I have news for you...that defensive, low scoring game is Vancouver's only chance of winning right now. Their offense is...not great.
- djamon

All they need is one more top 6 forward to turn that 2nd line into a threat again and the offense will return to what it was a year or two ago.

A new PP coach/system should help, as well, since the lack of PP points are the main reason the Sedins' output has declined—their ES production is similar to what it was the years they won the Art Ross.

Then why interview him? Why offer a 2nd interview?

I don't know what the Canuckls want, but this argument is ridiculous.
- djamon

Because clearly there was some considerable interest. Still doesn't mean there was an offer on the table yet.

Mac-T went after Eakins aggressively because he knew he'd found his guy—Gillis was obviously interested enough to give him a 2nd interview, but not interested enough to pursue him as aggressively as Mac-T did.

Seems you've been wasting a lot of time in here on ridiculous arguments the last few days...

Neither of them had a fair shake. I think both would do well under a new coach. I like Ballard but much like Lu probably just needs to get the f@ck out. Booth is a bubble guy who MG might give a shot. From his Twitter messages he seems pretty pissed how last season turned out. If it were me personally I would give him a shot. A guy with something to prove not only to himself but to his teammates is a guy I want on my team.
- thundachunk

Something to prove? He showed up in terrible shape...he only has himself to blame for his rough year.

maybe not now, but talk to us on Oct. 1st when hockey starts to matter.
- IanEsplen

It'll be better than last year because....?

Because clearly there was some considerable interest. Still doesn't mean there was an offer on the table yet.

Mac-T went after Eakins aggressively because he knew he'd found his guy—Gillis was obviously interested enough to give him a 2nd interview, but not interested enough to pursue him as aggressively as Mac-T did.

Seems you've been wasting a lot of time in here on ridiculous arguments the last few days...
- Fosco

I'm not making a ridiculous argument. Many are saying Eakins was never a fit for Vancouver. THAT'S ridiculous, he's the only guy Gillis has interviewed twice and that has to mean he was very interested.

I know he didn't get an offer, but you don't fly a guy across the country twice if you're not interested.

It ain't rocket science.

I'm not making a ridiculous argument. Many are saying Eakins was never a fit for Vancouver. THAT'S ridiculous, he's the only guy Gillis has interviewed twice and that has to mean he was very interested.

I know he didn't get an offer, but you don't fly a guy across the country twice if you're not interested.

It ain't rocket science.
- djamon

Isn't that what I just said in my post?

I've heard some arguments from Canucks fans that their opinion was that Eakins wasn't a fit due to the fact that the Canucks are a veteran team, and that's a fair argument whether you agree entirely or not.

I personally liked that he was good with young players, even though he wasn't my first choice.

Anybody who thinks that MG gave him two interviews based on anything other than interest is blowing smoke...

It would be a complete waste of everybody's time.

But I wasn't strictly referring to this argument...

There are 3 positions to fill.
- A_SteamingLombardi

Stevens isn't going to leave for an assistant coaching gig, if anything that's a demotion since the Kings are currently stronger. It's gotta be for the HC job.

Isn't that what I just said in my post?

I've heard some arguments from Canucks fans that their opinion was that Eakins wasn't a fit due to the fact that the Canucks are a veteran team, and that's a fair argument whether you agree entirely or not.

I personally liked that he was good with young players, even though he wasn't my first choice.

Anybody who thinks that MG gave him two interviews based on anything other than interest is blowing smoke...

It would be a complete waste of everybody's time.

But I wasn't strictly referring to this argument...
- Fosco

Fair enough. You're right...YOU never made the claim the Canucks were never interested, but others did. I thought they were rationalizing how things turned out.

One thing I find funny is the assumption that because Eakins was with the Marlies he must be good with younger players. The Marlies are actually older, on average, than the Leafs. I DO know he's a tough, no-nonsense kinda guy as well as being very strategically strong. I think that's exactly what the Oilers need as it sounds like they've acting as "enablers" with some of their so-called untouchables.

Stevens isn't going to leave for an assistant coaching gig, if anything that's a demotion since the Kings are currently stronger. It's gotta be for the HC job.
- bluecoconuts

Yup.

I'm not making a ridiculous argument. Many are saying Eakins was never a fit for Vancouver. THAT'S ridiculous, he's the only guy Gillis has interviewed twice and that has to mean he was very interested.

