How do you rate Travis Green’s first year?

[PG Canuck]

Green has a worse roster in that the vets are another year older and further over the hill, goaltending is worse and injuries to important players.

7/10.

The Sedins are on pace to outproduce their totals from last year. Insert Boeser and Vanek, that’s what, another 96pts of offense.

So who is over the hill?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I would give him an incomplete,but overall I've liked what he has done...He has been consistent on his message of an attacking style of play,although this has conceded more goals against..its certainly more watchable.

I'm looking forward to next season.

 

[Hammer79]

So why did we fire Willie then? He had an NHL roster?

Willie was coaching in 2014-2015 when the Sedins were still close to point-per-game players, Vrbata had racked up 31 goals and somehow the team managed a 48–29–5 record. He then 1-2-3-4'rd his way through the first round and got bounced by a putrid Flames team. I think they decided to give him another chance but he presided over the collapse of the team. Maybe his firing was part optics, pressure from season ticket holders perhaps, but I think his firing was a hockey decision and he did have 3 seasons behind the bench.

 

[pgj98m3]

Willie was coaching in 2014-2015 when the Sedins were still close to point-per-game players, Vrbata had racked up 31 goals and somehow the team managed a 48–29–5 record. He then 1-2-3-4'rd his way through the first round and got bounced by a putrid Flames team. I think they decided to give him another chance but he presided over the collapse of the team. Maybe his firing was part optics, pressure from season ticket holders perhaps, but I think his firing was a hockey decision and he did have 3 seasons behind the bench.

Hopefully the same criteria applies to Lindenning...send them both off with Golden Parachutes

 

[Siludin]

The Canucks actually were a middling team this year, but it had a glass foundation and was derailed not due to the quantity of injuries, but I think specifically due to untimely injuries to Horvat and Tanev complemented with other injuries at the time. The team next year will be very interesting. Green needs another option at defense, and any Canucks coach would have to contend with being shackled in limbo by the Sedins.

 

[Siludin]

Edit: accidentally quoted instead of edited

 

[pgj98m3]

The Canucks actually were a middling team this year, but it had a glass foundation and was derailed not due to the quantity of injuries, but I think specifically due to untimely injuries to Horvat and Tanev complemented with other injuries at the time. The team next year will be very interesting. Green needs another option at defense, and any Canucks coach would have to contend with being shackled in limbo by the Sedins.

‘Middling’....okay.......
I agree that Green needs another option on defence...about 8 new players would be a start. Add 7-8 new forwards and a couple of goalies and we can strive to be middling.

 

[RandV]

Kind of hard to say really. Doesn't have the same painful quirks that Willie had, but the team isn't showing to be any better under Green. Kind of hard to blame him though seeing how bad the roster is, as we saw in the first year when the team was still decent even Willie could coach a team to the playoffs.

I think one thing that's safe to say though is Green probably isn't going to ever end up being a great coach. At the AHL level he got a lot of credit for taking a team devoid of talent & depth, keeping them competitive and coaching them into the playoffs. That was the farm though, doesn't look like there will be any of that magic in the big league.

 

[tyhee]

We can argue better roster, worse roster, defence, forwards, goaltending, whatever we want. The season isn't a success. The team isn't improving. Green's the coach.

The question then becomes, what matters and what doesn't?

People complain about Boeser sitting out the first two games of the year. I'm not sure why. Does anyone seriously think Brock Boeser turned into a worse player because he sat out the first two games of the season? Does anyone think the Canucks are missing the playoffs because Brock Boeser missed those two games in which the Canucks got 3 of a possible 4 points?

I can see potential damage to the team if the future careers of players are damaged by treatment from Green. Hutton is the example that springs to mind that one wonders about, though we don't know what is going on behind the scenes or what Green's reasoning is.

The reasoning could be as little as trying to create motivation to work harder on his game or conditioning-after all, Hutton went straight to the NHL as a rookie, then was given an extension at a salary that probably surprised even him. He was considered a top-4 d-man by the beginning of his second season. Lack of adversity can lead to lack of motivation to improve-or even failing to realize that improvement is required.

Is that it? I don't know. I do think it's too early to say Green has done any lasting harm, and short-term harm may not be all bad. I understand the reasons for concern from some posters, but when a team is in transition with a demonstrably bad roster, the success of the franchise depends on development moves more than trying to squeeze an extra couple of wins so that one can draft, to choose a random example, 6th instead of 4th in the 2nd and subsequent rounds of the next draft.

Sitting Brock Boeser for two games to start the season was not a bad development move. He will never be a worse player for having sat out those two games. He would not have rated to do better than the one goal and one assist he got in his first two regular season games, it will not adversely affect his play next season or beyond and it didn't cost the Canucks anything of any consequence at all.

 

[Seatoo]

I'd like him a lot more if he wasn't trying to ruin the careers of Hutton and Goldobin - his WD impression is spot on with those two

 

[mossey3535]

I'd give him a B-. Philosophically it seems like he knows what he is doing but I think the cold hard reality of the NHL set in quickly and lots of stuff he was trying to do at the beginning just didn't stick.

