Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Contrast with the LA Kings

Discussion

This topic has been archived.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

#31 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,924 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:35 PM

Canucks choked in big games, got lucky on the way to the SCF and then got completely outclassed and outmatched against the Bruins.

Kings on the other hand, dominated the top 3 teams in the West and then won BIG in a must win game for them.


Wow, that post was complete crap. Luck? Not a chance.

For starters, the Kings beat an injury riddled Canucks. Removing Kesler and Daniel is like removing Brown and Kopitar. Suddenly they don't look so hot, do they? Whatever. We played like crap anyway.

Blues aren't built for the playoffs offensively. Winning by committee can get you everything but a birth in the final and the ultimate prize. Phoenix is a joke; overachieved all season. So while the Kings did beat the top three seeds, the first seed was a far cry from the real team it truly is and the other two were just phonies.

Edited by Tortorella's Rant, 11 June 2012 - 11:35 PM.

Posted Image

#32 Smyl ( :

Smyl ( :

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 164 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 12

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:37 PM

la.....

#33 miles.p

miles.p

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 221 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 11

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:40 PM

Wow, that post was complete crap. Luck? Not a chance.

For starters, the Kings beat an injury riddled Canucks. Removing Kesler and Daniel is like removing Brown and Kopitar. Suddenly they don't look so hot, do they? Whatever. We played like crap anyway.

Blues aren't built for the playoffs offensively. Winning by committee can get you everything but a birth in the final and the ultimate prize. Phoenix is a joke; overachieved all season. So while the Kings did beat the top three seeds, the first seed was a far cry from the real team it truly is and the other two were just phonies.


Not luck? We barely squeaked by the hawks after up 3-0. Winning game 7 was pure luck, it took the team extra minutes in game 7 to finish off a team that had no business being there.

Nashville. Not luck? If it wasn't for kesler going beast mode all of a sudden, the canucks would have lost. He hasn't mimicked that performance since. Also nashville was very inexperienced. First time ever making it out of a first round. They were in completely new territory.

San Jose. Not luck? Bieksa had one of the flukiest goals ever to clinch game 5.

Boston. Well luck ran out and we couldn't win game 7 on home ice.

Luck had a lot to do with the canucks being in SCF last year.

Edited by miles.p, 11 June 2012 - 11:41 PM.


#34 canucklesmith

canucklesmith

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 11

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:44 PM

we need Willie Mitchell. (20/20 hindsight)

#35 Zack_Kassians_Elbow

Zack_Kassians_Elbow

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 541 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 12

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:48 PM

Stanley Cup experience is overrated. The Canucks have a ton of players who have gone to game 7 of the SCF anyways, and experience comes from the marathon, not the final sprint.

The fact does remain that the Canucks need a physically imposing defenceman. One of the problems that has been ongoing is the lack of muscle along the boards in our own end. It's not so much that the Canucks are too small, it's that there's little threat for opposing forwards to go down low.

As for size up front, it's a luxury more than anything. Acquiring a skilled tough guy costs a lot, be it in assets or cap hit. We also have Kassian, despite him being a work in progress.


Yeah its funny how things change in a few years. The Canucks team in the 2009 playoffs had some physically imposing D but they were exposed by the Blackhawks speed..now that we have smaller more mobile D they get outmuscled by bigger teams like LA. I think what the canucks really need is BIG IMPOSING D who can actually SKATE

#36 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,924 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:54 PM

Not luck? We barely squeaked by the hawks after up 3-0. Winning game 7 was pure luck, it took the team extra minutes in game 7 to finish off a team that had no business being there.

Nashville. Not luck? If it wasn't for kesler going beast mode all of a sudden, the canucks would have lost. He hasn't mimicked that performance since. Also nashville was very inexperienced. First time ever making it out of a first round. They were in completely new territory.

San Jose. Not luck? Bieksa had one of the flukiest goals ever to clinch game 5.

Boston. Well luck ran out and we couldn't win game 7 on home ice.

Luck had a lot to do with the canucks being in SCF last year.


