Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Smashian Kassian

Canucks Report Card - Grading the Canucks 2011-12 Season

124 posts in this topic

he was great last year but that's last year, everyone is giving him a pass because of that, not me. It's about there play, if you watched he was very inconsistent not to mention being on the top pair he got more time with the Sedins to boost him +/-, Edler is better and had a better year.

He had his moments but was very inconsistent, Keith Ballard was probably more consistent than him, he's just another guy AV is giving a free pass to when they struggle.

Haha when! In the playoffs? Yeah that is the case but this is about the entire year, not just the playoffs.

He was our best D-man and was great all year, he did tail off down the stretch and was a train wreck in the playoffs, but he had a great year, he emerged as a top pairing dman, he finished 7th in points by a defencemen, he had a great year and that shouldn't be over looked, ton's of others were bad in the post season and still got good grades.

The grades are based on how well each player played in there role, you can't compare them, and I already said this. You should have read my posts a little more.

Tanev was fine, didn't make any mistakes and was great when he played. that's good enough for a B

Salo was way more consistent than KB3, KB3 was brutal in the playoffs and was probably 1st on our team in give away this year, Salo had a great year and was the model of consistency, that's worth a B

Again, it's not about comparing them, Ballard was fine this year, and he was our best D-man in the playoffs.

Did you not see everyone complaining about Hansen's grade? they made good points and cause me to change my mind and give him a B, although maybe he is only worthy of a B-.

And as for your comments about AV and MG, Did you even read the title??? it says 2011-12!

It's not about what they have done in the past, none of these ratings are, it's about how they did this year, I thaught I was being generous with MG's rating since most were giving him a D, I think C- is fair since most of the moves haven't turned out they way he hoped.

And don't even get me started on AV, he was brutal this year, and all the reasons I post in the OP are my explaination.

I give you an F- for this post because your living in the past, just because someone did a good job before doesn't excuse there play now, or else everyone would be in love with Keith Ballard wouldn't they?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:picard: These are just brutal, completely unrealistic, Idk How you got off with giving the Sedin's and Lu D's when they were our best players. I guess you missed the games where Tanev played top 4 and played well, I don't even wanna waste my time and energy commenting on the rest.

Yeah pretty much.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I'm glad you never graded anything I did in school.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playoff stats Luongo: 0-2-0 .891 sv % 3.59 gaa. Schneider: 1-21 .960 sv % and 1.31 gaa

He had horrible stats, and was heavily outplayed by his backup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it was totally Luongos fault :rolleyes:

What about those other players, how did you come up with that?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kassian: B (Better than Hodgson last year)

Sedins: B

Pahlsson: D

Ballard: C-

Raymond: C-

Hammer and Bieksa: B

Edler and Salo: B

Tanev: A

Schneider: B+

Luongo: B

Gillis: C-

Vigneault; C

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice! This is fun. I'd grade the team differently for reg season vs. playoffs. And given how differently AV uses his players vs. the rest of the league usage, there are many other factors to consider when grading the players (Also, considering value vs. cap hit). Great read: http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2012/6/6/3059415/review-scoring-chances

I agree with some of your analysis, he's where I disagree (reg season):

Sedins: C (Refer to link. They were helped by their high o-zone starts. Their season was forgettable. But they're still by favorites :) )

Burr: B (played tougher mins than Sedins, but was still helped by high o-zone starts. He's a great value/cap hit)

Higgins: A+ (IMO, by far the best Canucks forward this yr. He played the toughest mins and came out a rockstar)

Hansen: A- (carried heavy defensive load, but still had career yr in goals)

Malhotra: B (He played some of the toughest mins in the NHL again. Given he didn't get training camp, he carried his own weight)

Bieksa: B+ (Him and partner played the toughest mins. Started yr out pretty bad, but played better defensibly throughout season)

Tanev: A (Beast. For a young guy playing mins almost as tough as Edler, he did very well defensively)

Edler: B- (Forgettable defensive season. Great offensive season. He needs a stable partner)