Like literally anyone who could change the sequence of the numbers 1-2-3-4 would be a better in-game mananger than WD, and I like that Green can do that.

However, I also think that when he had no answers he regressed and went with useless scrub veterans even when they didn't actually produce proportionally to the amount of faith he put into them.

I think he could be pretty good but it will depend on whether he shows signs of adapting and innovating. IMO that same old shtick that we saw with WD, and Torts, and AV; isn't going to cut it in the NHL in general and this team in particular. We're going to be too young (barring more inane UFA signings...ok, nevermind).

 

[dc]

He has one of the worst blue lines in the NHL to work with. That exposes the average to below average goaltending and makes us a basement team. They were looking good for ten games, but that was about it. I like the style of play he implemented and the team was in many of the games for the first 3/4 of the season.

 

[WTG]

I think he has done a great job.

Just like Willie did a great job. :]

 

[vancityluongo]

Green is significantly less frustrating as a fan. His post-game interviews, general communication and in-game line management are a significant improvement on Willie. He also hasn't been trying to make square pegs (Sutter, Megna, Chaput) fit into round holes (top-6 roles with PP time). The deployment of the Sedins, Gaunce and Sutter this year is exactly how they should be played, and never would've happened under Willie.

However, the results speak for themselves. This is a better roster with a worse record. The positives from the stuff above are negated by negatives in other areas. He may be even more veteran-friendly than Willie, which is astonishing. Young players have stagnated, obviously Hutton in particular, but he didn't get another notch of performance out of Baertschi, Granlund, Gaunce, Stecher, Markstrom, etc. Aside from Boeser and Horvat, how many young players have actually developed or progressed this season? 10 minute Jake has had a positive season IMO that Green could get credit for, especially relative to how Willie handled him, but that's about it.

I think in any given season, Green could be between the 15th and 25th best coach in the league - probably not bottom-5 bad, but too many flaws to be better than average. Willie for the Calgary playoff disaster alone was bottom-5. Green's performance this year has him teetering closer to 25 than 15.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

He's a competent NHL coach, an improvement on Willie. I don't think he's committed to the franchise, frankly. He's not putting the future of the team first in his lineup and usage decisions. Instead he's doing what he can to keep the team competitive game to game, riding veterans, scratching young players when they struggle, etc. I suppose if you're trying to grind out a few extra points in 2017-18 it's not a bad plan. Despite a few consistently frustrating decisions I think his roster construction makes sense, which is... better than Willie. Again, he's no Willie. But I just have the feeling that Travis is looking at Travis' career and thinking mostly about how he can secure his second HC job in the NHL. He's not thinking about building this team into a cup contender over a period of years, probably because he's smart enough to recognize that he's working for morons who aren't long for their jobs.

 

[Canucks1096]

I give him a "F"

For some reason Green got this reputation that he is good with young players. He didn't make any impact on hardly any of our younger players

Baertschi, Grandlund, Hutton, Stecher, Gaunce, Goldobin showed no improvement or got worst

Virtanen. He showed a little improvement in his overall game but He only has 17 points in this season. Close to same ppg he had in rookie season. If your points don't go up? Can you really say he made much improvement? I hear a lot of people say Virtanen made hugh improvements. In my opinion a lot people think that because his sexy end to end rushes is tricking you guys into thinking he is better player. But those end to end rushes don't to lead much most of the time.

Horvat and Boeser. Regardless of the coach. I think they will have the same impact.

This is coach that made Boeser a heathy scratch for the first 2 games and told Boeser that your not good enough to play in the nhl this year.

In conclusion Green made no young players A lot better this year.

Has he even me a young player better in Utica a lot better?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I give him a "F"

For some reason Green got this reputation that he is good with young players. He didn't make any impact on hardly any of our younger players

Baertschi, Grandlund, Hutton, Stecher, Gaunce, Goldobin showed no improvement or got worst

Virtanen. He showed a little improvement in his overall game but He only has 17 points in this season. Close to same ppg he had in rookie season. If your points don't go up? Can you really say he made much improvement? I hear a lot of people say Virtanen made hugh improvements. In my opinion a lot people think that because his sexy end to end rushes is tricking you guys into thinking he is better player. But those end to end rushes don't to lead much most of the time.

Horvat and Boeser. Regardless of the coach. I think they will have the same impact.

This is coach that made Boeser a heathy scratch for the first 2 games and told Boeser that your not good enough to play in the nhl this year.

In conclusion Green made no young players A lot better this year.

Has he even me a young player better in Utica a lot better?

Mmmm...slightly a bit overdramatic there...

 

[Zippgunn]

He has not been any sort of improvement over Willie. We've had 5 games without an ES goal this year, a game where we gave up 5 PP goals and like others have mentioned it sure seems to me that some of the younger guys have stalled especially Virtanen who doesn't seem to have learned anything since he got to the NHL and Goldy who has the odd flash but only episodically. When the team is getting shut out for endless periods of time it's not usually the players' fault.

 

[hookshott]

I also give Green an "F". A good coach adjusts his "system" to the players he has available....he does not try to play the way he "likes" to play. Has Green done this?

There is no doubt that we are short on talent....but has he maximized the limited talent we do have? That is what a good coach does.