Why was it pure luck? It was pure luck that Toews deked out half the team and scored short handed. He couldn't do that again if he tried. Not to mention they staged a comeback from down 3-0 out of their ass. Luck plays a big deal in such a feat given the odds of actually doing what they did is slim to none. Campoli made the typical defensive play of 'off the glass and out' but Burrows intercepted it and blew it by Crawford. Right place, right time, great anticipation. It would seem the Hawks defied the odds.

Despite the Sedins going on fumes offensively, the Preds were definitely not the better team and were no closer to winning that series than we were. Our team was far better than theirs in the first place and I have confidence they would have prevailed.

We kicked the Sharks ass in five games. Fluke goal, okay, whatever.

You can also argue the Bruins got lucky given they had little to no injuries whatsoever. We were unlucky with ours.

You always need luck to make some sort of Cup run. I'm sure any player that has been there will tell you that but to say our entire run was a fluke is nonsense.
Posted Image

#37 Hugh Chardon

Hugh Chardon

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Joined: 21-December 09

Posted 12 June 2012 - 12:11 AM

Their best players showed up, ours didn't. End of story.

#38 10Bure14Burrows

10Bure14Burrows

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • Joined: 21-March 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:26 AM

Actually 4 times in 6 seasons :(

Anaheim 2006-07 second round (game # 5 western conference semi-final )

Chicago 2009-10 second round ( game # 6 western conference semi-final )

Buck foston 2010-11 ( game # 7 Stanley cup final )

L.A 2011-12 first round ( game # 5 western conference quarter final )



Forever Canuck !

#39 10Bure14Burrows

10Bure14Burrows

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • Joined: 21-March 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:28 AM

Actually 3 years in a row. Chicago, Boston, LA



Actually 4 times in 6 seasons :(

Anaheim 2006-07 second round (game # 5 western conference semi-final )

Chicago 2009-10 second round ( game # 6 western conference semi-final )

Buck foston 2010-11 ( game # 7 Stanley cup final )

L.A 2011-12 first round ( game # 5 western conference quarter final )


Forever Canuck !

#40 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:47 AM

Big difference:

L.A. has a cup, the Canucks still don't.

Also Sammy Pahlsson's and Aaron Rome's Stanley Cup ring says hi!


And Reinprecht's
Kevin.jpg

#41 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,292 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:55 AM

Biggest difference: Luck

LA captured lightning in a bottle on their run to the Cup. Everything went right in the playoffs. Every player got hot at the right time. New Jersey winning two games in a row near the end is the only semblance of adversity they had to face.

LA also had no significant injuries. You don't even hear rumours that anyone on the team is playing through injury.

The new NHL is all about parity. Anyone can beat anyone. LA won two tight 2-1 games in overtime. A lucky bounce the other way in either game and it's very different. Really, the only game the Kings had any back luck was game 4 in the Cup Final. That's it.

The Kings got hot at the right time. That's all there is to it.


You don't go on a 16-4 run with luck. The Kings are the perfect example of a big team that is built for the playoffs, not the regular season. Their big bodies are the reason they werent injured (just like Boston), not luck. You can't injure a guy who's 4 inches taller and 20 pounds bigger than you very easily. Surely unlucky injuries happen, but you can't wear down and injure players unless you're bigger like Chara's effect on the Sedins. The Kings outhit and wore other teams down just like Boston did to their opponents which is why they were the healthy ones - not luck.

Even in those close games, LA didn't just luck-win them. They constantly applied pressure and goaltending was the difference in those matches. Quick made some unbelievable saves that would have lose them the game - Brodeur didn't.

The whole team went to fricking game 7 of the finals. You can't get more experience than that.


Yes you can - you can win the bloody Cup. We have a team of losers right now, not winners and that's the different.



As for the OP - exactly what I've been saying all along. The Kings are big, as was Boston, but its the physical style of game that we need to adopt to be successful. The Canucks have some giants up front like Jensen, Malhotra, Kassian and Bitz but they're either on the bench, in the press box or not being used at all. AV needs to try and use more of these big guys throughout his lineup. The Kings had a giant on each of their lines (Kopitar, Penner, King, Nolan) as did the Devils (Kovalchuk, Zubrus, Ponikarovksy etc.) which is why they got so deep into the playoffs as well, but at the end of the day the Kings were just bigger.

