| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 11:10:20
Who was the best coach this year? Of the finalists, who will win the award? (and tell us who you think 'should' win the award?)
|
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 20:45:44
I agree with what Pain Train said about Ted Nolan - I would have nominated him for coaching a so-so club into the playoffs. I'd also have nominated Bryan Murray for overseeing the turn-around of an Ottawa team that was struggling the first couple of months of the season. That turn-around couldn't have been easy, particularly considering their somewhat fragile psyche as a result of previous year's disappointments.
Of the three they have nominated, I guess I'd give it to Ruff. The fact that the Sabres are a great team doesn't mean that he isn't a great coach (Scotty Bowman coached great teams too). The other nominees definitely deserve some credit too, but to me Ruff gets the slight edge because of the injuries to Buffalo, and also because his team maintained a pretty good consistency over the year (rarely losing consecutive games), and my guess is that his firm guidance contributed to that consistency. |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 17:27:57
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4462
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
How about JS Giguere in 2003. What happened there?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
This is completely off topic and on a tangent.
Giguere had a superb year and playoff run, and wasnt quite the same the following year - although he cannot be blamed entirely for it as personnel moves and style was changed. That being said, how does that relate AT ALL to this discussion?
I hate having to answer crap responses like this that are 'reaching' for some imaginary point to support their perposterous perspective.
The point is that you said a goalie isn't going to be average one year and brilliant the next. So I asked you about Giguere who you admitted in your next post did just that. It's very relative to the tangent we are on. Luongo had his best year ever this year. That is why Vancouver won their division and made it past the first round. Very little to do with the coach. IMO.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
That's fine.. but it's obviously IYUO. (in your uninformed opinion) |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 15:41:45
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4462
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
How about JS Giguere in 2003. What happened there?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
This is completely off topic and on a tangent.
Giguere had a superb year and playoff run, and wasnt quite the same the following year - although he cannot be blamed entirely for it as personnel moves and style was changed. That being said, how does that relate AT ALL to this discussion?
I hate having to answer crap responses like this that are 'reaching' for some imaginary point to support their perposterous perspective.
The point is that you said a goalie isn't going to be average one year and brilliant the next. So I asked you about Giguere who you admitted in your next post did just that. It's very relative to the tangent we are on. Luongo had his best year ever this year. That is why Vancouver won their division and made it past the first round. Very little to do with the coach. IMO.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 11:01:57
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
How about JS Giguere in 2003. What happened there?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
This is completely off topic and on a tangent.
Giguere had a superb year and playoff run, and wasnt quite the same the following year - although he cannot be blamed entirely for it as personnel moves and style was changed. That being said, how does that relate AT ALL to this discussion?
I hate having to answer crap responses like this that are 'reaching' for some imaginary point to support their perposterous perspective. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/05/2007 : 07:08:22
How about JS Giguere in 2003. What happened there?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 05/04/2007 : 23:35:54
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Your response is weak. You really think Luongo has not 'matured' and is now playing at a level much much higher than he was in Floriday? If you believe this, you know less that I thought you knew. Luongo stole games in Florida while regularly being completely ouytshot - and thro in a few 50+ save performances in there for good measure.
I would join this site if it wasnt so frustrating to listen to whinny wannabe analysts who state their fictionalized biased opinions as facts. I dont even believe that THEY really believe what they write and try to back up with illogic.. I really dont.
[/quote]
Uhhhh.... That is exactly what i was saying. My point was that Luongo has matured and is hitting his prime and that is why he wasn't able to singlehandedly carry the Panthers to the playoffs like he has with the Canucks this year. Read my post again and maybe you'll catch it the second time around.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
[/quote]
I got your post.. not read mine again and it's pretty obvious that there is a 'not' in there that should be a 'now' (cant edit/correct a post unless you are a member). Luongo shone in Florida.. he single handedly won them games... I dont know what miracle potion you think he drank over the summer to make him improve as much as you say when going to Vancouver. He may be better, yes (may not be too), but it's an incremental journey for a goalie.. he is not going to be average one year and brilliant the next. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/04/2007 : 18:45:12
[/quote]
Your response is weak. You really think Luongo has not 'matured' and is now playing at a level much much higher than he was in Floriday? If you believe this, you know less that I thought you knew. Luongo stole games in Florida while regularly being completely ouytshot - and thro in a few 50+ save performances in there for good measure.
