Carol Schram: Vancouver Canucks Willie Desjardins Ranks Low in NHL Coaching Ranking The Score ranks Willie Desjardins 18th among NHL coaches, Jordan Subban lifts heavy and Boeser and Brisebois will be participating in this week's World Junior Summer Showcase.

First.
Continuing from last thread, I know none of us want to see one of our Dmen go, but if a deal could be made for Landeskog I think we have to go for it

What is this hockey talk? I thought this was the mental midget politico forum...sheesh.

Now, I'm actually happy to see Juolevi is not participating. Although I want to see him play, he has already had a very long year. An evaluation camp is not required for his selection or development.

Let's offer sheet Monahan 7.9 x 7

I would sadly have to agree with Desjardins ranking after watching him over the past two seasons. He's struggled at the NHL level against more experienced coaches and he's certainly struggled in the systems department.

The team isn't hard enough to play against in part because of the poor defensive structure they play with. Although, Trevor Linden did address this in his recent interview where they apparently discussed with Desjardins the need to be more structured without the puck.

Let's offer sheet Monahan 7.9 x 7
- The_Kuze

First.
Continuing from last thread, I know none of us want to see one of our Dmen go, but if a deal could be made for Landeskog I think we have to go for it
- NorthNuck

Would have been nice to resign Hamhuis for 2 years and deal Edler.. The hamhuis signing would have bridged the gap until OJ was ready to make the jump plus given Hutton and Tryamkin another couple years of seasoning.

Im just hoping JV starts in Utica and we deal Hansen at the deadline. We can then bring up JV for the playoff push plus we have Boeser coming in next season. We will have no room for hansen starting season. Hoping he doesnt end up leaving for nothing much like Hamhuis.

I would sadly have to agree with Desjardins ranking after watching him over the past two seasons. He's struggled at the NHL level against more experienced coaches and he's certainly struggled in the systems department.

The team isn't hard enough to play against in part because of the poor defensive structure they play with. Although, Trevor Linden did address this in his recent interview where they discussed with Desjardins the need to be more structured without the puck.
- LeftCoaster

Very true. At least if they let him go at this point I would be happy with Green as a replacement. He looks to be a solid choice at this point unless some big names randomly become available.

First.
Continuing from last thread, I know none of us want to see one of our Dmen go, but if a deal could be made for Landeskog I think we have to go for it
- NorthNuck

If we move a top 4 dman like Tanev, Hutton, maybe even Gudbranson though I don't think JB wants to move him before he even plays a game, or see Tryamkin as a throw in in a deal. (I don't think Edler is going anywhere)-

Is the team better off with Landeskog in the top 6 than having a better dcorps? That could be worse than last seasons dcorps if Tanev is moved?

Is it easier to acquire a top6 winger/center at the draft than a top4 dman, and do they develop quicker than dmen?

If I am the Avs, I'm asking for Tanev and Boeser+. and the Canucks should be happy saying no, rolling with Tanev and the chance Boeser becomes a top6 winger. and continue to draft and develop.

- Redmile247

We would need a head exploding burkie emoji

If we move a top 4 dman like Tanev, Hutton, maybe even Gudbranson though I don't think JB wants to move him before he even plays a game, or see Tryamkin as a throw in in a deal. (I don't think Edler is going anywhere)-

Is the team better off with Landeskog in the top 6 than having a better dcorps? That could be worse than last seasons dcorps if Tanev is moved?

Is it easier to acquire a top6 winger/center at the draft than a top4 dman, and do they develop quicker than dmen?

If I am the Avs, I'm asking for Tanev and Boeser+. and the Canucks should be happy saying no, rolling with Tanev and the chance Boeser becomes a top6 winger. and continue to draft and develop.
- hillbillydeluxe

I agree with this

I wouldnt do Tanev for Landeskog straight up. I dont know why some on here are so quick to sell the guy short. He is better than Larsson who just got Hall. Landeskog is a good player but nothing special. Build your defence first as they are harder to predict and take longer to develop. Worry about the forwards once the defence begins to look solid.

Tanev is a top pairing Dman and he is our only legit one. Take him away and this team falls apart.

If we move a top 4 dman like Tanev, Hutton, maybe even Gudbranson though I don't think JB wants to move him before he even plays a game, or see Tryamkin as a throw in in a deal. (I don't think Edler is going anywhere)-

Is the team better off with Landeskog in the top 6 than having a better dcorps? That could be worse than last seasons dcorps if Tanev is moved?

Is it easier to acquire a top6 winger/center at the draft than a top4 dman, and do they develop quicker than dmen?

