Alain Vigneault is super-excited about his contract extension, you guys! (Juan Ocampo, Getty)
On Wednesday, Alain Vigneault signed a two-year contract extension with the Canucks, which means that he is slated to be with the team for the next three years. Or, as some fans might put it, the Canucks are stuck with him for three years. Harrison basically summed up my opinion on the contract yesterday, but here it is again: Vigneault good. Winning good. Fire bad.
But the contract extension brought up a few other thoughts on the most successful coach in Canucks history.
1. Extending Vigneault puts the ball back in the player’s court, to crossover my sports metaphors.
One of the main arguments against extending Vigneault is that players tend to tune out coaches over time. It’s an understandable argument: hearing the same message season after season from the same coach could certainly end up tiresome. Some particularly abrasive coaches tend to wear thin on their players especially quickly. Vigneault doesn’t strike me as that kind of coach, however, and he has shown a capability of adjusting the team’s style of play over time, from the ultra-defensive years when Luongo first arrived to the more offensive teams of the last couple years.
More than that, it seems to me that an extension would have the opposite effect and counteract that tendency to tune out. Essentially, this re-signing lets the players know that Vigneault is here to stay and that what he says, goes. It would be easier to tune out a coach when you know that he could be fired at any moment and a new voice could be brought in to the locker room. It’s a lot harder to do that when you know that the coach isn’t going anywhere.
2. Showcasing Hodgson for the trade market wasn’t really that big a deal.
At the most basic level, a general manager’s job is to acquire the best possible players he can find and the coach’s job is to take the players he is given and put them in the best possible position to succeed. Vigneault has done this to an unheard of degree, deploying Manny Malhotra almost exclusively in the defensive zone and the Sedins almost exclusively in the offensive zone. He hasn’t done a perfect job, of course. This last season, he wasn’t able to find a good partner for Edler from among the 8 other defencemen who were on the roster at various times, though that could be seen as falling under Gillis’s responsibility.
But, for the most part, Vigneault has put his players in a position to best utilize their individual skills to help the team.So when Gillis pointed out that they put Cody Hodgson in a position to score points and look good for a potential trade, Vigneault was doing exactly what he was supposed to be doing: putting Hodgson in a position to succeed. Last season, the best possible position for Hodgson to use his talents was to start him in the offensive zone against weak competition. He put Hodgson in the best possible position to help the team. It just so happens that was also the best way to showcase Hodgson for the trade market.
3. Alain Vigneault, like most humans, likes some people more than he likes others.
Does Alain Vigneault play favourites? Of course. Every coach does. In Vigneault’s case, however, I believe that his subjective opinion is frequently overruled by objective analysis when it comes to picking favourites. There’s a reason that Keith Ballard doesn’t get a lot of ice time and it has to do with the number of scoring chances the opposition gets when he’s on the ice compared to the number that the Canucks get. The same was true of Hodgson.
Some will argue that Vigneault hasn’t given players like Ballard and Hodgson a chance to play more minutes and show that they can succeed in those types of situations, but that’s not how Vigneault operates. We have repeatedly seen that players need to prove that they deserve more minutes. Ballard has yet to do that. His Relative Corsi rating was second worst among Canucks defencemen this season, ahead of only Andrew Alberts, who started more frequently in the defensive zone against tougher competition.
Ballard wasn’t able to push possession into the offensive zone against weaker competition; why would he improve against tougher competition? The opposite would likely be the case. The Canucks track their own data, which doesn’t map exactly to Corsi, but it’s not far off either. It’s likely that Vigneault’s favourites are informed more by this data than who didn’t pass him the salt at the dinner table.
You might also like:
19 comments
Search
Recent Comments
- steveB
on Six things the Canucks need to do better in Game 4 - Blueliner
on Will Alain Vigneault lose his job if the Canucks lose again? (Yeah, probably) - Abby
on Six things the Canucks need to do better in Game 4 - Wetcoaster
on Roberto Luongo’s condo is for sale, will likely be easier to move than he is - Nee
on Six things the Canucks need to do better in Game 4
About canada.com | Privacy Statement | Terms | Copyright & Permissions
© 2008 - 2011 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.
Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.
warren
May 24, 2012Good stuff Daniel
akidd
May 24, 2012it’s all good except that now AV is talking about playing ‘kings hockey’ instead of ‘wings hockey’. which to me means lots of low-scoring ‘dumping and chasing’. not only is it ugly i question whether the canucks have the horses to compete with the best playing that style.
i would like to believe that the 10-11 canucks, well-rested and healthy, would have beaten the 11-12 kings. that if the canuck d could have been faster on the puck and smarter transitioning it(and some better goalie puck-handling) that they could’ve overcome the heavy forecheck. and the canucks’ higher-skilled forwards would’ve made the difference. that’s what i’d like to believe anyways.
i am open though to a little less ‘cycling’.
Daniel Wagner
May 24, 2012I think that’s a bit of a misunderstanding of “Kings hockey.” They’re one of the best possession teams in the NHL, even during the regular season. They are also stellar defensively and move the puck out of the defensive zone very well. The only issue during the regular season was that they couldn’t score, but they’ve managed to solve that in the playoffs. I would love to see the Canucks employ the kind of heavy forecheck, aggressive penalty kill, and strong work off the rush that has made the Kings so successful. I don’t think “Kings hockey” is low-scoring dump and chase at all.