I would join this site if it wasnt so frustrating to listen to whinny wannabe analysts who state their fictionalized biased opinions as facts. I dont even believe that THEY really believe what they write and try to back up with illogic.. I really dont.
[/quote]
Uhhhh.... That is exactly what i was saying. My point was that Luongo has matured and is hitting his prime and that is why he wasn't able to singlehandedly carry the Panthers to the playoffs like he has with the Canucks this year. Read my post again and maybe you'll catch it the second time around.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
| Guest7418 |
Posted - 05/04/2007 : 16:53:58
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I don't think what Vigneault did was all that impressive. They are where they are in large part because of Luongo. I'm not buying the "he built them into a defensive style team to support Luongo" theory.
Willus, you are such a biased Canuck-hater. ;)
Explain to me why Luongo couldnt even get into the playoffs by himself in Long Island or Florida? I agree, Luongo is a big part of the team, but he is mostly certainly not the only part.
Actually, don't try to explain. It will just start another illogical non-fact based discussion with no conclusion. ;)
This argument is weak!!
Why didn't Lecavalier score 50 goals last year?
Player's mature and hit their prime at different times.
Players have great years. Maybe this is one of Luongo's.....
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Your response is weak. You really think Luongo has not 'matured' and is now playing at a level much much higher than he was in Floriday? If you believe this, you know less that I thought you knew. Luongo stole games in Florida while regularly being completely ouytshot - and thro in a few 50+ save performances in there for good measure.
I would join this site if it wasnt so frustrating to listen to whinny wannabe analysts who state their fictionalized biased opinions as facts. I dont even believe that THEY really believe what they write and try to back up with illogic.. I really dont. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 11:49:10
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I don't think what Vigneault did was all that impressive. They are where they are in large part because of Luongo. I'm not buying the "he built them into a defensive style team to support Luongo" theory.
Willus, you are such a biased Canuck-hater. ;)
Explain to me why Luongo couldnt even get into the playoffs by himself in Long Island or Florida? I agree, Luongo is a big part of the team, but he is mostly certainly not the only part.
Actually, don't try to explain. It will just start another illogical non-fact based discussion with no conclusion. ;)
This argument is weak!!
Why didn't Lecavalier score 50 goals last year?
Player's mature and hit their prime at different times.
Players have great years. Maybe this is one of Luongo's.....
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
| bonfire420 |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 09:16:23
[/quote]
Read this then read my previous post. It's like I could read his mind...
[/quote]
You must have super powers mr. babs. 
I did read your response and it doesn't address my point about you guys not following Vancouver closely for a few years. As a die hard canucks fan I can see the drastic changes that have been made to the teams overall style. This has nothing to do with goaltending although as a great coach Vigneault has recognized he has one of the best goalies and has adjusted the team's style accordingly. As I said before if you don't think he should win I can see that, but if you don't think he should be a finalist... well, let's just say we'll agree to disagree. |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 17:18:59
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
[What I meant about Luongo is that his success comes from the training of a different coach, not Vigneault, and since Luongo helped them a lot it wasn't Vigneault's training that got them this far, since he didn't train Luongo. But whatever, fair enough. We all have our opinions, but we'll just have to wait to see who gets it 
That was my point too Mikhailova. Goaltenders are never taught by the head coach, that's what the goaltender coach is for. Head coach can dictate general style of play, and scenario choices, but all technical aspects of tending is left to the experts. V does not more and no less here than any other head coach in the league. |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 17:15:43
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
I don't really appreciate the blatant dismissal without justification, but hey it's not reflective of me...
By the way, I'm sick of people saying that if we don't think Vigneault deserves the Adams that we must hate him or not follow hockey. There happen to be educated hockey fans out there and the followers of a team are not the only hockey fans who know about that team. I could easily be pitching Wilson as a candidate because I think he is more deserving than Vigneault, but I think there are even MORE deserving candidates than Wilson, ex: Trotz. Now for a Sharks fan to be supporting the Preds' coach is borderline "treason"  , but I'm not narrow-minded enough to think that my team's coach is the most deserving just because I like him, and certainly not to the point where I would shoot down the (educated) fans who don't think my team's coach deserves to win. If you want to put reasons forward that would suggest why Wilson is not as deserving as others to win, go right ahead. I might debate them if I don't agree, but I will never question how much of a fan of hockey you are.
