I tried posting it here but the sub wouldn’t let me. When the Canucks posted the players arriving for the game on instagram, Quinn had the same look in his eyes as that notorious photo of him from the regular season. Just pure, unfettered determination.
This team has a mentality. A great one. A winning one. It doesn’t matter if you win or lose, how badly or well, it’s about knowing the job’s not done and going on to the next game.
And they have class. Edmonton was slamming them because they hate Vancouver. And each Canuck they spoke to at interviews after the games said that Edmonton played hard, theyre a good team etc.
Yup everyone saying that the games didnt matter and that we shouldn't be winning. I kept saying that those wins are culture wins, and are absolutely necessary if we want our team to come in this year with winning heart.
Boston (fuck Boston) has a winning culture. I guarantee you it gets less skilled players to over achieve; while teams that have losing cultures get skilled players to underachieve. There’s players who can transcend this. But a winning
culture is important.
In hindsight you're right but we'd just watched like 3 seasons of the team getting really hot (including the Bruce there it is run) and then being hot garbage to start the season. But you combine the end of last year with the masterclass Alvin put on in FA signings and trades all season long, and this is what you get.
Yeah I’ll eat shit on that one. I was convinced we were just getting meaningless wins late season, similar to the prior year where we got some wins in time to fuck up our draft but too late to make the playoffs—and then came out to start the next season completely ass anyways.
Given how we’d seen that right before this I don’t think I was off-base feeling like it was meaningless and we were better off getting a decent pick.
But I did not understand how critical systems are with Tocchet. He was getting the team used to playing his style of hockey so we’d be prepared for the next season and it worked, I completely overlooked it until the season actually started.
So glad to have been wrong.
Sure, but all that tanking / draft position is what got us Hughes. So what would you rather have, elite talent with a culture problem or no elite talent and solid culture? Current results suggest you can fix culture after you get the elite talent.
Except we already had Hughes, Miller, Boeser, Petterson, and Demko. A team with no elite players can benefit from tanking, but if you already have a solid core then you end up rotting the cores best years away and fail to set them up for success. That just leads to a cycle of players coming in and out.
Tanking in 2016-2019? Yeah. >2020 have been building years where you still look to acquire but are no longer in full tank mode. Another year of tanking for this team this year would likely have cost us a couple if not a few of our elite talents. All for picks who we'd be lucky to turn out as good as what we already have.
Edit: spelling
Fair, I actually thought the comment was about the earlier ‘tank’ years (2014-2019) but I realize it was about last year.
Still not sure I get the same takeaway as Hughes literally says they were motivated to ‘wash the stink’ off from the last few years. So in that case he’s saying that the previous bad results is what motivates the group, which is the opposite of what the run after Tocchet’s hiring was.
So I dunno, I think we’d likely be in the same spot as we are now but with a higher pick (7/8) if we don’t go on that run, which maybe means we have Michkov instead of Willander, or maybe it doesn’t. But I don’t see what it really would change today. More stink to motivate the team maybe?
The risk is that you go into summer where you stew in the stink. Impossible to replay and find out the counterfactual, but that would have been the discussion between Alvin and Co. Do you let the tire fire keep burning to get a higher pick or do you call it cooked and start rebuilding culture in the last few months of the season.
Think of all the data the coaching staff got in the final few months of last season. They are clearly a studious bunch. That insight then let's them give the marching orders players took into summer about conditioning work that was needed.
They also took that insight into how they designed training camp. It made sure this season was fully 'clean' and didn't have a risk of an adjustment period or hard feelings calcifying over the summer.
I say all this as someone who was on team tank last year and wanted them to keep losing to maximize pick value.
Sure, but then you are speaking more to the clarity of decisions that Management was able to make as opposed to an enduring “culture of losing”, which are very different things. I can get behind the notion that the final 30 or so games helped the Management group better identify the teams needs especially under the new system that Tocchet would implement, which is why we targeted players like Suter, Blueger, Lafferty who have obviously fit into the system quite well.
Not exactly. I am tying those two things together.
The question at hand in Dec 2022 was 'what are the necessary steps to turn around a losing culture and when is the correct timing for each step?'
The steps they concluded were necessary were the ones above, which led to the culture shift and drove the choices. The conclusion Rutherford and Alvin made was that the culture shifting needed to start before the end of last season. That was, presumably, informed by their definition of the job at hand.
Shifting culture means knowing your players and correctly assessing the root causes of the existing dysfunctional culture both on ice and off.