I know he didn't get an offer, but you don't fly a guy across the country twice if you're not interested.

It ain't rocket science.
- djamon

Here is a quote from the Vancouver Province beat writer (Jason Botchford):

"Coaching candidate Dallas Eakins was back in Vancouver this week for his second interview as the Canucks search to replace Alain Vigneault. But he left without an offer, and he wasn’t likely going to get one from the Canucks.

The second interview was more about collecting information than hiring Eakins. Essentially a courtesy call for a guy they like a lot, but one lacking NHL experience."

http://www.theprovince.co.../story.html#ixzz2VsTpRt00

As I said in an earlier post I think they liked Eakins and probably liked him a lot but my guess is that he wasn't their first choice but instead a backup plan if something else didn't happen. If they really wanted him all along they would have made him an offer.

Brutal blog. How old are you, 12? Hockey executives do not try to "stress out" their competition by interviewing their guys. As usual and much like former Edmonton GM Tambellini, Gillis sat on his hands, twiddled his thumbs and lost out on a guy. That seems to be his M.O. Gillis does not respond. He inherited the team and did very little with it... yeah, Ballard is a great signing! Booth = brutal. So yes Vancouver, we beat you. And in doing so, once again confirmed that the Oilers will win another Cup long before the Canucks win their first.

Here is a quote from the Vancouver Province beat writer (Jason Botchford):

"Coaching candidate Dallas Eakins was back in Vancouver this week for his second interview as the Canucks search to replace Alain Vigneault. But he left without an offer, and he wasn’t likely going to get one from the Canucks.

The second interview was more about collecting information than hiring Eakins. Essentially a courtesy call for a guy they like a lot, but one lacking NHL experience."

http://www.theprovince.co.../story.html#ixzz2VsTpRt00

As I said in an earlier post I think they liked Eakins and probably liked him a lot but my guess is that he wasn't their first choice but instead a backup plan if something else didn't happen. If they really wanted him all along they would have made him an offer.
- smkuchta

The "backup plan" could be 100% true. But that begs the question of who their #1 option is. Is it someone still coaching? Is it Tippett? They haven't given anyone else a 2nd interview so I'm confused why their supposed backup plan has had 2 interviews.

The "backup plan" could be 100% true. But that begs the question of who their #1 option is. Is it someone still coaching? Is it Tippett? They haven't given anyone else a 2nd interview so I'm confused why their supposed backup plan has had 2 interviews.
- djamon

Well according to Botchford, John Stevens the LA Asst is their first choice and they've just gotten permission to talk to him, maybe they are also waiting to see if someone like Bylsma is let go.

Eakins might be a great young coach..he might also be Scott Arniel, the last great AHL coach that didn't do too well in the NHL, time will tell.

To be honest I don't know enough about most of these guys to have an opinion one way or the other, I can only hope they make the right decision.

Well according to Botchford, John Stevens the LA Asst is their first choice and they've just gotten permission to talk to him, maybe they are also waiting to see if someone like Bylsma is let go.

Eakins might be a great young coach..he might also be Scott Arniel, the last great AHL coach that didn't do too well in the NHL, time will tell.

To be honest I don't know enough about most of these guys to have an opinion one way or the other, I can only hope they make the right decision.
- smkuchta

I also heard Gillis still wants to interview another 5 or 6 guys. He sure is....deliberate.

I also heard Gillis still wants to interview another 5 or 6 guys. He sure is....deliberate.
- djamon

Well if he doesn't get this hire right he will be out of a job. I have no problem with him taking his time it isn't like there is a Ken Hitchcock, Mike Babcock available who is an obvious first choice.

There really isn't any rush to get a guy today, better to due your due diligence and pick the right guy.

The "backup plan" could be 100% true. But that begs the question of who their #1 option is. Is it someone still coaching? Is it Tippett? They haven't given anyone else a 2nd interview so I'm confused why their supposed backup plan has had 2 interviews.
- djamon

I think you're making too big a deal of this whole "second interview" thing. Some candidates still haven't even had a first interview so what's the big deal.

Well according to Botchford, John Stevens the LA Asst is their first choice and they've just gotten permission to talk to him, maybe they are also waiting to see if someone like Bylsma is let go.

