Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Giveaways Were Absolutely Our Number 1 Problem


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
26 replies to this topic

#1 OnlyCanucks

OnlyCanucks

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 23 April 2012 - 12:06 AM

The Kings scored a total of 12 goals in the series and I count 6 that were the direct result of giveaways off our sticks.

Game 1: The winning goal and the empty netter.
Game 2: Both Shortys
Game 5: Both goals.

Obviously a lack of offence or stellar defence by the kings was a huge problem. But I think our defence played great as well except for a handful of monumental giveaways. I don't think the Kings were able to create anything on their own and without us handing them those goals, the series would have been very different. So I think what that shows is that we are able to play a good defensive system that is very effective and is able to shut other teams down for the most part, but our breakdowns are monumental and cost us games.

Does anyone have any insight into why they think our giveaways are so costly, and what we can do to reduce these breakdowns?

#2 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 23 April 2012 - 12:12 AM

Raymond had upwards of 60 give aways. I am not even exaggerating..

#3 Sixteen W's

Sixteen W's

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 929 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 11

Posted 23 April 2012 - 12:57 AM

12 goals in 5 games isn't terrible, and the team only let in 4 in the last 3 games and lost 2. Not scoring was our biggest problem.

eptISvF.png


#4 domyours

domyours

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 03

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:01 AM

Laziness is our number one problem!

#5 Canuck7611

Canuck7611

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Joined: 11-May 09

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:04 AM

Kings also did a great job of creating pressure on their forecheck and pressuring our D-men on the point. Somehow, our D couldn't adjust to this and made poor decisions.

I don't think our D played great at all. They did an adequate job but there were too many times when we were pinned deep in our end scrambling all over the place. I would trade our entire defence (except Hamhuis) for a Kings like D. Doughty, Scuderi, Mitchell, Voynoz, Greene, Martinez are all big, tough, great skaters and mentally strong. Canucks D (except Hamhuis) are good skaters, turnover prone, small in size and mentally weak (way too many defensive zone breakdowns..i.e. 3 Canucks guys in front of the net all watching Doughty skate behind the net without taking the man in front / Leaving Carter wide open in front of the net 1 min into OT).

We have so much work to do on our backend and if Gillis thinks our D is ok, we will continue to lose in the 1st or 2nd round for many years

#6 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,812 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:15 AM

Defence was brutal. We may not have been ventilated but that's only because of our goaltending. The better defensive team won the series, won the Cup last season and will win again this season.

Not only too many turnovers but odd-man rushes against, poor defensive positioning and an inability of our defence to get out of their own zone lead to constant pressure against us.

This whole idea of having a fast, offensive defence that scores goals is bloody rediculous when it can't do its number 1 job. Look at all the solid Cup winners in the past - their defence is solid and their team is built from the goalie on out. Us on the otherhand, we have big forwards and tiny defencemen. Alberts is our one big physical defenceman and he's on the bench. Gragnani is our one playoff performer (7 points in 7 Buffalo games in the post season) and he's on the bench. Instead AV puts out Ballard (who played well, sure) and Tanev (who was terrible at times).
Posted Image

#7 CrazyAL

CrazyAL

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,971 posts
  • Joined: 10-March 03

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:15 AM

The issue was they couldn't score goals.

#8 Cristalinastar

Cristalinastar

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 411 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 11

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:20 AM

The only thing that was not an issue was schneider!

16 WINS-its the beauty way to go!

Posted Image

credit to canazzy

#9 babybulls211

babybulls211

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 446 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 08

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:21 AM

The only thing that was not an issue was schneider!


Based on tonight, Sedins and Hansen are not an issue as well. By the way, the last goal pretty much sums up our issues this season. Giveaways or try to do too much at our own blueline.

#10 jovocop55

jovocop55

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,122 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 03

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:32 AM

Seems like that for the past few months. Giving pucks away or can't clear the zone.

#11 spliced

spliced

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,247 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 03

Posted 23 April 2012 - 02:38 AM

Canucks were lazy and couldn't handle the King's forecheck. They seem to be always looking for the lazy way out. The D would get the puck and try to hold it and hope for a flyby or do some no look reverse pass or something. The problem was LA weren't buying it. They were forechecking hard and the Canucks litle tricks to get the puck out didn't work.

You need to move and move the puck quick when a team is forechecking like that just like a heavy pressure penalty kill. Unfortunately that takes effort that the Canucks weren't willing to put out. Raymond and Hansen were able to get the puck out at times because they didn't wait around they just skated hard out of the zone when they got the puck.