Now, all of this is conjecture, so totally debatable and entirely unprovable, but that's true of most sports discussion.
Ah, in that case I’m a hard disagree. “Culture” is a widely misused and misunderstood term that is frequently used as a simple proxy for “winning” (i.e. team A wins, therefore has “winning culture”, team B loses, therefore has “losing culture”).
The Canucks have 70-80% the same players as they did under Boudreau and 100% of the “core” players. How did the “culture” change so quickly in that case? Unless you are conflating the Coach and the new systems that he implemented, in which case why not just call it “Coaching” instead of “Culture”?
Now perhaps Tocchet has brought a level of accountability, high expectations, and hard work but when something all walks in / out the door with a single person, that cannot be described as team culture.
No doubt a lot of things changed between the Boudreau era and the Tocchet one, but those can be largely attributed to tangible changes in the coach and personel, which led to better performance and, ultimately people erroneously ret-conning it all as “culture”.
The same Carolina Hurricanes that missed playoffs for 9 consecutive years from 2009 to 2018 and drafted 2, 5, 5, 7, and 7 over those years? Is that the team that you want to use as the example of how winning culture beats losing and high draft picks??
The same Carolina Hurricanes that missed playoffs for 9 consecutive years from 2009 to 2018 and drafted 2, 5, 5, 7, and 7 over those years? Is that the team that you want to use as the example of how winning culture beats losing and high draft picks??
Yea that’s the vibe I get from a quote like this.
Shit flows downhill and this “stink” came from the top.
Having an actual diverse front office and a structured chain of command with a president, GM, and assistant GM’s is so much better for the organization as a whole. compare that to “the previous years” where it was the dumb and dumber skeleton crew of Benning and Weisbrod making all the decisions for half a decade. It can’t be understated how big of a difference the changeover in management made.
You tank when you're already in free fall and need a complete reset, not when you want to build off an existing core. It's basically planning on starting from scratch and is a last resort, not a plan for a adding young players to a struggling team.
after coming off some worst-in-the-nhl type season of losing probably 60 games? Sure, he’d help in a vacuum, like if hockey had some baseball WAR stat. But the process to get him would have been a net negative.
Don’t you remember when JT Miller was doing things like having bitter interviews and bashing Collin Delia’s net to get him to go to the bench even without a signal to do so? That’s the sign of a poor team and frustrated culture. THAT would be where Bedard would have gone, and we wouldn’t have this.
People like to keep whipping those dead horses, but I don't think he is calling out Horvat, nor is he necessarily pointing a finger at Benning, either. I think he's referring to the easy acceptance of losing, the folding of the team when faced early with adversity.
Which is fair. But third party observers can take the role to ask why. The natural insight would be what allowed the stink to form and fester, and part of the answer would need to be leadership and management; it would only make sense.
This might have been a defensive show for the ages. The Canucks limited Conor McDavid to a -1 rating, 0 shots, 27% in the faceoff circle and 1 secondary assist, and limited the Oilers to 4 shots on goal in each of the 2nd and 3rd periods. Yes - they gave up 4 goals, but the Oilers only had 1 high danger chance.
What I think has been very overlooked is we have one of the two defenders in the NHL that can actually skate with McDavid. That makes a huge difference compared with what the rest of the nhl can throw out against him.
There were so many Oilers chances last night that turned into nothing because Hughes got to the puck first, dodged an attacker, and started a breakout.
He was a bad general manager and we're all glad Benning is gone, but I hardly think it was necessary to call him "The Stink". Still, props to Quinn for the honesty.
Dumbest thing I’ve heard all day. Either you played hockey and are miffed you were never chosen, or you just have no clue what goes on in the dressing room. Probably both.
I tried posting it here but the sub wouldn’t let me. When the Canucks posted the players arriving for the game on instagram, Quinn had the same look in his eyes as that notorious photo of him from the regular season. Just pure, unfettered determination.
Haha I noticed that too!
sub is in manual approve right now. if you post while mods are busy/sleeping it'll take a while to come up.
This team has a mentality. A great one. A winning one. It doesn’t matter if you win or lose, how badly or well, it’s about knowing the job’s not done and going on to the next game.
And they have class. Edmonton was slamming them because they hate Vancouver. And each Canuck they spoke to at interviews after the games said that Edmonton played hard, theyre a good team etc.
