Confirmed with Link: Canucks fire John Tortorella, Mike Sullivan (not Glen Gulutzan)

[Raincouver]

Well of course the answer is somewhere in the middle as usual. I'll add links as I find them. Here's my take:

Not talking to Travis Green - I doubt it, 75% FALSE. Not only not corroborated as orca mentioned but several times the player I would expect Torts to promote (Archibald) was the one who came up rather than a guy like Jensen or Corrado. I think it's pretty clear he had some say in this, which would mean he talked to the coach.

Also, he's made some off-hand comments that I'm sure many have forgotten about Jensen where he talked about strides they had made in the minors. To me that implies he had talked to Green at some point. Not only that, but do you really think Torts would just accept whoever they fobbed off on him? That he wouldn't complain if they brought up a guy he didn't like? Yeah I don't think so.

Not practicing enough - 99% TRUE, we already have a couple of reports of this from local media where Kesler said it was ridiculous they had to practice forecheck and Gulutzan was the one to run practices.

Burrows buyout - I would say 99% FALSE Seems kind of stupid since there was no reason for him to be bought out when Torts was hired (came off leading us in goals previous season). And Tort's job was already in jeopardy by the time the off-season even rolled around to be able to buy Burrows out. Also seems at odds with comments he made about Burrows even when Burr was really struggling. To be honest I don't think Torts has the ability to be subtle enough to keep his mouth shut if he wanted Burrows bought out.

Didn't watch opposition video - I would say 90% FALSE. Since I feel they definitely looked at video of the opposition during 24/7, which I will double check. In fact it has been reported that the reason that he did not have structured practices is because he preferred to do video work. There's a small chance he changed what he did here but seeing as Torts is so stubborn, I don't see him changing what he did in NYR in the space of only a couple of years.

Also, by definition looking at tape of your team means you've looked at some opposition tape ... since they are in the game tape as well.

David Booth altercation - I would say 80% TRUE. I can imagine Torts going haywire for something like that for no reason. He's also been reluctant to praise Booth compared to Burrows and said he was a weird guy in public. So on one level it makes sense.

Anyways, not defending Torts by any means especially because I am a strong believer in structured practice and simulation of game situations in practice. But some of this "information" seems iffy. The things that seem plausible are things we've already known so I'm not too impressed, with the exception of the Booth incident.

How can a true or false question be 80-99% true?

Its either true or false.

 

[Raincouver]

So some player's leaked out unflattering stuff about Torts because they had an axe to grind (eg., he wasn't a good coach, etc.,). What is their excuse about sleepwalking for the last season+ when Vigneault was coach?

There were alot of reasons to fire Torts; however some of the blame for this past season has to go with the players.

Maybe the team wasn't good enough????


Vigneault is a good coach. MG is a horrid GM. There's the answer.

 

[fancouver]

Well, I guess NYR won the coach swapping

 

[mossey3535]

How can a true or false question be 80-99% true?

Its either true or false.

How can Vegas propose a 11/4 chance of a team winning (73%)? It's either they win or lose right?

Seriously, I don't think any of you are doing yourselves a favour commenting on my percentages. As I said before, I am speculating and I am fine with that.

 

[Raincouver]

How can Vegas propose a 11/4 chance of a team winning (73%)? It's either they win or lose right?

Seriously, I don't think any of you are doing yourselves a favour commenting on my percentages. As I said before, I am speculating and I am fine with that.

How can not talking to Travis Green be 75% false? Why not 77%? or 73%?

Makes no sense.

 

[opendoor]

How can not talking to Travis Green be 75% false? Why not 77%? or 73%?

Makes no sense.

He's giving his opinion on what he thinks the chance of it being true is.

 

[Canucker]

He's giving his opinion on what he thinks the chance of it being true is.

I believe there is 99% truth to this.

 

[Raincouver]

He's giving his opinion on what he thinks the chance of it being true is.

Still makes no sense...

As an engineer, if I see that there is a 75% chance of something, that means that it would occur 3/4 times.

Either Torts talked to Travis Green, or he didn't.

 

[ziploc]

Still makes no sense...

As an engineer, if I see that there is a 75% chance of something, that means that it would occur 3/4 times.

Either Torts talked to Travis Green, or he didn't.

If there is a 20% chance of rain tomorrow, it doesn't mean it's going to rain 1 out of 5 tomorrows. It's a probability rating. Guess work, but generally based upon knowable factors which have been shown to affect outcomes.

 

[JuniorNelson]

Torts wanted Burr off the team because he cannot shut up on the ice and attracts reputation calls like poo attracts flies.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Is it though? This is a guy who wouldn't hold or attend game day skates, and would drive back to point grey after his mandatory morning media scrum (this was reported throughout the season and was INSANE from the get go). Thats what? 1.5-2? 3? Hours of travelling a day instead of working on/with your hockey team?!?

Its pretty clear how few ***** were given by Torts.