On defence, it's mostly size but also the style they play. The Kings have 2 offensive defencemen (Doughty and Voynov). The Bruins had 2 offensive defencemen in their run (Chara and Kaberle). All the other 4 or 5 defencemen are big, physical shutdown guys who don't gamble, don't take stupid risks or pinches and are great in front of their own net. They're physical and grind down the opponents - not only with big hits but rubbing guys out along the boards really wears them down over a series. Guys like Matt Greene, Willie Mitchell, Seidenberg, McQuaid, Ference and Boychuk are masters at this which is why they have Cup Rings. Meanwhile, the Canucks defence is a pathetic excuse for a D. You clearly can't win in this league during the playoffs with an agile, fragile, nimble offensively minded defence. The Florida Panthers have a very similar defence and they suffered the same fate we did due to the number of defensive breakdowns caused by gambles. It's also a personel issue - our defenders are far too small to play a playoff-like-defensive game. Guys like Tanev, Ballard, Bieksa and Salo are not big enough for the playoffs. Sure Bieksa can play physical, but he isn't big enough to wear down opponents, and not big enough to contend with giant forwards like Lucic and Kopitar who took him to school. Edler is of perfect size and we need more guys who are 6'2" plus, over 210 lbs. They don't need to put up points - just play solid defence. Sadly, 2 of our most physical defencemen in Alberts and Rome aren't being used at all - a guy like Andrew Alberts is exactly what this team needs and I'll take his occasional brainfart over Tanev's complete absence of a physical game in the playoffs.
Posted Image

#42 250Integra

250Integra

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,099 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 06

Posted 12 June 2012 - 02:48 AM

We need more Canadians


(that's what Don Cherry would say).

naslundsig5.gif14326903821.giftowel.gif
Thanks for the Memories Canada!!!
Thanks for everything Naslund!
Original creator of the WWE and the Rate my sig / Showoff thread


#43 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,059 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:17 AM

Not luck? We barely squeaked by the hawks after up 3-0. Winning game 7 was pure luck, it took the team extra minutes in game 7 to finish off a team that had no business being there.

Nashville. Not luck? If it wasn't for kesler going beast mode all of a sudden, the canucks would have lost. He hasn't mimicked that performance since. Also nashville was very inexperienced. First time ever making it out of a first round. They were in completely new territory.

San Jose. Not luck? Bieksa had one of the flukiest goals ever to clinch game 5.

Boston. Well luck ran out and we couldn't win game 7 on home ice.

Luck had a lot to do with the canucks being in SCF last year.


I agree on all of this. What rarely gets mentioned is that the Blackhawks were just a shell of their Stanley Cup team, most of their good depth players were gone(Byfuglien, Ladd, Versteeg, etc.), and we still could barely beat them. Had they been the same team that knocked us out the two previous years, I think we would be talking about the Canucks getting dumped by Chicago three years straight.

#44 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,059 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:23 AM

And Reinprecht's


Pahlsson might be done with this team now, Rome played one regular season game and one playoff game for Anaheim in 2007 so his ring does not count, Reinprecht has yet to play for the Canucks. That's our SC ring "experience".

#45 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,121 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 12 June 2012 - 08:10 AM

Luck had nothing to do with it.

Our weaknesses were:

Goaltending. Quick > Luongo. By the time Schneids got to start it was almost already too late

Defense: LA had a bigger, more physical defense. Edler had one of the worst playoff series of his career. The whole of our defense just couldn't contain LA. (Then again a lot of teams ran into that) Doughty is an elite d-man, a type that we're lacking.

Offense: Outside of the Twins did anyone else show up? Where was Booth? Where was Higgins? Burrows? Kes was hurt. LA had secondary scoring with the likes of King, Penner, Stoll.

Coaching: Look at the two coaches. AV and his assistants didn't get the team to work on fixing it's powerplay, or work on an effective forecheck. Dump-Chase, Dump-Chase. Predictable. Then you look at Sutter. He was getting the most of his horses. He played a puck possession game. The players were like lions on raw meat. Sutter was actually COACHING his players, working with them, correcting mistakes, demanding more of his guys. Sutter got results. AV...well getting to game 7 I guess is good enough for this franchise.

