Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks
DucksFan_08

Trouble on the horizon for RC?

Recommended Posts

What about Dave Tippett? He kept Arizona reasonably competitive for years when their roster was absolute trash.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, perry_mvp said:

He's working as a senior adviser for the Seattle expansion team:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/23831768/seattle-group-hires-former-coyotes-coach-dave-tippett

I have a hard time believing that gig would prevent him from taking an NHL coaching job if he was offered (and wanted) one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dtsdlaw said:

I have a hard time believing that gig would prevent him from taking an NHL coaching job if he was offered (and wanted) one.

I just listened to an interview between LeBrun, Burnside, and him.  Tippett sounded not at all interested in taking an NHL coaching job.  He specifically said he didn't want one and that he wasn't even a candidate (by his own choice) for the Seattle job when they decide to hire someone.  Could he be enticed?  Technically, it's possible.  Everyone has their price.  But I doubt the Ducks would be willing to pay that price if he's as content as he sounded with what he's doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gorbachav5 said:

I just listened to an interview between LeBrun, Burnside, and him.  Tippett sounded not at all interested in taking an NHL coaching job.  He specifically said he didn't want one and that he wasn't even a candidate (by his own choice) for the Seattle job when they decide to hire someone.  Could he be enticed?  Technically, it's possible.  Everyone has their price.  But I doubt the Ducks would be willing to pay that price if he's as content as he sounded with what he's doing.

And Ken Hitchcock retired and didn't want to coach anymore either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, perry_mvp said:

Maybe Tippet wants a GM job?

Has he has ever have any GM Experince?.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

And Ken Hitchcock retired and didn't want to coach anymore either. 

Did Hitchcock do an interview within the last two weeks saying he doesn't want to coach in the foreseeable future?  And/or is Tippett from Southern California?  Tippett's not coming here to coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nieder said:

What about Dave Tippett? He kept Arizona reasonably competitive for years when their roster was absolute trash.

He’s going to the coach in Seattle 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jiggy2win said:

He’s going to the coach in Seattle 

He's not though, unless things change.  He specifically said as much in an interview very recently.  Yes, things could change, but going off of the information we have, he's not in line to coach Seattle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RC has definitely made some adjustments.  for example the first forechecker rarely forces

the d-man out  from behind his own net.  also the ducks are playing more man to man

defense in their defensive zone in an attempt to keep the play to the outside.  both of

these changes are similar to the way the ducks played in the past.  although the ducks are

trying to play faster and more up tempo,  they are doing it in ways the team is more

comfortable with.  the result is less shots against and fewer major defensive  breakdowns.

this may not be the style BM wanted,  but it is the style that has made the team more

competitive.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, niltes said:

RC has definitely made some adjustments.  for example the first forechecker rarely forces

the d-man out  from behind his own net.  also the ducks are playing more man to man

defense in their defensive zone in an attempt to keep the play to the outside.  both of

these changes are similar to the way the ducks played in the past.  although the ducks are

trying to play faster and more up tempo,  they are doing it in ways the team is more

comfortable with.  the result is less shots against and fewer major defensive  breakdowns.

this may not be the style BM wanted,  but it is the style that has made the team more

competitive.  

Well They Won...Interested to see how well this strategy lasts.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MooseDuck said:

Well They Won...Interested to see how well this strategy lasts.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

I dunno if it’s really a “style” change.  I think they are just getting the right mix of guys in and passing has gotten better out of our zone.  Maybe adjusting the positioning of the forwards to accept the passes to get out of our zone.  I’ve seen us use the chip play to get the puck off the side boards to a forward in the middle when we use to just get bottled in

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pazonator said:

I dunno if it’s really a “style” change.  I think they are just getting the right mix of guys in and passing has gotten better out of our zone.  Maybe adjusting the positioning of the forwards to accept the passes to get out of our zone.  I’ve seen us use the chip play to get the puck off the side boards to a forward in the middle when we use to just get bottled in

Perhaps it's adjustment as you say nothing more.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pazonator said:

I dunno if it’s really a “style” change.  I think they are just getting the right mix of guys in and passing has gotten better out of our zone.  Maybe adjusting the positioning of the forwards to accept the passes to get out of our zone.  I’ve seen us use the chip play to get the puck off the side boards to a forward in the middle when we use to just get bottled in