I'm not even a Canuck fan so don't think i'm goin' all homey. Don't try to hide behind the fact that you arent choosin' your own coach either.. but that would be a joke. With the team that SJ has, they should have competed for the Presidents trophy this year, so basically it was an example of a coaching failure (ok, to be fair it was not a failure, but it was far from being elite). Trotz is a good coach, but my pet weasle could have made the playoffs coaching the Preds this year. Trotz had his Pred fighting for the President trophy not too far bad... and ended up as the 4th seed (dont go all more points this, more points that on me..., bottom line is he ended up 4th seed). Man-o-man, with the talent that he had, and playing the likes of chicago, columbus, and St. Louis (he first 3/4 of the season team) a zillion times, i'm surprised that they didnt finish with even more wins... I'm not bashing Trotz, I believe in his abillity, but come on... let's get realistic about teams here... And yeah, there are lots of hockey-knowledgable people around, but they dont always talk with their brains or out of their mouths. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 17:03:16
I don't really appreciate the blatant dismissal without justification, but hey it's not reflective of me...
By the way, I'm sick of people saying that if we don't think Vigneault deserves the Adams that we must hate him or not follow hockey. There happen to be educated hockey fans out there and the followers of a team are not the only hockey fans who know about that team. I could easily be pitching Wilson as a candidate because I think he is more deserving than Vigneault, but I think there are even MORE deserving candidates than Wilson, ex: Trotz. Now for a Sharks fan to be supporting the Preds' coach is borderline "treason" , but I'm not narrow-minded enough to think that my team's coach is the most deserving just because I like him, and certainly not to the point where I would shoot down the (educated) fans who don't think my team's coach deserves to win. If you want to put reasons forward that would suggest why Wilson is not as deserving as others to win, go right ahead. I might debate them if I don't agree, but I will never question how much of a fan of hockey you are. |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:57:28
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
quote:
Originally posted by bonfire420
wow, people really have a chip on their shoulder about Vignualt! I could understand if they don't feel he should win the award but to say "the fact that Vignault is a finalist is truely an embaressment to me"... that's pretty far fetched. I like tctitans comment about how if it's all about Luongo why didn't he single handedly lead Florida into the playoffs every year he was there? The fact is Vignault has completely changed the style of the team. Anyone who disagrees either has not followed Vancouver over the past few years or has something against the guy (or the team, which I think is more likely). In addition, he's led this team to a division championship and into the second round of the playoffs when most people predicted at the start of the season they wouldn't even make the playoffs! I dont' know, I just don't get some people on this site...
Read this then read my previous post. It's like I could read his mind...
I have nothing against Vigneault, never have. In fact he used to coach the Moose, which were my hometown team so at one point I would have cheered for him. What I don't like is undeserving candidates being nominated (also like Kiprusoff for the Vezina). If his "success" keeps being blown out of proportion in the media like Kiprusoff's, then I might start to hate him too. Sometimes I just question some of the decisions that the league/writers make and this is one of them. I know there are a lot of deserving candidates but I think the point is that there are many MORE deserving candidates.
You have your opinions Baboushka... but unfortunately this time you are just plain wrong. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:57:19
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2049
I see where you are coming from now on some of your other points Mikhailova.
>And Vigneault had no influence on Luongo's training, he's got an
>entirely different goaltending coach
This is true, but you can say that about all head coaches in the league so i'm not sure the point.
What Vigneaut did with the team, the team strategy, team focus, how to use Luongo and how to play in front him him is pure genius. He led a rag-tag group of (sounds like battlestar galactica :o) blue collar players to a division title. Luongo DIDNT do that, but Luongo was a big part of that.
Nuff said... This is all too obvious to be debated any further. All people who can't see that V belongs in the finalist, simple has a Vendetta for him. ;)
i''''''m out!
ps. Vancouver may arguably have the best 2nd line in the NHL today. Unfortunately, they don't have a 1st line.
What I meant about Luongo is that his success comes from the training of a different coach, not Vigneault, and since Luongo helped them a lot it wasn't Vigneault's training that got them this far, since he didn't train Luongo. But whatever, fair enough. We all have our opinions, but we'll just have to wait to see who gets it |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:54:21
quote:
Originally posted by bonfire420
wow, people really have a chip on their shoulder about Vignualt! I could understand if they don't feel he should win the award but to say "the fact that Vignault is a finalist is truely an embaressment to me"... that's pretty far fetched. I like tctitans comment about how if it's all about Luongo why didn't he single handedly lead Florida into the playoffs every year he was there? The fact is Vignault has completely changed the style of the team. Anyone who disagrees either has not followed Vancouver over the past few years or has something against the guy (or the team, which I think is more likely). In addition, he's led this team to a division championship and into the second round of the playoffs when most people predicted at the start of the season they wouldn't even make the playoffs! I dont' know, I just don't get some people on this site...
