The problem with waiting til the summer is the expansion draft. Leave him exposed to protect Granlund/Bart or pick one of those two to leave exposed to protect Hansen so you can trade him?

The summer window will be tiny and not from a position of strength if GM's know Benning doesn't want to lose one of Hansen/Bart/Granlund to expansion draft. I personally think the interest would be higher if a team had Hansen for this season's playoffs on top of next season.
- boonerbuck

This

Really? Are you just saying that or being stubborn? So you don't think coaching decisions effect the the play or results of games?

As for your other point. You should know depth effects all teams. If you take out top guys who can score they will lose. No Crosby or Malkin for example makes the Pens ordinary. Same with Nucks missing their top guys for scoring. They aren't named Sedin anymore. So maybe you didn't know that.

As for making a few trades of depth players for prospects won't effect the on ice fortunes of the team now or how it's coached.
- Nuck4U

many here dont. They dont understand it

I don't know what you're talking about
- nelson911

Do some posters still think we will be buyers at the deadline?

Playoffs are off the table.
- thundachunk

I think you misunderstand me. I don't mean off the table for us. I mean for the trading partner. Post playoffs.

Are you dumb? Lefty said Bo's ceiling is a 2C
- CanuckDon

Yes.

Do some posters still think we will be buyers at the deadline?
- CanuckDon

many here dont. They dont understand it
- SMBDragon

Whoa whoa whoa you just need to calm down and stop with the teaching lesson. I think you're assuming a lot and understanding little of me. Im an ice pak holder and consistent watcher of the canucks so just store the condescending comments away.

I should know depth affects all teams? Of course it does... some teams have more than others and can compensate. When the canucks are injured it really hurts them.

Making trades to change the on ice fortunes? You have no concept of what I was talking about, the canucks are not some team on the brink of breaking out, they can trade their soon to be gone players and get some assets for once and get younger and cheaper still.

The role of coaching is big, whats to say some coach will come in and give you exactly what you want. Willie doesn't recognize Horvat's effectiveness at times and that isnt the greatest. Prolly has to do with who gets paid more as usual. He is doing fine with the roster he has.
- nelson911

Fine. No worries. Your comment came off as asinine and invites hecklers. Too bad you know the Canucks but cheer for an obviously loaded team.

But I agree WD is doing okay. It could be worse given circumstances. But he could do a lot better. How much is open for debate. Again given issues with team. So who's a better fit is probably what should be looked at.

Yeah I did understand trade point at TDL. Was just sticking to coaching effect issue. But those trades are a tired subject cause of how little it will really do to effect club's fortunes down the road. A pick or prospect may replace older depth with new depth a few years from now. Or the picks Nucks have now can do that too. They need impact players more now then depth.

A lot will depend on who's available in the summer. They may choose to go with WD if there's no one else available who'd be willing to coach a rebuilding team and put up with the fickle fanbase and rabble rousing media. Hitchcock won't come here, not when he was planning on retiring at the end of the season, not when it's going to take 4-5 years before the team is ready to take a shot at making the playoffs and doing some damage.

I also feel like Green's stock has dropped considerably the past couple of years. He didn't get hired last time around and I think with how horrible his Utica teams have been that probably NHL GMs aren't going to be willing to put their future in his hands.
- DariusKnight

I could never understand the arguement on why we needed to replace WD with Green. There were quite a few people pressing this for two seasons. Why would we take a rookie coach out of the AHL, replace a 3 season HC who had more success in the AHL, and expect Green to be better? There is no case for him being a better replacememnt. When challenged, the best people could come up with was "he can't be any worse". This from some of our most persistant arnchair GMs.

- Marwood

especially MarFU

I could never understand the arguement on why we needed to replace WD with Green. There were quite a few people pressing this for two seasons. Why would we take a rookie coach out of the AHL, replace a 3 season HC who had more success in the AHL, and expect Green to be better? There is no case for him being a better replacememnt. When challenged, the best people could come up with was "he can't be any worse". This from some of our most persistant arnchair GMs.
- boonerbuck

I go with a proven winner if your going to make a change. No point in changing one unproven for another. WD is not my bag but he has the team playing hard every game. He hasn't lost the room. Still he isn't a good coach. He isn't horrible either. Now if he somehow managed to get this team in the playoffs and they win a round. I will eat my words. I highly doubt it though.

especially MarFU
- SMBDragon

I looked back 2 years ago and I didn't see your explanation.

many here dont. They dont understand it
- SMBDragon

I believe they do on coaching. It's just people have agendas on their view points. They might believe the following:

They just don't rank it higher then impact players.
Or feel without superstars it doesn't matter.
Or just don't care as they rather see the team fail ... tank.
So maybe a tear down happens or savior draft picks are landed.