 

[F A N]

I also give Green an "F". A good coach adjusts his "system" to the players he has available....he does not try to play the way he "likes" to play. Has Green done this?

There is no doubt that we are short on talent....but has he maximized the limited talent we do have? That is what a good coach does.

I don't necessarily disagree with the points you made. But evaluating coaching can be difficult.

The reality is that the coaches considered to be the best coaches are those who win the most championships and those coaches generally DON'T adjust their "system" to the players they have available. Scotty Bowman was known more for forcing players to play his way than his ability to adjust to the players he had. I'm not saying that the best coaches doesn't make adjustments but there are few coaches who are known to be able to take a bad team and turn them into a playoff team and at the same time able to coach a talent laden team to a championship. More often, the best coaches are coaches who can win with a talented roster and not the coach who can make the playoffs with a bad roster.

In today's NHL, teams don't really hire a coach to address team's needs. Gone are the days where a team would change its style of play by hiring a different coach. Teams hire coaches that coach the way the team wants to play. So we shouldn't be surprised that Green isn't far off from Willie in overall philosophy. The philosophy has remained relatively the same only there are differences between the two coaches.

I can be hard to evaluate a coach until they are given a good roster to work with. The most important part of Green's job this year was actually to help develop the young players.

 

[hookshott]

.............
But, of course, Willie had even less talent than Green...and he was evaluated and his performance was deemed unacceptable. Oh, and how did Green do at "developing the young players"?

 

[mossey3535]

I don't necessarily disagree with the points you made. But evaluating coaching can be difficult.

The reality is that the coaches considered to be the best coaches are those who win the most championships and those coaches generally DON'T adjust their "system" to the players they have available. Scotty Bowman was known more for forcing players to play his way than his ability to adjust to the players he had. I'm not saying that the best coaches doesn't make adjustments but there are few coaches who are known to be able to take a bad team and turn them into a playoff team and at the same time able to coach a talent laden team to a championship. More often, the best coaches are coaches who can win with a talented roster and not the coach who can make the playoffs with a bad roster.

In today's NHL, teams don't really hire a coach to address team's needs. Gone are the days where a team would change its style of play by hiring a different coach. Teams hire coaches that coach the way the team wants to play. So we shouldn't be surprised that Green isn't far off from Willie in overall philosophy. The philosophy has remained relatively the same only there are differences between the two coaches.

I can be hard to evaluate a coach until they are given a good roster to work with. The most important part of Green's job this year was actually to help develop the young players.

You think the greatest coach of all time, who coached for literally decades, didn't adapt to changes in the game? Just with that basic knowledge that he coached that long you would see that isn't a defensible statement.

"At heart, though, he remains a coach, one who was incredibly successful through five decades and amidst many changes to the game, among them the eventual evolution to a more skill-oriented style which followed the first Canada Cup tournament thanks to the European influence.

“Wingers used to stay on their own side because that’s how hockey was played. And not many before Bobby Orr that can I remember played the way he did, carrying the puck up the ice,” Bowman recalled.

“When we started playing the Europeans, they grew up on the bigger ice surface, and had a different style. They would fly guys out of the defensive zone, had players cutting across the ice, and that was the start of wingers not just staying on their own wing. It was something for the NHL to pick up.

It just took time to implement a new style.

From Hockey CanadaThe quintessential coach

Now as for the tenor of coaching, you might be correct. He was a relentless guy. But even that softened over time, as you'd expect for anyone.

 

[black ace]

Id give him a 6.5/10

I think he's set a decent level of effort that he wants players to play. I think he has been let down by his goalies. The only thing that really concerns me is the mess that is the defence. I haven't seen enough yet to know if its system based or that our defenseman suck or (likely) a bit of both.

Seems like eons ago but he had this team playing a fast aggressive style at one point and was discussed as a coach of the year candidate.

 

[pitseleh]

However, I also think that when he had no answers he regressed and went with useless scrub veterans even when they didn't actually produce proportionally to the amount of faith he put into them.

I think this is the problem, and it reflects differing incentives between the coach and management. Green is coaching the team for short-term results when they are at a place where they need a coach (and management supporting the coach) to coach the team for long term development. I think that explains a lot of the "bad" things that Green has done this year. His overreliance on low event players has probably helped them squeeze out a few extra wins.

Green's fetishization of hits is a little strange though.

 

[me2]

Willie was coaching in 2014-2015 when the Sedins were still close to point-per-game players, Vrbata had racked up 31 goals and somehow the team managed a 48–29–5 record. He then 1-2-3-4'rd his way through the first round and got bounced by a putrid Flames team. I think they decided to give him another chance but he presided over the collapse of the team. Maybe his firing was part optics, pressure from season ticket holders perhaps, but I think his firing was a hockey decision and he did have 3 seasons behind the bench.

That 14-15 team is interesting. To get 101 points out of such a mediocre team was mostly a fluke, at ES

19th in Corsica f/a %, 18th in Fenwick
-10 at ES
21st in ES goals against

Special teams and luck dragged a below average to a lot more points than they deserved. It wasn't just stats, the team didn't pass the eyeball test either.