Read this then read my previous post. It's like I could read his mind...
I have nothing against Vigneault, never have. In fact he used to coach the Moose, which were my hometown team so at one point I would have cheered for him. What I don't like is undeserving candidates being nominated (also like Kiprusoff for the Vezina). If his "success" keeps being blown out of proportion in the media like Kiprusoff's, then I might start to hate him too. Sometimes I just question some of the decisions that the league/writers make and this is one of them. I know there are a lot of deserving candidates but I think the point is that there are many MORE deserving candidates. |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:54:16
I see where you are coming from now on some of your other points Mikhailova.
>And Vigneault had no influence on Luongo's training, he's got an
>entirely different goaltending coach
This is true, but you can say that about all head coaches in the league so i'm not sure the point.
What Vigneaut did with the team, the team strategy, team focus, how to use Luongo and how to play in front him him is pure genius. He led a rag-tag group of (sounds like battlestar galactica :o) blue collar players to a division title. Luongo DIDNT do that, but Luongo was a big part of that.
Nuff said... This is all too obvious to be debated any further. All people who can't see that V belongs in the finalist, simple has a Vendetta for him. ;)
i''''''m out!
ps. Vancouver may arguably have the best 2nd line in the NHL today. Unfortunately, they don't have a 1st line.
|
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:46:35
I think Therrien will win, but I think Ruff should win.
Therrien did a lot with a toung team, brought them along quickly, but Ruff is day in and day out the best coach in the NHL. His team always plays hard and he's not afraid of his players (ex - making Afinogenov sit in the most important game of the year).
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. - Gretz |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:26:31
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2049
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
Because they don't coach Canadian teams.
BULLCRAP.
I meant they're not considered HERE ON THIS SITE because they don't coach Canadian teams, and 98% of the members here are Canadian, therefore probably only consider guys like Vigneault. In reality, I know this isn't the reason they weren't chosen for the finals.
quote:
quote:
You're completely right babs, no Western conference followers here talk about the Sharks, the Avs, the Wild, the Ducks, the Kings, or the Wings nearly as much as they talk about the Flames, the Oilers, and the Canucks.
Daa... Of course this is true. Because most of the people on this board are Canucks, Flames, and Oilers fans.
The point of that was to say that babs was right when he said the so-called "die-hard Western conference fans" only talk about the Canadian teams and not the whole Western conference.
quote:
quote:
The reason Vigneault is winning this poll is because the majority of members are Canucks fans.
True again. But who cares about this stupid poll? The REAL poll was already taken and Vigneault, like him or hate him, was a top 3 finalist.
This poll here is for the WINNER, not the top 3, and the winning poll hasn't been taken yet in the NHL. I'm just pointing out to all the people complaining that Vigneault is winning is because most of the people voting cheer for his team.
quote:
quote:
But we all know LUONGO won the division for them, not Vigneault.
]No, we dont all know that. That is an interesting opinion you have there Mikhailova.
Clearly you don't recognize a hyperbole when you see one. Of course I didn't mean EVERYONE knows that, but lots of people agree Luongo carried the team, and you have to admit there's no telling where Vancouver would've been without Luongo. And Vigneault had no influence on Luongo's training, he's got an entirely different goaltending coach.
|
| bonfire420 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 16:16:17
wow, people really have a chip on their shoulder about Vignualt! I could understand if they don't feel he should win the award but to say "the fact that Vignault is a finalist is truely an embaressment to me"... that's pretty far fetched. I like tctitans comment about how if it's all about Luongo why didn't he single handedly lead Florida into the playoffs every year he was there? The fact is Vignault has completely changed the style of the team. Anyone who disagrees either has not followed Vancouver over the past few years or has something against the guy (or the team, which I think is more likely). In addition, he's led this team to a division championship and into the second round of the playoffs when most people predicted at the start of the season they wouldn't even make the playoffs! I dont' know, I just don't get some people on this site... |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 15:30:48
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Trotz like Ruff MADE THEM AN ELITE TEAM. He did this by developing young players like Weber and Hamhuis into household defensemen, among other things.