Point Roberts, Washington... across the border.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Well, I guess NYR won the coach swapping

Most certainly.

Ronnie Shuker of The Hockey News sings a chorus from the John Lennon/Beatles hit Imagine:

Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache. Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final.

Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another.
...
About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll. It was his Eugene Melnyk moment, when in the summer of 2006 Melnyk let GM John Muckler keep Wade Redden and allowed Zdeno Chara to leave via free agency.

Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization. Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season.

If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner. He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver.

Recall the hullabaloo in Van City over Tortorella’s increased ice time for Daniel and Henrik Sedin. Vigneault always kept them below 20:00 per game, because he wanted them fresh and focused on offense. Under Vigneault the Sedins were among the best players in the NHL. Under Tortorella they had their worst seasons in more than a decade.

In New York, Vigneault has taken that same strategy and worked it to near perfection so far. The Rangers are Mariana Trench deep, and Vigneault has used every foot of the team’s depth that GM Glen Sather put together.​

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/why-the-new-york-rangers-should-thank-the-vancouver-canucks/

And he ends with this:

If you think owners have little impact on teams aside from cutting checks, think again. What they do filters down, positively or negatively, throughout an organization, and sometimes into another. The coaching flip-flop between the Canucks and Rangers has to be the most lopsided de facto trade in NHL history. And New York has Aquilini to thank for it.​

 

[Win One Before I Die]

And he ends with this:

If you think owners have little impact on teams aside from cutting checks, think again. What they do filters down, positively or negatively, throughout an organization, and sometimes into another. The coaching flip-flop between the Canucks and Rangers has to be the most lopsided de facto trade in NHL history. And New York has Aquilini to thank for it.​

Aquilini loves his Italian brothers. Hopefully that trade had a clause (if one team makes it to the conference finals... 1st rounder...)

 

[Wetcoaster]

Aquilini loves his Italian brothers. Hopefully that trade had a clause (if one team makes it to the conference finals... 1st rounder...)

The NHL has forbidden compensation in any form for coaches and executives changing teams for a number of years.

 

[Raincouver]

Most certainly.

Ronnie Shuker of The Hockey News sings a chorus from the John Lennon/Beatles hit Imagine:

Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache. Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final.

Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another.
...
About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll. It was his Eugene Melnyk moment, when in the summer of 2006 Melnyk let GM John Muckler keep Wade Redden and allowed Zdeno Chara to leave via free agency.

Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization. Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season.

If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner. He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver.

Recall the hullabaloo in Van City over Tortorella’s increased ice time for Daniel and Henrik Sedin. Vigneault always kept them below 20:00 per game, because he wanted them fresh and focused on offense. Under Vigneault the Sedins were among the best players in the NHL. Under Tortorella they had their worst seasons in more than a decade.

In New York, Vigneault has taken that same strategy and worked it to near perfection so far. The Rangers are Mariana Trench deep, and Vigneault has used every foot of the team’s depth that GM Glen Sather put together.​

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/why-the-new-york-rangers-should-thank-the-vancouver-canucks/

And he ends with this:

If you think owners have little impact on teams aside from cutting checks, think again. What they do filters down, positively or negatively, throughout an organization, and sometimes into another. The coaching flip-flop between the Canucks and Rangers has to be the most lopsided de facto trade in NHL history. And New York has Aquilini to thank for it.​

So...if the Rangers win the cup...Aquilini should get a ring!

 

[Wetcoaster]

So...if the Rangers win the cup...Aquilini should get a ring!

I am in favour of a piercing for Francesco.

 

[Fat Tony]

How can Vegas propose a 11/4 chance of a team winning (73%)? It's either they win or lose right?

It's something that hasn't happened or been decided yet. The odds are 100% that the Hawks won the Cup last year.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Most certainly.

Ronnie Shuker of The Hockey News sings a chorus from the John Lennon/Beatles hit Imagine:

Imagine if Francesco Aquilini had chosen the other guy. He would have saved himself millions and avoided a huge public relations headache. Oh yeah, and the New York Rangers wouldn’t be anywhere near where they are today, three wins away from the Stanley Cup final.

Funny how a dumb move by one team can turn out so brilliantly for another.
...
About this time last year, after his Canucks were eliminated with ease in the first round for the second straight post-season, Aquilini knew he had to make changes. His team was two years removed from making the Stanley Cup final and was nowhere near getting back there. Either GM Mike Gillis or coach Alain Vigneault had to go.

Well, we all know how that one worked out. Aquilini picked the wrong head to roll. It was his Eugene Melnyk moment, when in the summer of 2006 Melnyk let GM John Muckler keep Wade Redden and allowed Zdeno Chara to leave via free agency.

Because of his brain cramp, Aquilini is paying somewhere between $8 million and $16 million for Gillis and John Tortorella not to do any more damage to the organization. Vigneault, meanwhile, is making a case for being the best coach in the NHL this season.