I do agree though that the 10-11 Canucks would have beaten these Kings. I think the 11-12 Canucks could have beaten these Kings with Daniel healthy for the entire series.
Nee
May 24, 2012“I think the 11-12 Canucks could have beaten these Kings with Daniel healthy for the entire series.”
Excuse me while I shake my fist at the sky. : ( Curse you, Duncan Keith.
MB13
May 25, 2012LOL
Should we give the hypothetical “with Daniel” Canucks the Stanley Cup then? Let’s start a pretend parade.
Has anybody stopped for a second and said maybe this team wasn’t as good as everyone thought they were. Yes they were 1 game away from a Stanley Cup. They were also one Sharp shot to the crest away from going out in the first round in consecutive seasons.
This is what makes me laugh about Canucks fans – you truly believe they are the best team and will look at anything (stupid made up stats, injuries, etc) to justify your position. I’ve taken a step back – they are a good team that doesn’t have the horses to win it all. Never have.
Daniel Wagner
May 25, 2012No, no one has ever said that. You’re the first. Congratulations, you have changed the world.
MB13
May 25, 2012Which amazing stat did you pull from your behind to figure that one out?
Dan D
May 25, 2012I don’t think someone who essentially cites “one Sharp shot to the crest” as a stat can make the above comment. Never mind the fact that it doesn’t make any sense!
MB13
May 25, 2012You know who cites stats? The losing team – it makes them feel better.
The winning team cares about one stat – the score.
akidd
May 25, 2012come on mb13, yes the hawks were one sharp shot to the crest away from winning but the canucks dominated that game and the hawks were super lucky to get it to ot.
the 10-11 canucks were pretty smoking. they dominated for long stretches that season. that was a really good team. the 10-11 canucks were really good for about a month and a half.
i’m hoping the 12-13 canucks(with weber) will be the best edition yet.
akidd
May 25, 2012sorry, should read, “the 11-12 canucks were good for about a month and a half.”
Frank N.
May 24, 2012I’m mostly happy that he is back. I think. Anyways, here are 3 thoughts on him resigning:
1. Gillis and AV must be on the same line again for where they want to take the team. Observing some press moments during the second half of the season and right after, there seemed to be a shift towards more defensively oriented play (which AV seemed to prefer), yet Gillis stated in the year end presser that he envisions an offensive team. Curious to see how this plays out.
2. Can AV get the players to buy in again and fix some of the issues they had during the second half of last season? If not, I could see him getting fired around the all-star break, when other coaches are likely available. Gillis could feel that this would give his team enough time to adopt to a new coach.
3. Hopefully he will bring the Canucks to the Stanley Cup final and win it!
Gimmic
May 25, 2012Thank you. I’ve been trying to say this about Ballard for 2 yrs now. AV doesn’t trust him, and he shouldn’t. Ballards given him no reason to get more ice time (other than the sweet hipchecks). It’s why, for the life of me, I can’t understand why he’s still on the roster. He’s takes up about $3M more cap space than the average bottom paring d-man, and he has to play sheltered mins cause the oppositions generally eats him up. I mean, the rookie guy who played in some mens league 2 yrs ago plays tougher mins than Ballard. I just don’t get it, especially when they still don’t have a partner for Edler.
Generally speaking, I don’t think AV plays favorites. I think he’s predictable in which types of players he likes to use more often – the Ballard types with defensive issues don’t fit that mold. The one exception is Raymond. I’ve looked at all the advanced stats and still can’t find a reason why he got so much ice time, and why he wasn’t in the pressbox. Still searching…
Tamara B
May 25, 2012correct me if I’m wrong, but would the coach of any sport not be ridiculous to put a player where they’ll succeed the most?
Protected minutes, offensive vs defensive starts etc. all meaningless ultimately if you don’t play your player where they’ll succeed. It’s not the Canucks fault the Sabres didn’t notice pretty much all CoHo’s awesomeness was in one zone doing one thing.
It’s kind of like someone wearing their best clothes to a job interview — everyone knows you’re wearing your best clothes. If from that you can’t extrapolate some things will be worse than your “best behaviour & clothes” well…. not their fault at all.
All I’m saying is… I don’t understand why “showcasing” CoHo is a big deal, every player is showcased in their best role as much as is possible.
Dougster
May 26, 2012What? Nothing yet on the Gillis retraction of AV’s remarks? C’mon PITB we are all waiting lol! Seeing how the Kings have swept aside all the opposition in the west takes a bit of the sting out of our defeat but the ‘what ifs’ are hard to ignore.
ray
May 30, 2012I like coach v a lot but I wish he would put his brain in gear before speaking sometimes. The recent comments about Danny Sedin and Ryan Kessler are best kept in private because they can be easily misconstrued(especially by hungry reporters). They just make for bad feelings all round. If the doctor’s say they are hurt THEY ARE HURT end of conversation. Dropping some words on french TV about the situation makes us wonder why he just left town and didn’t offer up an explanation as to why an 8th place team rips a presidents trophy winner in half.
Matt
June 6, 201240 years and no cup. What more is there to say about this country club franchise and its homer fans? The Sedins should get into ballet and not a rough sport which involves hitting, penalty killing and standing up for yourselves.
Tom
June 12, 2012Which is harder, letting your anger out, or being meek? Meekness is harder to do than swinging your fist at someone like a child. Whenever i see a fight in hockey, i am reminded of high school problem solving skills.
pooroldbear
May 24, 2012Additional 2 years I think, so 3 in total counting this year which is the last on the current contract.