Agree - I noticed much better passing in the first period and a half tonight - and then it seemed to regress to our OLD way of passing - and then it got sharp again in the last 1:34 of the 3rd period. Oh yeah there was that REALLY REALLY good pass from Montour to Rickey - GOAL !!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't want to start a new thread and it's coaching related.

 
h6trodzM_bigger.jpgBob McKenzieVerified account @TSNBobMcKenzie
Bob McKenzie Retweeted Pierre LeBrun

PHI has asked for and received permission from ANA to talk to Dave Nonis about the Flyers GM job. Chuck Fletcher and Bill Zito are the other candidates, to this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DuckFan4Life said:

Didn't want to start a new thread and it's coaching related.

 
h6trodzM_bigger.jpgBob McKenzieVerified account @TSNBobMcKenzie
Bob McKenzie Retweeted Pierre LeBrun

PHI has asked for and received permission from ANA to talk to Dave Nonis about the Flyers GM job. Chuck Fletcher and Bill Zito are the other candidates, to this point.

Please take Nonis.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RobD360 said:

Longest horizon ever....

And it'll get longer after winning 3 straight. But credit where credit is due. The team has won 3 in a row, on the road, with a depleted defense against some solid teams. Not saying RC has a lot to do with that but the results are there. Gibson and Miller still see too many shots IMO but at least we won some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DucksFan_08 said:

And it'll get longer after winning 3 straight. But credit where credit is due. The team has won 3 in a row, on the road, with a depleted defense against some solid teams. Not saying RC has a lot to do with that but the results are there. Gibson and Miller still see too many shots IMO but at least we won some.

Here is this the thing though, they are a paper tiger that HEAVILY relies on its goaltending. If things don’t change and Gibson/ Miller do carry them to the POs on their battle beaten backs they are going to get gutted once more in a series against better teams and we won’t even have gotten the pleasure of getting a higher draft pick. 

Is there anyone on this board who actually believes they have been consistently playing well and are a cup contending team? Anyone? Hello?.....Bueller....Bueller 

Edited by RobD360

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, RobD360 said:

Here is this the thing though, they are a paper tiger that HEAVILY relies on its goaltending. If things don’t change and Gibson/ Miller do carry them to the POs on their battle beaten backs they are going to get gutted once more in a series against better teams and we won’t even have gotten the pleasure of getting a higher draft pick. 

Is there anyone on this board who actually believes they have been consistently playing well and are a cup contending team? Anyone? Hello?.....Bueller....Bueller 

Well, you know...they say you want to play to your strengths as a team...our strength is CLEARLY our goaltending. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some element to the system of "we have 1 unbelievable goalie and 1 extremely good goalie...we're likely to be OK if we make a mistake in our zone...so take bigger chances against less offensively powerful teams. And be a lot more careful against offensive powerhouses." It would explain why we seem to play very good hockey against very good teams...and seem to be asleep against "lesser teams" and then lose lol

Carolina isn't really either. They are just a team that has a reputation for putting A LOT of shots on net and not allowing many against. I think we thought in the first period we could get away with being asleep in our zone 'cause they aren't a super scary team, but then realized we can't and had to turn it around. We actually should be pretty proud of how our team was against Carolina after the first. We did some things that many teams can't do.

Actually, I think that's what's going on this season! RC isn't interested in TRYING to blow out teams. He probably allows us to be more lackadaisical against teams the staff thinks wont light us up offensively...i.e. REALLY relying our goalies. And against teams that are offensive powerhouses -- to do a very strong defensively minded game. Neither is gonna really get us much of a positive goal differential. But that's fine (to an extent)...our weakness is our scoring. We should not be relying on that nor taking chances on that unless we feel the other team wont capitalize on our many offensive zone mistakes. Obviously there are still games where this doesn't work. But any team putting their system in place can always lose. There are a refs, hot goalies, hot players, mistakes, injuries, etc...