If I am the Avs, I'm asking for Tanev and Boeser+. and the Canucks should be happy saying no, rolling with Tanev and the chance Boeser becomes a top6 winger. and continue to draft and develop.
- hillbillydeluxe

Thus why I was wondering if we could scrape assets together so we would not have to move Tanev. With Landeskog I would feel okay moving my 1st rounder this year. The need for a 1C would be mitigated by the fact that if Boeser reaches potential, and it looks like he will, whether Bo is a 1C or a 2C he would look like a 1C with Landy and Boeser on his wings.

What is this hockey talk? I thought this was the mental midget politico forum...sheesh.

Now, I'm actually happy to see Juolevi is not participating. Although I want to see him play, he has already had a very long year. An evaluation camp is not required for his selection or development.
- PuckShack

Agreed, after a long season I am glad he's taking time to regroup and train

I think Willie is somewhere in the 18-24 range of coaches in the NHL. He certainly looked much worse last year because of how poor the team was overall, the same way he looked brilliant in his first year because of how they over-achieved.

I would sadly have to agree with Desjardins ranking after watching him over the past two seasons. He's struggled at the NHL level against more experienced coaches and he's certainly struggled in the systems department.

The team isn't hard enough to play against in part because of the poor defensive structure they play with. Although, Trevor Linden did address this in his recent interview where they apparently discussed with Desjardins the need to be more structured without the puck.
- LeftCoaster

I'm curious what your view on the structure makes the team so easy to play against?

So reportedly JB was trying to sign Gagner before he signed with CBJ, does this mean he is now going to explore other options?

Let's offer sheet Monahan 7.9 x 7
- The_Kuze

lol…ok Kevin Lowe

Thus why I was wondering if we could scrape assets together so we would not have to move Tanev. With Landeskog I would feel okay moving my 1st rounder this year. The need for a 1C would be mitigated by the fact that if Boeser reaches potential, and it looks like he will, whether Bo is a 1C or a 2C he would look like a 1C with Landy and Boeser on his wings.
- NorthNuck

You have to add something enticing to that first round pick... blue chip prospect or a young roster player that is still developing like Sven+ or Hutton.

Landeskog is worth more than a 1st round pick. a sure thing/proven top6 vs a draft pick, a gamble.

The Score says that Bill Peters was a 1st year coach last year.

He wasn't.

I'm not going to put a lot of stock in their evaluation of coaching staffs if they can't even figure out how long somebody has BEEN a coach.

We would need a head exploding burkie emoji
- bloatedmosquito

With that hair I'm not sure that's possible

The Score says that Bill Peters was a 1st year coach last year.

He wasn't.

I'm not going to put a lot of stock in their evaluation of coaching staffs if they can't even figure out how long somebody has BEEN a coach.
- BINGO!

No kidding, WD was marked down because of his win-loss record apparently but McLellan is top 15 (I wont even mention Babcock, good coach but obviously being rated on different parameters than W/L)

I think Willie is somewhere in the 18-24 range of coaches in the NHL. He certainly looked much worse last year because of how poor the team was overall, the same way he looked brilliant in his first year because of how they over-achieved.
- NorthNuck

Agree for the most part I would have Willie 16-22 somewhere in there. The rankings focus too much on wins/losses and not the intangibles involved like injuries and lack of personnel.

"the Canucks' upper management has given Willie Desjardins little to work with during a tricky transitional phase for the franchise," and that "Desjardins is a strong players-first coach and he's trusted."

That quote was key in Carols blog. I'm willing to give WD the benefit of the doubt this season with a better roster and hopefully less injuries.

Enter the SMBDragon…should have a field day with this ranking...

Personally I think Lidster is a much bigger problem than WD will ever be.

With that hair I'm not sure that's possible
- Redmile247

That is it exactly. you see at construction sites, the blanket of tires/rubber they put over explosions to keep them contained... same with Burkie's hair, it is there to keep the head exploding contained.

The hair keeps it all bottled inside and he doesn't wear a tie because that would restrict the explosion as it heads towards his stomach and then out his ass.

I'm curious what your view on the structure makes the team so easy to play against?
- WhiteLie

Based too heavily on forecheck and pinching "D", the number of odd-man rushes has to be trimmed down considerably. They play more of a 2-2-1 than I'd like to see.

When you're 3rd last in goal differential or your team is offensively challenged, you've gotta play more conservatively.

The Score says that Bill Peters was a 1st year coach last year.

He wasn't.

I'm not going to put a lot of stock in their evaluation of coaching staffs if they can't even figure out how long somebody has BEEN a coach.
- BINGO!

Yes he was. This year was his second year as head coach.