Ballard: F (The repercussions of sheltering him this yr had bad ripple effects on team. The worst 'value vs. cap hit' on team)

Coaching: B (Didn't like how he overused an injured Kesler. Hated distribution of TOI for d-men. Love unique deployment tactics and pre-season usage of players)

Gillis: D (Wasn't impressed. Took some big risks, none of them payed off as of last yr. (i.e. Booth, Hodsgon, Pahlsson trades. Failed to get rid of Ballard. Failed to pick up partner for Edler last summer. Failed to bring in a top 6 forward. Only acquired players last summer were Sturm and a bunch of 4th liners).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't blame everyone else, when you're letting in 4 goals per game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't blame everyone else, when you're letting in 4 goals per game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard: F (The repercussions of sheltering him this yr had bad ripple effects on team. The worst 'value vs. cap hit' on team)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forwards:

Henrik Sedin B+

- Henrik's offense suffered a bit, but then almost everyone in the league's did. He was still the offensive leader of the team.

Daniel Sedin B+

- Daniel kept up with Henrik for most of the part, but fell a bit behind in the end. He barely gets a B+, but consider him a bit below his brother.

Alex Burrows B+

- His offense was his lowest since 2008-09, but like his linemates, that could be attributed to a general drop in offense in the league.

Ryan Kesler C

- Kesler's offensive production was way down, but even his defensive play was a small bit worse.

David Booth C+

- Booth showed flashes of brilliance. He had some rough patches, but overall played well enough.

Mason Raymond C-

- Mason Raymond didn't have the comeback we hoped for. As a matter of fact, he had his worst season since 2008-09.

Jannik Hansen A-

- Hansen finally had the breakout year we've all been waiting for. He made career highs in almost every statistical category and still kept up his great defensive play.

Chris Higgins B+

- This year was Higgins' comeback year. He nearly equaled his point production (point/game) of his best Montreal days from back in 2007-08.

Samuel Pahlsson B-

- Although it may have not seemed that impressive, Pahlsson's move to Vancouver seemed to boost his offensive production to a level not seen since just after the lockout. His faceoff percentage also increased when he came to Vancouver.

Maxim Lapierre B+

- Lapierre's offense had a bit of a revival this year, and his high faceoff percentage was also very helpful. He was invaluable to this team.

Zack Kassian C-

- Many people were at first disappointed in the Kassian trade, but some decided to hold judgement in hopes that Kassian would surprise. He didn't; scoring just one goal in 17 games. Thankfully he's a year younger than Hodgson so he has time to improve.

Manny Malhotra C

- Malhotra had a lot to live up to coming into this year. His defensive abilities only fell slightly, but his offense took a huge hit. His production hasn't been this low since 2002-03.

Defence:

Kevin Bieksa B-

- Bieksa broke through this year with one of his best offensive years, which was a relief considering his previous two years. His defense was sketchy at times, but overall, he was decent and his offense was helpful.

Dan Hamhuis A

- One of our most steady defensemen. He was a very calming presence on the ice and even had one of his best offensive years as well.

Alex Edler A-

- Many hoped that Edler would break through as a star defenseman this year. He did that to some extent, but a slow end to the season for him made this season only a partial breakthrough for him. His defense continues to improve (minus the playoffs).

Sami Salo B+

- Some expected Salo to finally drop off this year, after an injury plagued 2010-11 season. Although his offense still wasn't up to his old standards, he did surprise many with his 9 goals. His defense is very strong and he also played 69 games; the most he's played since the lockout.

Keith Ballard C+

- Ballard gets a C+ because, although he still wasn't worth what he's getting, he did improve this year. His defense improved a little, and despite more injuries, his offense improve marginally as well.

Chris Tanev B

- Tanev continues to show great promise. He hasn't broken through offensively yet. He's still very solid on the puck and is a calming presence on the ice.

M-A Gragnani C-

- Gragnani unfortunately set a bad impression from the get go by several bad defensive plays. His offense wasn't fantastic either. Hopefully he improves a bit in the coming years.