If the criteria for the Jack Adams Award included the playoffs, which is what we do at here at The Hockey News, Vigneault would be the frontrunner, if not the runaway winner. He’s taken what looks like a middling Rangers roster on paper and turned it into a Stanley Cup contender on the ice with the same philosophy that brought him and the Canucks so much success, and almost a Stanley Cup, in Vancouver.

Recall the hullabaloo in Van City over Tortorella’s increased ice time for Daniel and Henrik Sedin. Vigneault always kept them below 20:00 per game, because he wanted them fresh and focused on offense. Under Vigneault the Sedins were among the best players in the NHL. Under Tortorella they had their worst seasons in more than a decade.

In New York, Vigneault has taken that same strategy and worked it to near perfection so far. The Rangers are Mariana Trench deep, and Vigneault has used every foot of the team’s depth that GM Glen Sather put together.​

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/why-the-new-york-rangers-should-thank-the-vancouver-canucks/

And he ends with this:

If you think owners have little impact on teams aside from cutting checks, think again. What they do filters down, positively or negatively, throughout an organization, and sometimes into another. The coaching flip-flop between the Canucks and Rangers has to be the most lopsided de facto trade in NHL history. And New York has Aquilini to thank for it.​

oh come now. torts was a disaster, and good for AV for pulling it together in NY, but it was time for AV to go. the insinuation that he could have gotten us to the conference finals had he stayed is 99.9999% laughable.

 

[Wetcoaster]

oh come now. torts was a disaster, and good for AV for pulling it together in NY, but it was time for AV to go. the insinuation that he could have gotten us to the conference finals had he stayed is 99.9999% laughable.

I disagree.

Firing AV was another knee jerk reaction by a fan boy owner.

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

I disagree.

Firing AV was another knee jerk reaction by a fan boy owner.

Firing him after the LA loss would've been knee-jerk, getting swept the following year made a change necessary, regardless of whether AV was to blame or not. You can't get virtually swept in the post season 2 straight years and expect to keep your job.

 

[Samzilla]

Is it really so hard to understand someone assigning percentages to information we can't fully know? It's pretty simple when he says, for example, he thinks something has a 75% chance of being true, essentially what he's saying is he's willing to give 1:3 odds that the rumours are correct.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

I disagree.

Firing AV was another knee jerk reaction by a fan boy owner.

So do you think AV would have got the Canucks to the conference finals this season? Keep in mind he led this team to a 1-10 playoff record in their last 11 games. Those are probably the worst numbers in NHL history for a team that was a favourite going into every series...

AV couldn't get this team to perform come playoff time. A change of scenery was needed, regardless of how he or Tortorella performed this season.

 

[leftwinglockdown]

Firing him after the LA loss would've been knee-jerk, getting swept the following year made a change necessary, regardless of whether AV was to blame or not. You can't get virtually swept in the post season 2 straight years and expect to keep your job.

I agree with the bolded but I can also see that when we fired AV, there was no better coach on the market to replace him. It wasn't a well thought-out decision.

Wings just lost in the playoffs again and already we're hearing about a possible extension for Babcock. Bylsma is still on the job pending a new GM. You could argue that their Cup wins bought them some leeway but the Sharks have choked another series away and Mclellan doesn't have a cup. Yet, he has been guaranteed that he will stay on.

The reason? No better candidate than them to take over even if they wanted to fire them.

 

[Wetcoaster]

So do you think AV would have got the Canucks to the conference finals this season? Keep in mind he led this team to a 1-10 playoff record in their last 11 games. Those are probably the worst numbers in NHL history for a team that was a favourite going into every series...

AV couldn't get this team to perform come playoff time. A change of scenery was needed, regardless of how he or Tortorella performed this season.

I do not know how far but IMHO the team would have performed much better under AV than Tortorella.

Look at the Sharks - now there is a team that has a history of crashing and burning in the post-season yet their owner counsels patience.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=452205

It is a message that Ken Holland has delivered clearly. As Holland would say it is all about patience, staying the course and having an owner who stays out of hockey operations as I posted before.
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=83567239&postcount=637

Instead we have a knee jerk fan boy owner - the antithesis of DRW's Mike Illitch and Sharks majority owner Hasso Plattner.

I said it was mistake to fire AV at the time and subsequent events have only served to strengthen the basis for that opinion.

 

[Wisp]

I said it was mistake to fire AV at the time and subsequent events have only served to strengthen the basis for that opinion.

It wasn't a mistake to fire AV. It was a mistake to replace him with John Tortorella. AV is a clearly superior coach, but I never liked how he ran this roster and thought he had run his course in Vancouver.

Might not be so bad how things worked out - 1 season of crash and burn vs 5 more of diminishing returns under AV. That sixth overall pick is something we might be thanking the stars for in the long run.

Also Wet Coaster, You mention the Sharks in the same breath as preaching patience, but they're probably poised for a big roster shake up in lieu of coaching or management changes.