Whatever it's okay. The Nucks have a long way to go in all areas to improve.

I looked back 2 years ago and I didn't see your explanation.
- Marwood

You had time for that?

I could never understand the arguement on why we needed to replace WD with Green. There were quite a few people pressing this for two seasons. Why would we take a rookie coach out of the AHL, replace a 3 season HC who had more success in the AHL, and expect Green to be better? There is no case for him being a better replacememnt. When challenged, the best people could come up with was "he can't be any worse". This from some of our most persistant arnchair GMs.
- boonerbuck

Im not sold on green either.
I dont know enough about green to make an informed opinion on him.
But I would also say he couldnt be any worse as well.

I looked back 2 years ago and I didn't see your explanation.
- Marwood

Still poking the bear huh....

I looked back 2 years ago and I didn't see your explanation.
- Marwood

bullsh*t, you did not. Or youd have found it.
Youre just stirring the pot once again .....why dont you just piss off and leave me alone creep

You had time for that?
- thundachunk

no he's just being a goof as part of his daily agenda

I could never understand the arguement on why we needed to replace WD with Green. There were quite a few people pressing this for two seasons. Why would we take a rookie coach out of the AHL, replace a 3 season HC who had more success in the AHL, and expect Green to be better? There is no case for him being a better replacememnt. When challenged, the best people could come up with was "he can't be any worse". This from some of our most persistant arnchair GMs.
- boonerbuck

Cause he's just the greatest coach not in the NHL *sarcasm* ... there is just no point in doing that move. Green may just hit it off but there is nothing to go on... makes no sense. Linden and Benning take a lot of flak but at least they have some patience with the coach. They know they served him a mediocre team and he's actually had them in the playoff hunt up until a week or two ago... dont think they will close the gap now. The schedule of recent and upcoming will be tough.

I was thinking the same thing. If the goals of the club arent clear, why would any coach volunteer to come here and tarnish their careers? I look at Torts, who won a cup in Tampa, had some very successful Rangers teams, and now has Columbus near the top of the league, but his career was nearly over after one really lousy season in Vancouver. Why risk doing that when the team hasn't really decided if they want to compete or rebuild? WD said it was a challenge last year developing guys and trying to win at the same time

At this point, the team might be outclassed in games, but the players havent quit. Tonight was entertaining and this whole road trip (minus Pitt) they managed to keep the games close with decent effort. If they are rebuilding and players are still going hard, then maybe a coach signs up for the long haul, but really they are still on the downswing and its usually better to make those changes when they benefit the longterm future of the club on the upswing
- WhiteLie

Good points. I have teetered there as well on direction. Could be same issues facing management. The downswing seems to have happened. It might be more of when will the upswing start? Not changes of personnel. But a nexus of impact players that could be built up from. There are some signs just not enough. So coaching fit will play a part in that development.

Still poking the bear huh....
- Nuck4U

yes he is....dont know why anyone would want to embarrass themselves so badly by acting so shamefully.

his gravestone will only read 'he sure annoyed a lot of people on the internet'. Must be wickedly proud

many here dont. They dont understand it
- SMBDragon

You are deflecting. People challenge your coach talk. They don't deny the obvious like "deployment matters" or not smart enough to understand "coaching decissions matter" which is what you always start accusing people of when you are challenged about who is in charge of what behind the bench. People argue about your observations... and who makes which decissions... if you are not just deflecting.. then the "not understanding" is mostly on your end.

Claiming you backed something up two years ago and don't feel like repeating yourself over and over and claiming challengers are not smart enough to see it is a complete joke.

You know what else is a joke? Recently you claiming you were better at certain aspects of NHL coaching that WD. You, who has no pro coaching experience if any at all. Just like when you claimed you were better than the Canucks scouts... serious about these claims... willing to argue over it even.

Do some posters still think we will be buyers at the deadline?
- CanuckDon

So far it's only been Bloated and Belcher... but often I think they are the same poster. Good cop bad cop kind of routine...

Cause he's just the greatest coach not in the NHL *sarcasm* ... there is just no point in doing that move. Green may just hit it off but there is nothing to go on... makes no sense. Linden and Benning take a lot of flak but at least they have some patience with the coach. They know they served him a mediocre team and he's actually had them in the playoff hunt up until a week or two ago... dont think they will close the gap now. The schedule of recent and upcoming will be tough.
- nelson911

I dont love the lineup by any means. But when youre losing games to coaching errors and lack of in game decisions or poor decisions then you have to part ways with the coach. No one here likes the decision of playing dorsett and sitting sedins with 5 min left and down a goal. SOme of those games you will win some you wont. But we'd be better positioned for making playoffs with those wins.