Smashian Kassian Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Just added, a coaching and managing section since everyone seems to be bringing them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 IMO they can do great awesome and hunky dorry all season long, but if they can't bring their A game during the Playoffs, they all deserve F's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 You can't compare each others, it's based on each's play, and how they could have been better Kassian did tail off (to be fair) he was a ghost in the playoff, and really didn't do much in the last few games of the year he was just average. Hansen was also nowhere in the playoffs, especially since we all know what he can bring he was great early but then he really wasn't much throughout the rest of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I don't think the emotions from the playoffs have worn off yet for you.... Try and look at the regular season a little more. There is only 5 games fromthe playoffs to look at, and to be fair that's as many as any team has made agains this LA team. (Though I do agree that we could have been alot better). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shimy1 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Does anyone else find it ironic that the player the OP thought was the MVP of a presidents trophy team, got a B+??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 To be fair?? He stunk it up, bro! It's best to just forget this season entirely if you're him. He never tailed off because he never got hot. He literally had one productive game and that was IT. That should garner a failing grade. Hansen did get his points in bunches, but he got a lot more than he ever did before. It looks like you're the one comparing him to second-liners or something. If you're looking at playoffs, almost everyone gets a failing grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derr12 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Id give Hamhuis a B-, It would be a Solid B if it werent for that god awful cough-up that cost us the kings series. Last man back hammy, get the goddamn puck down the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Does anyone else find it ironic that the player the OP thought was the MVP of a presidents trophy team, got a B+??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derr12 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Actually now that i think about it... from about january on, The third line, salo, and our goalies were awsome while the rest of the team played retard hockey. The sedines were cursed with a bad case of mediocrety. Near the end of the season I was willing to trade our entire d-corps except hamhuis and salo for a bag of pucks. I gotta believe the problem is coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grapefruits Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 IMO they can do great awesome and hunky dorry all season long, but if they can't bring their A game during the Playoffs, they all deserve F's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Actually now that i think about it... from about january on, The third line, salo, and our goalies were awsome while the rest of the team played retard hockey. The sedines were cursed with a bad case of mediocrety. Near the end of the season I was willing to trade our entire d-corps except hamhuis and salo for a bag of pucks. I gotta believe the problem is coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Actually now that i think about it... from about january on, The third line, salo, and our goalies were awsome while the rest of the team played retard hockey. The sedines were cursed with a bad case of mediocrety. Near the end of the season I was willing to trade our entire d-corps except hamhuis and salo for a bag of pucks. I gotta believe the problem is coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apples Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Luongo. F- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Luongo. F- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangelos Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I'll use C to say their year was reasonably acceptable, nothing great, yet not disappointing. If they have a grade above C it means they did better than I expected of them, below C means they disappointed. Forwards: Daniel- C (Goes for whole line, they didn't have a great year, but they were in no way disappointing) Henrik- C Burrows- C Kesler- C- (He came off surgery, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt, regardless I expected a bit more) Booth- C- (I expected a bit more, he was too inconsistent and disappeared at times) Raymond- D- (I defended him at first, but it just looks like he doesn't care out there) Hansen- B+ (He really stepped his game up, proved he deserves at least 3rd line minutes) Pahlsson- C+ (Was what I expected defensively, surprised me by putting up a few points as well) Higgins- B+ (I think he was our most consistent player when healthy, he really impressed, would be higher if not for poor playoffs) Malhotra- C (Didn't expect much of him after his injury, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt) Lapierre- B (Was really impressed by his play, especially as the year went on) Kassian- C- (I didn't expect much of him, but I expected a lot more physical play than he provided) Weise- C (Was decent, looks like he could be a full time 4th line player soon) Defence: Bieksa- B (Defensively was a litte inconsistant, but did great offensively) Hamhuis- B+ (Was arguably our best defence man defensively, while stepping up on offence) Edler- B- (He did great, but I really hoped he would be phenomenal this year, however it was still a step in the right direction) Salo- B (Stayed healthy, and was one of our most consistent players) Ballard- C (I just didn't expect anything great, and thats what we got ) Tanev- B (Proving he will be a solid defence man) Rome- B- (Really impressed early on, then did what was expected) Alberts- C (Did what he had too when he was called upon) Goaltending: Luongo- B- (He did what he needed to do, he won us games and never imploded like many feared) Schneider- B (Proving he deserves to be a starter, whether it is here, or somewhere else) Overall: C- Did better than expected in the season until the end, extremely disappointing playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I 100% disagree with your Kevin Beiksa grade. Edler was terrible in his end this year and he gets an A-? KB who put up 40 pts versus Edler's 49pts with more PP time and KB a C? KB was better +- and gets a C? Tanev rated above KB? Gragiani who has not even comes close to grabbing a spot on the team is rated the same as K Bieksa? Kevin Beiksa was better than Salo and Salo gets a B+ ( I guess he got that becauise he didn't get hurt?) Keith Ballard who has not secured a spot on the 3rd pairing gets the same rating as Kevin Beiksa who is out against the other teams best lines and plays more minutes? I love Hansen but seriously, rated slightly below the Sedins and Burrows? AV who has coached the team to another 100 pt season gets a D? MG who has brought so many positive changes to the Canuck organization as well as systematically gone about doing his best to make the team better each year gets a C-? Do you think that he should just curcumvent the Cap reality and aquire players at the snap of a finger just because you want them? Like he stated, trades are complicated and take a lot of planning. I give your post an F-....how's that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunjabiCanuck Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 trade raymond and ballard they didnt do much or have done much!!! and they were both F's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NP-4815162342 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 How is bieksa c he had 44 points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 You're not alone in your concerns about coaching. Unfortunately, MG doesn't agree which is one reason he deserves a failing grade. With the exception of one "miracle" run last year, AV has shown he can't get it done in the playoffs. THe team is often unprepaired, unmotivated and slow to adjust. This, despite having the best eam Vancouver has ever iced and one picked 2 years in a row to win it all. AV...F Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunjabiCanuck Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Vigneualt: C Mike Gillis: D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.