Goalies:

Roberto Luongo B+

- Though some think there was controversy between him and Schneider, there was no doubt that he was a leader of the team. He had a few off nights like every goalie and wasn't quite as good as last year, but he was still very good.

Cory Schneider A-

Schneider finally bloomed into the great goaltender we've all hoped we would see. He is no doubt in the top 15 goalies, maybe even top 10. Whether in Vancouver or someplace else, he's primed to be a star.

Coaching/Managing:

Gills: C

Gillis would get a C- or even a D if it weren't for his Booth trade. The Booth trade seemed great at the time, but Samuelsson has shown with Florida that he can be just as good as Booth. That said, Booth is still younger and shows more long term promise. Gillis will likely come out the winner of this trade. The Hodgson trade really wrecked his score. The full results are yet to be seen, but it looks like he lost this trade big so far. But it is also true that he didn't have much choice, being that Hodgson wanted a trade.

Alain Vigneault: B-

Vigneault was doing a pretty good job for the most part. He was hesitant to play young players, and give them a chance, but overall, he coached pretty well and most of the players seem to like him.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll do my own :P

Forwards:

Line 1 (A): (main supplier of the team's goal production)

Henrik Sedin A (carried the team when Daniel was out, reminded me of his MVP)

Daniel Sedin B+ (team looked a lot better with him in the lineup, especially in the playoffs)

Alex Burrows B+ (brought great energy and point production again)

Line 2 ( C ): (struggled with consistency all season, lacked chemistry)

Ryan Kesler C (brought solid effort and d-play, but played too selfishly and the whole line suffered)

David Booth C (showed glimpses of a gifted powerforward, but too inconsistent and lacked chemistry with his teammates)

Mason Raymond D (has great speed that he uses on defense, but played on the perimeter and didn't use his speed to create chances)

Line 3 ( B ): (great two-way play, production dropped without Hodgson, failed to make a solid presence in the playoffs)

Jannik Hansen B- (had very nice offensive production, still needs better hands and can improve his physical play)

Chris Higgins B+ (made every line click, solid point production, but couldn't get it going in the playoffs)

Samuel Pahlsson D+ (was good on faceoffs, but acted like a frustrated rookie and took undisciplined and costly penalties)

Line 4 (C-): (was changing throughout the season, but was not quite physical enough, didn't produce much offense or offensive pressure/momentum)

Manny Malhotra C- (was terrific on faceoffs, no offensive presence)

Maxim Lappierre B (solid on faceoffs, was pretty physical and had some offensive success)

Zack Kassian C- (very physical to start his Canuck career, but slowed down and looked like he needed more seasoning in the AHL)

Defense:

Pairing 1 ( B ):

Kevin Bieksa C+ (A bit of a let down, not noticeable in the playoffs, didn't seem as edgy/physical as last year)

Dan Hamhuis A (Great defensive play, added some unexpected offense)

Pairing 2 (B+):

Alex Edler B (For a change, started the season out very well, but slowed down in the latter part of the season, and severely struggled in the playoffs)

Sami Salo B+ (Best 2-way d-man on the team, was much healthier than in the past, still put up a decent amount of points)

Pairing 3 (B-):

Keith Ballard B (looked more comfortable, helped guide and make up for Tanev's mistakes, didn't get many points, but improved defensively and made nice outlet passes)

Chris Tanev B- (was solid defensively, made a few more mistakes than last year, struggled with the puck in the offensive zone)

Goalies (A+):

Roberto Luongo A (had a great season, couldn't steal the first two games of the playoffs)

Cory Schneider A+ (had a terrific year, played unbelievably in the playoffs)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little harsh..

He was okay, he showed some promise early then tailed off (as I said), not much was expected of him, and he wasn't terrible, he was average after the Buffalo game. So that's why I gave him a C.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're high. Ballard was one of our best D this year, especially in the playoffs. He was a lot better than last year too.

Value vs Cap hit? Shouldn't that be on the GM part then. MG could have traded Ballard to get rid of the cap hit that you hate.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, can we not e-chat like normal people instead of name calling.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.