Your very argument applies here. I agree that Trotz and Ruff are both good coaches, but without generalizing (like you have) what did they do?
My point in asking the question is that it's very hard to answer this question in detail. Anyone can generalize.
The main points for Vigneault are: He took a team that was not supposed to make the playoffs (and Yes, all the experts who made this prediction knew that Luongo was their goalie), and won the division with them. That's a pretty impressive feat. Now you will ask 'How did he do that' and that is not an easy question to answer. Just like it's not easy to answer for any other coach's accomplishments (I havent heard 1 concrete example yet to the contrary).
Because we dont have the answers to the "How's", we must fall back on the "What's" (the facts), and the "What's" point to Vigneault being a top contender for this award.
On a side note, when Vigneault was asked about how he felt about being nominated, he was pretty blunt and made it clear that he believes that of all the awards, this is the most 'team' based award as it involves not just the coach, but his assistants, trainers, facilities staff, management, players, fans, and every other factor that makes a team successful.
The "How's" are implicit based on the "What's"...
great points tctitans. I don't see any possible arguments againt this (besides some people's emotional ramblings because their favorites didnt get picked boo-hoo). Trotz, Wilson, Lemaire, .. all are good coaches and good candidates, but noone (at least no sane person) can argue that they had a hell of a lot more tools to work with than Vigneault or Thierrien (who himself had a lot more tools than Vigneault). Stop playing the boo-hoo card and fess up. You dont have to like it, but at least show some resemblance of logic and cognitive thinking. |
| Guest2049 |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 15:19:35
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Some of you Westerners who claim to be die-hard inter-Conference fans only really follow the Western Canadian teams.
True. Some fans only like 1 team. Some fans only like Eastern teams. Some fans only like southern teams. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
quote:
Why aren't guys like Carlyle, Trotz and Wilson even being considered?
THEY WERE. They were considered, then rejected as not beloning in the top 3.
quote:
Because they don't coach Canadian teams.
BULLCRAP.
quote:
You're completely right babs, no Western conference followers here talk about the Sharks, the Avs, the Wild, the Ducks, the Kings, or the Wings nearly as much as they talk about the Flames, the Oilers, and the Canucks.
Daa... Of course this is true. Because most of the people on this board are Canucks, Flames, and Oilers fans.
quote:
The reason Vigneault is winning this poll is because the majority of members are Canucks fans.
True again. But who cares about this stupid poll? The REAL poll was already taken and Vigneault, like him or hate him, was a top 3 finalist.
quote:
But we all know LUONGO won the division for them, not Vigneault.
No, we dont all know that. That is an interesting opinion you have there Mikhailova.
quote:
I'd like to see where the Canucks would end up WITHOUT Luongo under Vigneault's coaching.
Yes, that would be interesting.
[quote]
They wouldn't have been 3rd in the West, that's for sure.
Noone will ever know. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 14:53:07
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Some of you Westerners who claim to be die-hard inter-Conference fans only really follow the Western Canadian teams. Why aren't guys like Carlyle, Trotz and Wilson even being considered?
Because they don't coach Canadian teams. You're completely right babs, no Western conference followers here talk about the Sharks, the Avs, the Wild, the Ducks, the Kings, or the Wings nearly as much as they talk about the Flames, the Oilers, and the Canucks. The reason Vigneault is winning this poll is because the majority of members are Canucks fans. But we all know LUONGO won the division for them, not Vigneault. I'd like to see where the Canucks would end up WITHOUT Luongo under Vigneault's coaching. They wouldn't have been 3rd in the West, that's for sure. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 14:39:44
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Trotz like Ruff MADE THEM AN ELITE TEAM. He did this by developing young players like Weber and Hamhuis into household defensemen, among other things.
Your very argument applies here. I agree that Trotz and Ruff are both good coaches, but without generalizing (like you have) what did they do?
My point in asking the question is that it's very hard to answer this question in detail. Anyone can generalize.
The main points for Vigneault are: He took a team that was not supposed to make the playoffs (and Yes, all the experts who made this prediction knew that Luongo was their goalie), and won the division with them. That's a pretty impressive feat. Now you will ask 'How did he do that' and that is not an easy question to answer. Just like it's not easy to answer for any other coach's accomplishments (I havent heard 1 concrete example yet to the contrary).