Now whether or not we think that's a good system is definitely up for debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jasoaks said:

Well, you know...they say you want to play to your strengths as a team...our strength is CLEARLY our goaltending. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some element to the system of "we have 1 unbelievable goalie and 1 extremely good goalie...we're likely to be OK if we make a mistake in our zone...so take bigger chances against less offensively powerful teams. And be a lot more careful against offensive powerhouses." It would explain why we seem to play very good hockey against very good teams...and seem to be asleep against "lesser teams" and then lose lol

Carolina isn't really either. They are just a team that has a reputation for putting A LOT of shots on net and not allowing many against. I think we thought in the first period we could get away with being asleep in our zone 'cause they aren't a super scary team, but then realized we can't and had to turn it around. We actually should be pretty proud of how our team was against Carolina after the first. We did some things that many teams can't do.

Actually, I think that's what's going on this season! RC isn't interested in TRYING to blow out teams. He probably allows us to be more lackadaisical against teams the staff thinks wont light us up offensively...i.e. REALLY relying our goalies. And against teams that are offensive powerhouses -- to do a very strong defensively minded game. Neither is gonna really get us much of a positive goal differential. But that's fine (to an extent)...our weakness is our scoring. We should not be relying on that nor taking chances on that unless we feel the other team wont capitalize on our many offensive zone mistakes. Obviously there are still games where this doesn't work. But any team putting their system in place can always lose. There are a refs, hot goalies, hot players, mistakes, injuries, etc...

Now whether or not we think that's a good system is definitely up for debate.

Is it?  Does anyone think this is a good system?  Letting our goalies get rubber poisoning every game while scoring two goals (maybe)?  If that's a good system, so is my workout plan of lifting a beer to my mouth every two minutes and hoping it will get me in shape.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, gorbachav5 said:

Is it?  Does anyone think this is a good system?  Letting our goalies get rubber poisoning every game while scoring two goals (maybe)?  If that's a good system, so is my workout plan of lifting a beer to my mouth every two minutes and hoping it will get me in shape.

It is. It’s all about having good form whilst you lift and chug. Stick with it. You should see results in no time like improved courage and speaking of your shape you should also notice a rounder belly too. 

Cheers to the workout system of choice!

Edited by RobD360
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jasoaks said:

Well, you know...they say you want to play to your strengths as a team...our strength is CLEARLY our goaltending. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some element to the system of "we have 1 unbelievable goalie and 1 extremely good goalie...we're likely to be OK if we make a mistake in our zone...so take bigger chances against less offensively powerful teams. And be a lot more careful against offensive powerhouses." It would explain why we seem to play very good hockey against very good teams...and seem to be asleep against "lesser teams" and then lose lol

Carolina isn't really either. They are just a team that has a reputation for putting A LOT of shots on net and not allowing many against. I think we thought in the first period we could get away with being asleep in our zone 'cause they aren't a super scary team, but then realized we can't and had to turn it around. We actually should be pretty proud of how our team was against Carolina after the first. We did some things that many teams can't do.

Actually, I think that's what's going on this season! RC isn't interested in TRYING to blow out teams. He probably allows us to be more lackadaisical against teams the staff thinks wont light us up offensively...i.e. REALLY relying our goalies. And against teams that are offensive powerhouses -- to do a very strong defensively minded game. Neither is gonna really get us much of a positive goal differential. But that's fine (to an extent)...our weakness is our scoring. We should not be relying on that nor taking chances on that unless we feel the other team wont capitalize on our many offensive zone mistakes. Obviously there are still games where this doesn't work. But any team putting their system in place can always lose. There are a refs, hot goalies, hot players, mistakes, injuries, etc...

Now whether or not we think that's a good system is definitely up for debate.

It’s this system that got the Ducks swept in such glorious fashion in the playoffs. They are possibly the worst defensive team and have one of the least potent offenses. I think that we’ve seen enough of this team to determine that this is just who they are: Gibson or bust. That’s not going to get them out of the first round if they wind up making the playoffs. To me, it’s in the long-term interest of the franchise to miss the playoffs this year, hopefully get a blue-chip prospect and come back with a new coach next year. If we can also flip Silfverberg for a 1st round pick then that would be even better.

Edited by BombaysTripleDeke
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

It’s this system that got the Ducks swept in such glorious fashion in the playoffs. They are possibly the worst defensive team and have one of the least potent offenses. I think that we’ve seen enough of this team to determine that this is just who they are: Gibson or bust. That’s not going to get them out of the first round if they wind up making the playoffs. To me, it’s in the long-term interest of the franchise to miss the playoffs this year, hopefully get a blue-chip prospect and come back with a new coach next year. If we can also flip Silfverberg for a 1st round pick then that would be even better.