Eakins might be a great young coach..he might also be Scott Arniel, the last great AHL coach that didn't do too well in the NHL, time will tell.

To be honest I don't know enough about most of these guys to have an opinion one way or the other, I can only hope they make the right decision.
- smkuchta

Eakins was sought after. Vancouver fans need to deal with it. He had 2 interviews and didn't get an offer. Everyone else has to deal with that.

Desjardins is sought after as well but since he's not from Toronto, media doesn't cover him. Blysma didn't have head coaching experience either and was a below average hockey player like Eakins. Those guys make the best coaches. Boucher, Cooper, many NYI coaches, Hanlon, Granato for a while, etc.. Sometimes change is good. I think it will be good for both Vancouver and Edmonton.

Eakins is the fifth Oilers coach in six years. If they don't turn it around, nobody will resign and nobody will sign as a ufa either.

I think you're making too big a deal of this whole "second interview" thing. Some candidates still haven't even had a first interview so what's the big deal.
- hankthetank

Maybe he got a 2nd interview because he was a candidate they liked and they knew the Oilers were moving fast on him. Better to have a 2nd interview and find out if they liked him enough to speed up the process and make him an offer.

Obviously they didn't make him an offer. That doesn't mean he isn't or won't be a good coach it just means GMMG felt he wasn't the right fit for the Canucks at this time.

Maybe he got a 2nd interview because he was a candidate they liked and they knew the Oilers were moving fast on him. Better to have a 2nd interview and find out if they liked him enough to speed up the process and make him an offer.

Obviously they didn't make him an offer. That doesn't mean he isn't or won't be a good coach it just means GMMG felt he wasn't the right fit for the Canucks at this time.
- smkuchta

Obviously they were interested. They gave him a second interview. Don't think they were just doing that for kicks. But they still have several more guys to interview. And by all accounts Eakins was never the front runner in Vancouver.

The year the Canucks went to the final we watched 8 months of unbelievably exciting and entertaining hockey. I couldn't wait for every game to begin, the Canucks were fun to watch and winning at an incredible pace.

So we had 8 months of thrilling, exciting hockey and 1 week of misery at the end, was that a success? The players might not consider it success but for me I simply watch hockey to be entertained and as a Canucks fan I have had a lot of entertainment value the last 10 years and especially that year.

Hopefully it will result in a Cup at some point but whether that happens or not it won't affect my life in the slightest I just continue to hope that I am entertained on a nightly basis.
- smkuchta

The team absolutely succeeded in entertaining fans and generating huge revenue (they likely paid off Luongo's entire contract with playoff profit alone). But they lost, so no, the season was not a success. In professional sports success is determined by winning championships.

The confusion around the Canucks interview process for a head coach is confusing me. If you listen to Gillis and Botchford, everything so far has gone exactly to plan. They aren't rushing, they're taking their time, they're being thorough, and they're waiting for the right guy. Fans might want Gillis to move faster, but everyone knew this was how it was going to shake out. If you didn't then you haven't been watching how Gillis operates.

The team absolutely succeeded in entertaining fans and generating huge revenue (they likely paid off Luongo's entire contract with playoff profit alone). But they lost, so no, the season was not a success. In professional sports success is determined by winning championships.
- KB3Point0

Nope. Success is measured by how much money you make. That's why the NBA exists. 90% of NBA teams have no chance at winning a championship but as professional sports businesses they are all very successful.

Ian Esplen: Ticking off T.O.?
Ticking off T.O.?
- IanEsplen

This is one of the dumbest blogs written to date. Sorry, but gillis and company aren't 11 years old and trying to piss off another organisation when Eakins had zero to do with any goaltending situation. They're professionals, not school yard kids. Give me a break and blog about something actually worth reading, not this pointless dribble.

Nope. Success is measured by how much money you make. That's why the NBA exists. 90% of NBA teams have no chance at winning a championship but as professional sports businesses they are all very successful.
- bloatedmosquito

The NBA is more about the show they put on than the sport they play. Dancers all over the place. Music between every whistle. So much showboating.

This is one of the dumbest blogs written to date. Sorry, but gillis and company aren't 11 years old and trying to piss off another organisation when Eakins had zero to do with any goaltending situation. They're professionals, not school yard kids. Give me a break and blog about something actually worth reading, not this pointless dribble.
- BodyCheckRadio

Jokes on you, he got your hit.....