#12 AndyBernard

AndyBernard

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,411 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 11

Posted 23 April 2012 - 03:55 AM

Panicking in our own zone and not finishing on our chances have been our biggest issues the second half of the season as well as these playoffs.
Posted Image
credit - VintageCanuck


#13 VoiceOfReason_

VoiceOfReason_

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts
  • Joined: 26-October 09

Posted 23 April 2012 - 03:57 AM

Defensive breakdowns.

#14 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:01 AM

What was Edler's +/- in this series?? -100
Seems like Edler was on for most of the goals in this series.

Posted Image


#15 gordfish

gordfish

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:24 AM

Glad someone else noticed this. They turned the puck over in their own zone 30 times in game 5. I counted.

This was a problem for this team all year, and must be addressed in the off season. I think both the forwards and the defense are to blame, but let's finally face reality here. Guys like Bieksa, Edler and Hamhuis are over rated in this market. The D core needs some serious help in the form of at least one legit number one defenseman, preferably a puck mover that can QB the powerplay.

I suggested Luongo for Mike Green about a month or so ago, and a lot of you scoffed. Now it's Washington that would scoff at the deal, given the way Holtby has emerged there.

Mike Green is the difference maker in Washington. His injury struggles this year are why Washington fell to 7th in the East, and why Ovechkin's numbers have decreased so dramatically.

Green / Edler
Bieksa / Hamhuis

Now that's a top 4 that has everyone where they belong. And I'd still look to upgrade 'Behind-the-net' Bieksa at the first opportunity that presented itself.

#16 DaMacNamedDre

DaMacNamedDre

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,032 posts
  • Joined: 13-October 11

Posted 23 April 2012 - 10:37 AM

1) The laissez-faire attitiude of this team and its coach and the total lack or sense of urgency is its number one problem.
These guys barely seemed motivated most the time. unexcusable. "saving it for the playoffs" ya right.
Every year playoffs turn into warfare and we built a team that doesnt like to wear it's work boots.
We need to make significent changes in the off season if we want to go deep in the playoffs.

The leadership core isnt getting it done.

2) Heart of a Canuck ?
I'm sick of seeing our star players get abused. Its hard to cheer for a team that doesnt stick up for itself.
we went out like chumps this year and both Duncan Keith and Dustin Brown destroyed the Sedins with zero retribution.
we were supposed to have Bitz and Kassian around to deal with that.
Brian Boyle was messing with Ottawa's star player and he got absolutely destroyed by Matt Carkner then Chris Neil, he wont be doing that again. That is the kind of response i want to see from this team, not facewashing. I thought after last year's Boston series we would never be subjected to watching our team get abused, like groundhog day all over again.

Lazyness lack of finishing checks, lack of urgency, lack of motivation , lack of physicality , lack of heart.
No one respects the Canucks and takes liberties on its stars at will.
Going to be hard for me to buck down next year on a season ticket share without this getting addressed.
Yappierre's antics are an embarrassment, Keslers diving etc...



2) Defense core ?
Edler -a truly horrific series, are you smoking kush on game days ?
Hamhuis, a terrible giveaway to think about all summer,
Bieksa ? ya we know you want a career in TV after you hang them up but how about less chirping more hitting next season,twitter quotes aren't that important.

Salo and Ballard were ok.


3) Forwards lack of scoring and hitting
No scoring, been a problem since last years playoffs w/Boston.
This team can't produce.
really noticed that no one was finishing checks last night accept Dale Wiese in the first period.
talk about a lack of heart considering your season is on the line.

Raymond,Malhotra bye bye. sorry guys but you're the weakest links at this point.
I'd like to see Manny stay with the club at some other level/position.
Maybe he could be faceoff coach.

4) Coaching
Lack of motivation, lack of making adjustments, a PP that goes -3 etc....
i wanna see a guy back there that isnt the teams best friend but an ass kicker who can show some emotion back there once in awhile.


The 1st goal LA scores we have 4 of our guys standing in front of the net doing NOTHING.
Your season is on the line and you're not clearing guys and smashing them ?
101 boys, cmon that was pathetic. saw this all season long.

That goal right there really summed the series up nicely , oh wait a minute, the O.T winner did too.
Hamhuis pissing around makes a soft play/turnover....textbook, also saw that repeatedly by most of our D for the past 2-3 months.
We need 2 solid BIG Defensemen additions this off season.
guys that play nasty and clear the front of the net.
2 puckmovers and 4 monsters back there should be the formula.

Edited by D.J Ball, 23 April 2012 - 11:05 AM.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Posted ImageBodee, on 18 April 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

I haven't been a supporter of the Canucks for long. Mainly because firstly I know nothing about NHL and secondly ESPN America only started showing NHL 3 years ago.

http://forum.canucks.com/topic/328055-whats-wrong-with-me
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

#17 S.Mouse!

