Just so you know.

I wasn't calling you stupid, it was said more in jest than anything, just hard to articulate emotion on a keyboard. In my opinion the ideology that Cloutier would be a bad coach simply because he wasn't the greatest player is preposturous! I said, as a general statement, "that's stupid", not, you're stupid. I also said, "you can't fix stupid", which was said in jest. I respect your opinion along with everyone else's.

I guess I can get frustrated at the 'train-of-thought' that you're a bad player so you're a bad coach. Most good coaches I've had or that are currently in the NHL were fringe players, on the flip side, some of the greatest players to ever play, Gretzky & Roy, were/are terrible coaches imo.

The merits of a player's on-ice performance have little to nothing to do with their ability to teach the game. I think your angle was two-fold, one that the fan base won't let him do his job because he let in bad goals during the playoffs, and two, that he's shown no ability to be a good coach.

I personally think that line of thinking is ridiculous! Cloutier has been coaching for several years and is seemingly very good at the technical and communication side of things. From what I've read. I can only go by what I've read.

Secondly, as I've said, a persons ability to coach has nothing to do with their abilities as a player….that's my opinion. Some of the most fierce competitors I've encountered on the ice were absolutely the most intelligent well mannered people off the ice. Stu Grimson being an example.
- LeftCoaster

I don't think Cloutier was a bad goalie, I know you said not the greatest, and if he was still in his prime, I think he'd have a job. One big gaff really tarnished his reputation and he had some injury issues.

iirc, Cloutier was the first Canuck goalie to put together 3 consecutive 30 plus win seasons. That is either a good indication of Cloutier's ability or the woeful teams and goalies before him.

sorry, didn't mean to pick, bored.

If Gaunce and any of the other prospects have good season, Van could certainly be in trouble for the nhl expansion draft.

If Gaunce and any of the other prospects have good season, Van could certainly be in trouble for the nhl expansion draft.
- manvanfan

I'm not worried about the expansion draft, we are more that 1 player away from contending so losing 1 player isn't going to hurt us.

I'm not worried about the expansion draft, we are more that 1 player away from contending so losing 1 player isn't going to hurt us.
- A_SteamingLombardi

You would think deeper teams would have to expose better players...

If Gaunce and any of the other prospects have good season, Van could certainly be in trouble for the nhl expansion draft.
- manvanfan

We are in a better position than 90 % of the other teams...I suppose it's a result of years of bad drafting

We are in a better position than 90 % of the other teams...I suppose it's a result of years of bad drafting
- CanuckDon

edit: i misread your post. i agree that most teams are probably sweating the expansion draft more than the canucks.

You would think deeper teams would have to expose better players...
- hillbillydeluxe

As long as one of the prime Canucks prospects is not picked, I am fine with Vegas getting a good prospect or good player. I loved the Grizzlies, and what the NBA did to them was beyond a joke. Moreover, I don't want the Vegas team to be an utter patsy either. The Canucks have a few Presidents Cups feasting on patsies like the Flames, Oilers, and Wild - to very little success in the playoffs. I'd like to see some good hockey coming out of Vegas.

It's best to demote the young players and stall their development. The same people screaming to buy out Burrows are now saying demote Virtanen so that Burrows can play. Again, we desperately need a head exploding emoji!!
- Marwood

Burrows does need to go. No matter how I try I can't find a spot for him.

In continuation of the last blog Marwood. I also find it hilarious posters don't think a 20 year old Virtanen can beat out a 34 year old Burrows. Burrows CAN'T skate. Just because he said he is working out harder people think he will "reinvent" his game? You slow down as you get older, he can't come close to JV's speed or physicality.
- CanuckDon

Bang on.

It's a mans game. If you are not scoring then you need to be hitting

I'm not worried about the expansion draft, we are more that 1 player away from contending so losing 1 player isn't going to hurt us.
- A_SteamingLombardi

It's more about who Van could lose

Burrows does need to go. No matter how I try I can't find a spot for him.
- VANTEL

I don't quite understand the hate for him right now. Yeah he makes quite a bit but it's not as if he dissapeared. He had 22 points.

It's more about who Van could lose
- manvanfan

Maybe they test Eriksson and see how he pans out on the team and if he doesn't fit they leave him open for exdraft. P

Chasing the playoffs is fine, but the big picture should be on the long term development of guys like JV and Juolevi.

Realistically this team isn't ready to make noise in the post season. I'd rather see the kids dominating at lower levels until they have rounded out their game 100%
- Vanoxy

I am not sure it is chasing a playoff spot if they are better than who you currently have

Maybe they test Eriksson and see how he pans out on the team and if he doesn't fit they leave him open for exdraft. P
- thundachunk

Eriksson has to be protected. NMC

I don't quite understand the hate for him right now. Yeah he makes quite a bit but it's not as if he dissapeared. He had 22 points.
- manvanfan

It is not hate. Tons of respect . He is old and it is time to move on. No hate

It is not hate. Tons of respect . He is old and it is time to move on. No hate
- VANTEL

He won't be moving on until he is traded or his contract ends. So he will be on the team this season.

Maybe they test Eriksson and see how he pans out on the team and if he doesn't fit they leave him open for exdraft. P
- thundachunk

Vegas top 9 next year will be

Ladd Backes Ericsson
Lucic Mathews and Brouwer

Just saying I was a little surprised to get such lack of respect from you in the last article. I was giving you the benefit of every doubt and you turn around and call me stupid.

I am not going to drag this on but Sheesh man, this place is for sharing thoughts, not to be lectured to by self-described educators. Maybe I am a little hurt by your lack of basic respect. If you were actually in education, you would see that my comments come from the school of Dr. Brene and the study of Vulnerability and that of Nodding and the Ethics of Care. You want to go toe to toe with me on education, bring your pedagogy to the table and we will discuss it... but you should stop calling people stupid because they disagree with you.
-beatlejohn

there are some people on here who like to call others names or swear at them, but the moment you give em' some back they run to their momerator and turn you in and then tell everyone about it like some 5 year old... i wouldn't take being called 'stupid' personally.

not saying that's what happened here. just sharing an anecdote.