That's why we lost. We got out-worked, out-coached. The team from 2/3rd of the season on was out of gas, plain and simple.
You can get hot at the right time, but you need the team to get you to 16 wins.

I agree with much of your post. Of particular concern is the question of coaching. You cannot argue about AV's regular season successes. Not sure whether it is a lack of coaching as contrasted to Sutter or that the ice strategy was lacking in playoffs. Van plays a 'run & gun' with attempts at 'puck possession'. Their d-zone puck support was usually designed for quick breaks up the middle that usually broke down. CUP quality d-cores mostly eliminated corner play forcing the play back for point shots. A lot of point shots were simply blocked. All this leds me to question where was the ability to change the ice strategy to counter. Where was that physical guy who would go to the net and bump Quick off his game? WHen it did happen he lost his cool. An obvious play IMHO.

Is this a coaching problem or that of a GM who felt the NHL was headed into a faster less physical game. He had every reason to think that but it is becoming obvious that is not the case. Anaheim, Hawks X 2, Boston and now LA have outmuscled Van. As the window starts to close on the Twins Van has to get it right. Back to coaching my concern resides with Bowness. Who knows who sets what direction within Canuck management but his d-cores have been the fundamental weakness over the past 5 years. Not necessarily his fault but I hope he is putting it on the line about having to upgrade.

#46 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,904 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 12 June 2012 - 08:41 AM

LA started the season over in Europe, just like the last 4 cup winners. Cheers.


TOML

suffer.gif


#47 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,376 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 12 June 2012 - 09:09 AM

Secondary scoring, elite playoff goaltending, and health.

Hopefully with a shrewd trade/signing or two, Schneider in net, and a nice long offseason to train and get prepared, we'll eliminate those shortcomings.

PBF020-Skub.gif


#48 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,639 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 12 June 2012 - 09:11 AM

Since many others have already pointed out the fail in the OP I will just :picard:
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#49 BoKnows53

BoKnows53

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 11

Posted 12 June 2012 - 09:13 AM

The Kings did copy the Canucks model at the center ice position. Acquiring Richards to be their Ryan Kesler.

#50 mygame

mygame

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts
  • Joined: 12-February 10

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:00 AM

Here is the bottom line kid's,these type of threads (all threads "what if" etc) won't stop til the nucks win the cup.It's been 40 + years and we are cup crazy here, this could be a make or break summer for years to come.I hope that in my life time we win it, but til we do get used to everyone comparing,"what if'"we should do this, etc.

#51 RXnucks975

RXnucks975

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 194 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:09 AM

I don't think we need to add more cup winners, we have something better a team full of guys who were one game away from it, and granted the team was worn out last year, but still found ways to win in the regular season. What we need is this long off season to heal, get our mental state back in order, and if we can grab an impact player or two if possible

#52 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:13 AM

Biggest difference: Luck

LA captured lightning in a bottle on their run to the Cup. Everything went right in the playoffs. Every player got hot at the right time. New Jersey winning two games in a row near the end is the only semblance of adversity they had to face.

LA also had no significant injuries. You don't even hear rumours that anyone on the team is playing through injury.

The new NHL is all about parity. Anyone can beat anyone. LA won two tight 2-1 games in overtime. A lucky bounce the other way in either game and it's very different. Really, the only game the Kings had any back luck was game 4 in the Cup Final. That's it.

The Kings got hot at the right time. That's all there is to it.

Thank you. Not enough people aknowledge luck as a contributing factor in success. Of course, good luck is nothing without the skill to capitalize on it, but without luck, skill alone is just a pretty goal/pass/move.

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#53 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,092 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:18 AM

Not luck? We barely squeaked by the hawks after up 3-0. Winning game 7 was pure luck, it took the team extra minutes in game 7 to finish off a team that had no business being there.

Nashville. Not luck? If it wasn't for kesler going beast mode all of a sudden, the canucks would have lost. He hasn't mimicked that performance since. Also nashville was very inexperienced. First time ever making it out of a first round. They were in completely new territory.

San Jose. Not luck? Bieksa had one of the flukiest goals ever to clinch game 5.

Boston. Well luck ran out and we couldn't win game 7 on home ice.

Luck had a lot to do with the canucks being in SCF last year.



This is hilarious.