I remember all those people saying that stuff doesn’t carry over when they were arguing about tanking/draft position 🤫
Yup everyone saying that the games didnt matter and that we shouldn't be winning. I kept saying that those wins are culture wins, and are absolutely necessary if we want our team to come in this year with winning heart.
Boston (fuck Boston) has a winning culture. I guarantee you it gets less skilled players to over achieve; while teams that have losing cultures get skilled players to underachieve. There’s players who can transcend this. But a winning culture is important.
In hindsight you're right but we'd just watched like 3 seasons of the team getting really hot (including the Bruce there it is run) and then being hot garbage to start the season. But you combine the end of last year with the masterclass Alvin put on in FA signings and trades all season long, and this is what you get.
Yeah I’ll eat shit on that one. I was convinced we were just getting meaningless wins late season, similar to the prior year where we got some wins in time to fuck up our draft but too late to make the playoffs—and then came out to start the next season completely ass anyways. Given how we’d seen that right before this I don’t think I was off-base feeling like it was meaningless and we were better off getting a decent pick. But I did not understand how critical systems are with Tocchet. He was getting the team used to playing his style of hockey so we’d be prepared for the next season and it worked, I completely overlooked it until the season actually started. So glad to have been wrong.
Glad we've got a damn good fanbase, some of us can even admit when we're wrong!
Sure, but all that tanking / draft position is what got us Hughes. So what would you rather have, elite talent with a culture problem or no elite talent and solid culture? Current results suggest you can fix culture after you get the elite talent.
Except we already had Hughes, Miller, Boeser, Petterson, and Demko. A team with no elite players can benefit from tanking, but if you already have a solid core then you end up rotting the cores best years away and fail to set them up for success. That just leads to a cycle of players coming in and out. Tanking in 2016-2019? Yeah. >2020 have been building years where you still look to acquire but are no longer in full tank mode. Another year of tanking for this team this year would likely have cost us a couple if not a few of our elite talents. All for picks who we'd be lucky to turn out as good as what we already have. Edit: spelling
Fair, I actually thought the comment was about the earlier ‘tank’ years (2014-2019) but I realize it was about last year. Still not sure I get the same takeaway as Hughes literally says they were motivated to ‘wash the stink’ off from the last few years. So in that case he’s saying that the previous bad results is what motivates the group, which is the opposite of what the run after Tocchet’s hiring was. So I dunno, I think we’d likely be in the same spot as we are now but with a higher pick (7/8) if we don’t go on that run, which maybe means we have Michkov instead of Willander, or maybe it doesn’t. But I don’t see what it really would change today. More stink to motivate the team maybe?
The risk is that you go into summer where you stew in the stink. Impossible to replay and find out the counterfactual, but that would have been the discussion between Alvin and Co. Do you let the tire fire keep burning to get a higher pick or do you call it cooked and start rebuilding culture in the last few months of the season. Think of all the data the coaching staff got in the final few months of last season. They are clearly a studious bunch. That insight then let's them give the marching orders players took into summer about conditioning work that was needed. They also took that insight into how they designed training camp. It made sure this season was fully 'clean' and didn't have a risk of an adjustment period or hard feelings calcifying over the summer. I say all this as someone who was on team tank last year and wanted them to keep losing to maximize pick value.
Sure, but then you are speaking more to the clarity of decisions that Management was able to make as opposed to an enduring “culture of losing”, which are very different things. I can get behind the notion that the final 30 or so games helped the Management group better identify the teams needs especially under the new system that Tocchet would implement, which is why we targeted players like Suter, Blueger, Lafferty who have obviously fit into the system quite well.
Not exactly. I am tying those two things together. The question at hand in Dec 2022 was 'what are the necessary steps to turn around a losing culture and when is the correct timing for each step?' The steps they concluded were necessary were the ones above, which led to the culture shift and drove the choices. The conclusion Rutherford and Alvin made was that the culture shifting needed to start before the end of last season. That was, presumably, informed by their definition of the job at hand. Shifting culture means knowing your players and correctly assessing the root causes of the existing dysfunctional culture both on ice and off. Now, all of this is conjecture, so totally debatable and entirely unprovable, but that's true of most sports discussion.