Because we dont have the answers to the "How's", we must fall back on the "What's" (the facts), and the "What's" point to Vigneault being a top contender for this award.
On a side note, when Vigneault was asked about how he felt about being nominated, he was pretty blunt and made it clear that he believes that of all the awards, this is the most 'team' based award as it involves not just the coach, but his assistants, trainers, facilities staff, management, players, fans, and every other factor that makes a team successful.
The "How's" are implicit based on the "What's"...
|
| PainTrain |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 20:12:56
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
WHAT DID VIGNEAULT DO?
Everyone is quick to say "Oh he is the best coach, he turned this team around, blah blah blah...". No one can justify it. Yet when people try to justify why he doesn't deserve to win the biased voters shoot us down. The only arguments offered so far are "Why couldn't Luongo win in Florida?", "If you don't vote for Vigneault you hate the West or you're ignorant" or "Vigneault has the Midas touch". The first two are completely unrelated to Vigneault's coaching abilities and the third is a baseless comment. I live in the East but I hate the Conference and hardly pay attention to its standings/results. I much rather pay attention to the Ducks, Sharks, Kings, Wings, Preds, Wild, Avs, because it's a much better brand of hockey (in my opinion). But there is a difference between liking the "West" and actually following the West. Some of you Westerners who claim to be die-hard inter-Conference fans only really follow the Western Canadian teams. Why aren't guys like Carlyle, Trotz and Wilson even being considered? Of course the main argument is because they have more talent to work with, but that just doesn't cut it. First of all, Nashville is certainly no better skillwise than Buffalo, but Trotz like Ruff MADE THEM AN ELITE TEAM. He did this by developing young players like Weber and Hamhuis into household defensemen, among other things. Wilson had some good players to work with, but a well-structured PP didn't just come from Boston with Thornton. Wilson and Strelow worked with Nabokov and Toskala by developing their aggressiveness (notice how Nabokov almost lives outside the crease?) and their rebound control in order to make them both top 10 NHL goalies (when Nabokov shows up). How about Carlyle orchestrating the emergences of players like Beauchemin and McDonald, with the newborn Selanne? No flukes. But ask the NYR and Avs from a few years back who were stacked with talent but failed miserably. Just because a team has an All-Star lineup doesn't mean that it will automatically succeed.
But of course, none of this matters unless you coach a Canadian team or coach in the East.
Babs I agree with you. The west had 7 teams with over 100 points.Another coach is Jaque Lemaire of the Minnesota Wild. Without Gaborik for a majority of the season he has made the team still have success. Like I said Ruff deserves it for the amount of man games lost and they still manage to be at the top of the league. But what you're saying is true. Almost every coach in the west could be nominated. Willson, Carlyle, Trotz etc. And also another coach from the east is Ted Nolan, look at what he has done to the Islanders he made a not a playoff team to make the playoffs. By you saying Vigneault shouldn't get it is pretty true without Luongo they wouldn't be anywhere and you're right the penalty kill was the best thing he has done. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 19:18:34
WHAT DID VIGNEAULT DO?
Everyone is quick to say "Oh he is the best coach, he turned this team around, blah blah blah...". No one can justify it. Yet when people try to justify why he doesn't deserve to win the biased voters shoot us down. The only arguments offered so far are "Why couldn't Luongo win in Florida?", "If you don't vote for Vigneault you hate the West or you're ignorant" or "Vigneault has the Midas touch". The first two are completely unrelated to Vigneault's coaching abilities and the third is a baseless comment. I live in the East but I hate the Conference and hardly pay attention to its standings/results. I much rather pay attention to the Ducks, Sharks, Kings, Wings, Preds, Wild, Avs, because it's a much better brand of hockey (in my opinion). But there is a difference between liking the "West" and actually following the West. Some of you Westerners who claim to be die-hard inter-Conference fans only really follow the Western Canadian teams. Why aren't guys like Carlyle, Trotz and Wilson even being considered? Of course the main argument is because they have more talent to work with, but that just doesn't cut it. First of all, Nashville is certainly no better skillwise than Buffalo, but Trotz like Ruff MADE THEM AN ELITE TEAM. He did this by developing young players like Weber and Hamhuis into household defensemen, among other things. Wilson had some good players to work with, but a well-structured PP didn't just come from Boston with Thornton. Wilson and Strelow worked with Nabokov and Toskala by developing their aggressiveness (notice how Nabokov almost lives outside the crease?) and their rebound control in order to make them both top 10 NHL goalies (when Nabokov shows up). How about Carlyle orchestrating the emergences of players like Beauchemin and McDonald, with the newborn Selanne? No flukes. But ask the NYR and Avs from a few years back who were stacked with talent but failed miserably. Just because a team has an All-Star lineup doesn't mean that it will automatically succeed.