S.Mouse!

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,426 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 09

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:04 AM

Turnovers were huge, definitely.

The worst part is it was steady guys like Edler and Hamhuis that made the biggest mistakes.
I'd expect it from MAG or Rome, but not our 2 best d-men.

The team was outplayed in every aspect, so turnovers weren't the only issue, but Edler's blunders cost us game 2 in my mind.

Hopefully it was just a fluke, and not a sign that Edler struggles with post season pressure.
Posted Image

#18 TotesMagotes

TotesMagotes

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,327 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:21 AM

Sign a top norris trophy d man who can play 25-30 minutes a night. We haven't had one of these guys...ever. Most great teams have one, and i think it's time we ought to get one.

IMO this would solve a lot of our mental lapses in the defensive zone. Having a guy who can dominate the defensive zone, move the puck and also chip in with a few goals would make our team so much better and solve so many problems.

Edited by DirtyHarry, 23 April 2012 - 11:21 AM.

Posted Image

#19 Steve Carell

Steve Carell

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,675 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 06

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:22 AM

Defence was brutal. We may not have been ventilated but that's only because of our goaltending. The better defensive team won the series, won the Cup last season and will win again this season.

Not only too many turnovers but odd-man rushes against, poor defensive positioning and an inability of our defence to get out of their own zone lead to constant pressure against us.

This whole idea of having a fast, offensive defence that scores goals is bloody rediculous when it can't do its number 1 job. Look at all the solid Cup winners in the past - their defence is solid and their team is built from the goalie on out. Us on the otherhand, we have big forwards and tiny defencemen. Alberts is our one big physical defenceman and he's on the bench. Gragnani is our one playoff performer (7 points in 7 Buffalo games in the post season) and he's on the bench. Instead AV puts out Ballard (who played well, sure) and Tanev (who was terrible at times).


You talk about the canucks needing to play better defence, but then you question why we benched Gragnani...

#20 VanIsleNuckFan

VanIsleNuckFan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,687 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:35 AM

Right, I just think we need more back passing!

#21 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,478 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:50 AM

The main problem was that the team played like a bunch of pussies and has for the last three playoffs. There were very few hard body checks other than the ones to the Canucks and we were wimps in front of our net....no one paid a price to be there.
When we were in front of the opposition net, we were consistantly crosschecked or face washed. What did the Canucks do......chase the loose puck instead of taking the man.
This team needs to make some serious changes to the lineup and get some skilled players with size and grit.

#22 dajusta

dajusta

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 03

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:53 AM

Giveaways due to tenacious pressure by LA kings forechecking
I'm Christian
I won't judge you
No one is perfect
Only through Jesus
Will we find Truth

#23 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 23 April 2012 - 02:53 PM

Sign a top norris trophy d man who can play 25-30 minutes a night. We haven't had one of these guys...ever. Most great teams have one, and i think it's time we ought to get one.

IMO this would solve a lot of our mental lapses in the defensive zone. Having a guy who can dominate the defensive zone, move the puck and also chip in with a few goals would make our team so much better and solve so many problems.


Suter or Weber?? Suter is a UFA this summer so hopefully MG can somehow attract him to the Canucks.

Posted Image


#24 tan

tan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 774 posts
  • Joined: 17-July 06

Posted 23 April 2012 - 04:53 PM

The Kings scored a total of 12 goals in the series and I count 6 that were the direct result of giveaways off our sticks.

Game 1: The winning goal and the empty netter.
Game 2: Both Shortys
Game 5: Both goals.

Obviously a lack of offence or stellar defence by the kings was a huge problem. But I think our defence played great as well except for a handful of monumental giveaways. I don't think the Kings were able to create anything on their own and without us handing them those goals, the series would have been very different. So I think what that shows is that we are able to play a good defensive system that is very effective and is able to shut other teams down for the most part, but our breakdowns are monumental and cost us games.

Does anyone have any insight into why they think our giveaways are so costly, and what we can do to reduce these breakdowns?

please pass your post to GM MG. thank you.



tumblr_m0nxk38n5q1qdlh1io1_400.gif


#25 magoomba

magoomba

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined: 16-December 08

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:39 PM

Every team has give aways during the game.
The problem is the Canucks didn't bury the Kings when they had their chances.

#26 toyotafan

toyotafan

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 10

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:42 PM

We were physically punished by the forecheck and didn't hit back nearly enough.

#27 Marty Robbins

Marty Robbins

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 11

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:47 PM

ya we needed to be more physical too, those two things were our downfall




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.