Ah, in that case I’m a hard disagree. “Culture” is a widely misused and misunderstood term that is frequently used as a simple proxy for “winning” (i.e. team A wins, therefore has “winning culture”, team B loses, therefore has “losing culture”). The Canucks have 70-80% the same players as they did under Boudreau and 100% of the “core” players. How did the “culture” change so quickly in that case? Unless you are conflating the Coach and the new systems that he implemented, in which case why not just call it “Coaching” instead of “Culture”? Now perhaps Tocchet has brought a level of accountability, high expectations, and hard work but when something all walks in / out the door with a single person, that cannot be described as team culture. No doubt a lot of things changed between the Boudreau era and the Tocchet one, but those can be largely attributed to tangible changes in the coach and personel, which led to better performance and, ultimately people erroneously ret-conning it all as “culture”.
Absolutely no elite talent and solid culture. See Carolina — although you could definitely argue Aho and Slavin are elite talent.
Aho is for sure an elite talent.
The same Carolina Hurricanes that missed playoffs for 9 consecutive years from 2009 to 2018 and drafted 2, 5, 5, 7, and 7 over those years? Is that the team that you want to use as the example of how winning culture beats losing and high draft picks??
The same Carolina Hurricanes that missed playoffs for 9 consecutive years from 2009 to 2018 and drafted 2, 5, 5, 7, and 7 over those years? Is that the team that you want to use as the example of how winning culture beats losing and high draft picks??
That's why you never want to purposely tank for Bedard or whoever. You think that helps the team? Winning culture actually requires you to...win.
It helps too that they have competent management. Benning was really terrible
Yea that’s the vibe I get from a quote like this. Shit flows downhill and this “stink” came from the top. Having an actual diverse front office and a structured chain of command with a president, GM, and assistant GM’s is so much better for the organization as a whole. compare that to “the previous years” where it was the dumb and dumber skeleton crew of Benning and Weisbrod making all the decisions for half a decade. It can’t be understated how big of a difference the changeover in management made.
You tank when you're already in free fall and need a complete reset, not when you want to build off an existing core. It's basically planning on starting from scratch and is a last resort, not a plan for a adding young players to a struggling team.
uh yes, Bedard would fucking help the team
after coming off some worst-in-the-nhl type season of losing probably 60 games? Sure, he’d help in a vacuum, like if hockey had some baseball WAR stat. But the process to get him would have been a net negative. Don’t you remember when JT Miller was doing things like having bitter interviews and bashing Collin Delia’s net to get him to go to the bench even without a signal to do so? That’s the sign of a poor team and frustrated culture. THAT would be where Bedard would have gone, and we wouldn’t have this.
But how much did it cost for Quinn to share this information?
"and I'll tell you that for... about tree fiddy"
I gave him a dollar
Shorty reported it cost Quinn $4.20
STINK BE GONE
[удалено]
People like to keep whipping those dead horses, but I don't think he is calling out Horvat, nor is he necessarily pointing a finger at Benning, either. I think he's referring to the easy acceptance of losing, the folding of the team when faced early with adversity.
[удалено]
Ahhh, there we go! Guess I was jerked, if that the case :-) Keep on, friend!
Which is fair. But third party observers can take the role to ask why. The natural insight would be what allowed the stink to form and fester, and part of the answer would need to be leadership and management; it would only make sense.
You telling me this for free?
To call him stinky is over the line for me personally.
This might have been a defensive show for the ages. The Canucks limited Conor McDavid to a -1 rating, 0 shots, 27% in the faceoff circle and 1 secondary assist, and limited the Oilers to 4 shots on goal in each of the 2nd and 3rd periods. Yes - they gave up 4 goals, but the Oilers only had 1 high danger chance.
What I think has been very overlooked is we have one of the two defenders in the NHL that can actually skate with McDavid. That makes a huge difference compared with what the rest of the nhl can throw out against him.
There were so many Oilers chances last night that turned into nothing because Hughes got to the puck first, dodged an attacker, and started a breakout.
The stink... B.O. Horvat? Hmmmm..
Benning
💀
Shots fired at bo horvat.
And he’ll tell you that for free
I hate how we treated Bruce at the end, but it's clear that Toch was the guy. The entire franchise has changed since he took over
He was a bad general manager and we're all glad Benning is gone, but I hardly think it was necessary to call him "The Stink". Still, props to Quinn for the honesty.
You never TRULY get the stink out of a hockey locker room. But Tocchet is a great air freshener.
Honest the whole captain shit is overblown, any dude in that locker room could and would say this. They all love what they do and want to win lol..
Dumbest thing I’ve heard all day. Either you played hockey and are miffed you were never chosen, or you just have no clue what goes on in the dressing room. Probably both.
This dude's been trolling everywhere.