But of course, none of this matters unless you coach a Canadian team or coach in the East. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 18:58:18
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7418
Anyone who says that Vigneault didnt do anything to deserve being a finalist either hates the Canucks, lives out east, and/or doesnt know what the heck they are talking about. He has single-handedly done more to improve his team than any other coach in the NHL this year. I'm not saying he is the best coach, as Lemaire is a genius, but Vigneault has had the midas touch this year and completely deserves the kudos he is getting.
Why is Lemaire a genius?
"Go chase headlights!" |
| Guest7418 |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 18:53:43
Anyone who says that Vigneault didnt do anything to deserve being a finalist either hates the Canucks, lives out east, and/or doesnt know what the heck they are talking about. He has single-handedly done more to improve his team than any other coach in the NHL this year. I'm not saying he is the best coach, as Lemaire is a genius, but Vigneault has had the midas touch this year and completely deserves the kudos he is getting.
|
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 18:10:40
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
The fact that Vigneault is a finalist is truly embarrassing to me. I COULD have led Vancouver to the top of the NW with Luongo in net. All he needed was a TINY bit of offense (which wasn't there in Florida) and the team was okay. The only thing I will credit Vigneault for (which I've mentioned many a time before) is the top PK unit in the league. But I think there is no excuse as to why Naslund is under-performing and all the other stuff (line-juggling, etc.) that people seem to think he mastered, well those are a coach's duties, they aren't criteria for an elite coach.
I still think it's absurd that Trotz isn't even being considered. I know why he isn't (no exposure) but this guy has transformed a terrible expansion team that couldn't give a ticket away into one of the best teams in the NHL with a solid fanbase. I mean it's not his fault he keeps meeting SJ in the playoffs . But seriously, I think he should win by a long shot.
Too many haters out there. ;) It's either that or people are just ignorant (this isnt an insult!) and we can't blame them for that. Good that the media people have more access to all the facts. I'm impressed that even with the west coast exposure that the media folk included Alain on this list.. Just goes to show you that he must have done an amazing job to even compensate for being out west.
TC you're such an East hater!!!
Not quite, as there are several teams out east that I really really like. I dont however, like the general eastern bias that affects so many aspects of the game. C'est la vie. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 18:07:00
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
The fact that Vigneault is a finalist is truly embarrassing to me. I COULD have led Vancouver to the top of the NW with Luongo in net. All he needed was a TINY bit of offense (which wasn't there in Florida) and the team was okay. The only thing I will credit Vigneault for (which I've mentioned many a time before) is the top PK unit in the league. But I think there is no excuse as to why Naslund is under-performing and all the other stuff (line-juggling, etc.) that people seem to think he mastered, well those are a coach's duties, they aren't criteria for an elite coach.
I still think it's absurd that Trotz isn't even being considered. I know why he isn't (no exposure) but this guy has transformed a terrible expansion team that couldn't give a ticket away into one of the best teams in the NHL with a solid fanbase. I mean it's not his fault he keeps meeting SJ in the playoffs . But seriously, I think he should win by a long shot.
Too many haters out there. ;) It's either that or people are just ignorant (this isnt an insult!) and we can't blame them for that. Good that the media people have more access to all the facts. I'm impressed that even with the west coast exposure that the media folk included Alain on this list.. Just goes to show you that he must have done an amazing job to even compensate for being out west.
TC you're such an East hater!!!
"Go chase headlights!" |
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 17:54:12
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
The fact that Vigneault is a finalist is truly embarrassing to me. I COULD have led Vancouver to the top of the NW with Luongo in net. All he needed was a TINY bit of offense (which wasn't there in Florida) and the team was okay. The only thing I will credit Vigneault for (which I've mentioned many a time before) is the top PK unit in the league. But I think there is no excuse as to why Naslund is under-performing and all the other stuff (line-juggling, etc.) that people seem to think he mastered, well those are a coach's duties, they aren't criteria for an elite coach.