Pretty much this. Although it's odd we don't play very good defense with the D men we have and some of our defensive minded forwards. Another coach might go a long way I think.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gorbachav5 said:

Is it?  Does anyone think this is a good system?  Letting our goalies get rubber poisoning every game while scoring two goals (maybe)?  If that's a good system, so is my workout plan of lifting a beer to my mouth every two minutes and hoping it will get me in shape.

*opens up a can of beer* well, yeah, I could see how there could be an argument that *takes a sip* in order for us to get better at being the fast team we need to be less safe with the puck *puts down beer* and do what we want to do at the speed at which we want to do it. *takes sip* Easier to take those chances on teams with less offensive power. *puts down* There is a study that says when you're trying to become an expert at something that requires speed -- *sips beer* you're better off at trying to do what you want to do at that speed and making mistakes then seeing the mistakes and seeing where you improve...*puts down* as opposed to trying to work up to it safely. *sips beer* You'll see the mistakes clearer this way and you'll be training your brain in a more efficient way. *puts beer down*

Geez...man I'm beat. Gotta rest for a minute. *opens up a can of beer*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

It’s this system that got the Ducks swept in such glorious fashion in the playoffs. They are possibly the worst defensive team and have one of the least potent offenses. I think that we’ve seen enough of this team to determine that this is just who they are: Gibson or bust. That’s not going to get them out of the first round if they wind up making the playoffs. To me, it’s in the long-term interest of the franchise to miss the playoffs this year, hopefully get a blue-chip prospect and come back with a new coach next year. If we can also flip Silfverberg for a 1st round pick then that would be even better.

Well, I think RC coached a hell of a playoffs in 2017 and yeah, we got swept in 2018 -- which is obviously very bad. But in my eyes, he's even then. I don't understand what happened to our D. I don't think they are bad. They weren't bad. I'm guessing it's the new assistant coach that is making things a little uncomfortable with the D. That's my best guess. But they've improved. And we show signs of being a great team -- right now -- injured players and all -- RC coaching.

I do believe long-term interest is something very important to be looking at. But I'd rather have a very good up and coming forward right now. We can't waste Gibson's best years. I don't know the usual time it takes for a prospect to become a game-changing player. But I just get worried that drafting high right now isn't going to get us the players we need to not waste Gibson's prime. I would think we need to trade for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jasoaks said:

*opens up a can of beer* well, yeah, I could see how there could be an argument that *takes a sip* in order for us to get better at being the fast team we need to be less safe with the puck *puts down beer* and do what we want to do at the speed at which we want to do it. *takes sip* Easier to take those chances on teams with less offensive power. *puts down* There is a study that says when you're trying to become an expert at something that requires speed -- *sips beer* you're better off at trying to do what you want to do at that speed and making mistakes then seeing the mistakes and seeing where you improve...*puts down* as opposed to trying to work up to it safely. *sips beer* You'll see the mistakes clearer this way and you'll be training your brain in a more efficient way. *puts beer down*

Geez...man I'm beat. Gotta rest for a minute. *opens up a can of beer*

Lol awesome

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jasoaks said:

Well, I think RC coached a hell of a playoffs in 2017 and yeah, we got swept in 2018 -- which is obviously very bad. But in my eyes, he's even then. I don't understand what happened to our D. I don't think they are bad. They weren't bad. I'm guessing it's the new assistant coach that is making things a little uncomfortable with the D. That's my best guess. But they've improved. And we show signs of being a great team -- right now -- injured players and all -- RC coaching.

I do believe long-term interest is something very important to be looking at. But I'd rather have a very good up and coming forward right now. We can't waste Gibson's best years. I don't know the usual time it takes for a prospect to become a game-changing player. But I just get worried that drafting high right now isn't going to get us the players we need to not waste Gibson's prime. I would think we need to trade for that.

I like your thinking very project manager-ish. The question is then, what is the age range of Gibson’s golden years and do we have time to first acquire then train that player so he is ready to meet that time period. Or we trade for that impact player soon. 

Edited by RobD360

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...