The Canucks were "lucky" that Kesler played well against the Preds? Using that logic, LA was lucky this year that Quick didn't stink it up.

Lucky against Chicago? Chicago was lucky. Go back and watch game seven. Vancouver completely outplayed the Hawks. Conversely, Chicago was lucky the previous year, being able to fit all of that talent under the Cap. Last season was a dose of the same reality that the entire league deals with.

Lucky against the Sharks? Because of the clinching goal? You are aware that Vancouver was up 3-1 at that point, right? Even if they hadn't got the Bieksa bounce, they were much better than San Jose that series.

Go back and watch the Bieksa-Marleau fight. It's indicative of how the entire series went.

I'd argue that the Canucks were unluckly against Boston. Hamhuis, Ehrhoff, henrik, Kesler, Bieksa, Raymond, Rome....all were either out or playing through significant injuries.

Lets not forget the turning point of game three. Right after killing a five minute major, Edler's stick falls apart, leading to a Bruins goal.

Pretty "lucky" if you ask me.
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#54 skyfall

skyfall

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 940 posts
  • Joined: 16-November 09

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:39 AM

If Canucks fans are willing to settle with luck as the reasons for winning and losing then this is why I find it hard to be a Canucks fan. When a team is dominant luck should be a small percentage of the game. The Canucks are not dominant and cannot claim to be championship material if their mentality relies this heavily on luck.

#55 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,892 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:40 AM

Pahlsson and Rome have cup rings

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!

CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#56 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,892 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:46 AM

Rome and Pahlsson do have rings.....But, do they play a significant role on our team? A third line shut-down center and a spare D?


But you said no one has a cup ring.

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!

CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#57 1-d

1-d

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,231 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 09

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:19 PM

LA had all the stars lined up perfectly just in time for them.

As soon as the PO begins Kings started skating twice as fast as during the regular season, forechecking like there's no tomorrow and physically overpowering the other team at every puck battle. All this while all of their key players also remained completely healthy and the puck seemed to bounce to their way most of time.

When you see that happening to a team in the playoffs, you know other teams have no chance whatsoever.

#58 fagin

fagin

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,541 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 08

Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:37 PM

Luck had nothing to do with it.

Our weaknesses were:

Goaltending. Quick > Luongo. By the time Schneids got to start it was almost already too late

Defense: LA had a bigger, more physical defense. Edler had one of the worst playoff series of his career. The whole of our defense just couldn't contain LA. (Then again a lot of teams ran into that) Doughty is an elite d-man, a type that we're lacking.

Offense: Outside of the Twins did anyone else show up? Where was Booth? Where was Higgins? Burrows? Kes was hurt. LA had secondary scoring with the likes of King, Penner, Stoll.

Coaching: Look at the two coaches. AV and his assistants didn't get the team to work on fixing it's powerplay, or work on an effective forecheck. Dump-Chase, Dump-Chase. Predictable. Then you look at Sutter. He was getting the most of his horses. He played a puck possession game. The players were like lions on raw meat. Sutter was actually COACHING his players, working with them, correcting mistakes, demanding more of his guys. Sutter got results. AV...well getting to game 7 I guess is good enough for this franchise.

That's why we lost. We got out-worked, out-coached. The team from 2/3rd of the season on was out of gas, plain and simple.
You can get hot at the right time, but you need the team to get you to 16 wins.

......Schneider got ample time to correct the ship but he couldn't do it.Plus the team did show up in front of him and not in front of Lou.Schneider lost 2 and Luongo lost 2.The team was our problem not the Goaltenders.

#59 WEEWILLY01

WEEWILLY01

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:41 PM

LA has ten times the quality players, coach, GM and all the rest that goes into a Stanley Cup winner. The Nucks have none of this, least of all the Coach and GM Gilligan!!!!................

#60 WEEWILLY01

WEEWILLY01

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:43 PM

......Schneider got ample time to correct the ship but he couldn't do it.Plus the team did show up in front of him and not in front of Lou.Schneider lost 2 and Luongo lost 2.The team was our problem not the Goaltenders.

Finally, a Nuck fan who sees that the goaltending did everything they could to win but it was the fault of the team of PYLONS in front of them and the half baked coach!!!!.......................




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.