November 15 2011 09:09PM
Editors note: You may have noticed a strange group of Canucks fans on twitter who seem to use a foreign language while staying hyper-current about Canucks news. Sure most of the made-up words they use have deliriously filthy meanings according to the urbandictionary.com, but regardless, their schtick is funny and pervasive. They're known as the #shap crew, or the #shap bandits, and their strange lingo has been referenced by Dan Murphy during a Sportsnet broadcast, and has made it into the Vancouver Province as well. It's all very #shapocalytic (link very much NSFW). As I often defend the Canucks head-coach Alain Vigneault in this space, I figured I'd let the #shap bandits tell you why they disagree with me.
The Following is a Guest Post from the Shap Crew:
Recently, Alain Vigneault decided to start Roberto Luongo in 3 games in 4 nights. Today, we are hearing that Luongo is hurt and missed practice. Let's think about this for a moment...prior to these 3 games Luongo's play was typical of his career at this time of year, as he's been known as a slow starter. Granted, his form has been improving. The question is: What kind of coach plays his starter 3 games in 4 nights? Answer: Only a Milt.
What's a Milt? Well, if you really have to ask that question you're probably a Milt. A bit slow to laugh at a joke... your buddy's fiancé doesn't want you at their wedding... Milt. I digress...back to AV.
AV lacks one thing that every coach should possess: common sense. It's common sense to give your starter a rest when your team plays back to back, especially when you consider the fact you have a more than competent backup; or when you consider it's November; or when you remember the original plan to give Schneider 25+ starts that they trumpeted a few weeks ago; and when you keep in mind Luongo's history of injuries; and Luongo's being worn out in the playoffs.
This is the norm when it comes to AV's decision making. Think back to when AV asked Luongo whether he wanted to come out of a playoff game when getting shell-shocked. Let's explore this move: A coach is, in essence, a manager. When does your manager ask rather than tell you what to do? Typically, when they are out of their element. If you don't know what you're doing in your position, you start asking those around you.
Think of all the times the Canucks are being peppered with goals and you watch AV cling onto his timeouts as though they were linked to his bonus. Or think of when ever you heard AV take the blame for anything? There's always one of three things with AV: an excuse; a reason; or a scapegoat. As long as he has those three things he'll never have anything to worry about.
Consider this: AV had a career of 42 games over 2 years for the Blues as a professional hockey player, zero championships. As a coach he has been practicing the profession for 25 years now, zero championships, and by all accounts he's still figuring out what to do.
We could go on and debate questionable lines, the fact there's a revolving door of assistant coaches around him, yet he remains, the fact he acts like the Jack Adams is the same as a Stanley Cup, his lack of preparation, lack of motivation but it would take us pages and pages and you wouldn't read it all anyway, so we'll boil it down to winning.
There's something to be said about a winner. A winner has that special "IT" factor that can hardly be put into words. You either got it or you don't. A winner leads his team, a winner demands respect, a winner's team is prepared to go through any obstacle that stands before them, a winner motivates, a winner... wins! Does that mean AV is a loser? No... AV is a Milt.