I still think it's absurd that Trotz isn't even being considered. I know why he isn't (no exposure) but this guy has transformed a terrible expansion team that couldn't give a ticket away into one of the best teams in the NHL with a solid fanbase. I mean it's not his fault he keeps meeting SJ in the playoffs . But seriously, I think he should win by a long shot.
Too many haters out there. ;) It's either that or people are just ignorant (this isnt an insult!) and we can't blame them for that. Good that the media people have more access to all the facts. I'm impressed that even with the west coast exposure that the media folk included Alain on this list.. Just goes to show you that he must have done an amazing job to even compensate for being out west. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 17:49:34
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
[I thiink that the Canucks success was entirely Luongo and if you put an average goalie in net (or even one that was a lot better than average) and I they would have barely made the playoffs, if at all.
Thanks Leigh. You pretty much prove here why Vigneault is a finalist. If they made the playoffs without Luongo, then Vigneault should be the clear winner. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 17:47:01
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I don't think what Vigneault did was all that impressive. They are where they are in large part because of Luongo. I'm not buying the "he built them into a defensive style team to support Luongo" theory.
Willus, you are such a biased Canuck-hater. ;)
Explain to me why Luongo couldnt even get into the playoffs by himself in Long Island or Florida? I agree, Luongo is a big part of the team, but he is mostly certainly not the only part.
Actually, don't try to explain. It will just start another illogical non-fact based discussion with no conclusion. ;) |
| willus3 |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 16:10:05
I still can't believe Gretzky isn't a finalist here. 
"Go chase headlights!" |
| leafsfan_101 |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 16:09:00
Vingnault hasn't really done anything to change this team, it's been more of what Luongo has done. Lindy Ruff had an easy team to coach going into the year but its amazing how they won the Presidents Trophy with so many injuries. Therrien coached well and kept his team disciplined and a contender. My vote had to go to Ruff though, he coached a team when it had about 12 regulars out at one time in the season and still have the top ranked team.
When life gives you lemons throw them at the Ottawa Senators and their fans and hope it gets them in the eyes ;) |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 16:00:41
Ok, so I can't spell Radivojevic, lol. But I can pronounce it without being told how to 
So anyway, the Pens jumped from last to 5th in the league, but that wasn't entirely due to Therrien. Crosby and the others had skill, and although Therrien helped them play well together as a team, most of the work was already done for him since they brought their talent with them. So who made the bigger jump isn't always the best criteria to base the vote on, ergo Ruff wins it. And I can't believe why Vinegoat or however you spell it was a finalist either. I hope he doesn't win it. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 15:55:09
quote:
Originally posted by Leafs Rock Planet
I think it has to be Lindy Ruff. He took a team that was just fighting for a playoff spot last year and turned it into one of the best eams in the NHL.
Last year Buffalo finished 4th in the East, 5th in the League. Not really battling that hard...
And Mik, it's Radivojevic lol. No 'h'. |
| Leafs Rock Planet |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 15:48:41
I think it has to be Lindy Ruff. He took a team that was just fighting for a playoff spot last year and turned it into one of the best eams in the NHL.
Forecheck+Backcheck= Paycheck!!! |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 15:44:59
Yeah willus, I am biased toward the Sabres (not quite a homer, Maryland's about 5 hours from Buffalo), but I really do believe Ruff is the best option here. Therrien would be second, he did a good job with the Pens, it's just they already had a lot of talent to begin with. Vigneault however...no way, as I explained earlier. And (this didn't affect my voting, but) his is the one name in the NHL I cannot remember how to spell. I can spell Radivojevich and Niittymäki, but not Vigneault, lol. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 05/01/2007 : 15:43:27
The fact that Vigneault is a finalist is truly embarrassing to me. I COULD have led Vancouver to the top of the NW with Luongo in net. All he needed was a TINY bit of offense (which wasn't there in Florida) and the team was okay. The only thing I will credit Vigneault for (which I've mentioned many a time before) is the top PK unit in the league. But I think there is no excuse as to why Naslund is under-performing and all the other stuff (line-juggling, etc.) that people seem to think he mastered, well those are a coach's duties, they aren't criteria for an elite coach.
I still think it's absurd that Trotz isn't even being considered. I know why he isn't (no exposure) but this guy has transformed a terrible expansion team that couldn't give a ticket away into one of the best teams in the NHL with a solid fanbase. I mean it's not his fault he keeps meeting SJ in the playoffs . But seriously, I think he should win by a long shot. |
|
|
