Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

Poor 11-12 season was because of the lack of chemistry?


This topic has been archived.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

#61 Gino Odjick

Gino Odjick

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,771 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 07

Posted 04 September 2012 - 09:40 AM

Interesting theory. But I disagree. We won the President's trophy. The team fell apart in the playoffs against a great team. The Canucks were no match.

#62 Canada Hockey Place

Canada Hockey Place

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,846 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 04 September 2012 - 09:48 AM

Tired of reading of how LA was on a hot streak. They were a solid team and they found ways to win. Which, after the fact, is summed up as a hot streak.

Tired of reading about the President's Trophy. Does anyone actually believe the Kings are complaining about their regular season performance last season? 1st place guarantees home ice advantage. Not very useful if you can't win on home ice.

Tired of reading about how it's all 1 player's fault. Daniel was injured, Henrik isn't a good captain, Luongo is mentally fragile, Hamhuis/Bieksa/Edler aren't true top defenders, and somehow more fighting majors equals more goals, etc.... When it's obvious it's all based on the result. Win = good. Loss = bad.

Tired of the defence of Vigneault. How there is no suitable replacement good enough. While other teams seem to find suitable replacements and improve. A 3 year contract extension? Because the players are comfortable with him? WTH?

The Canucks had a poor post-season performance in 2012. They've also had less than stellar performances in the 2nd round in 2007, 2009, 2010. The Cup Finals in 2011 is the anomaly, not the other way around.

The Canucks fail because they think they're better than they actually are.. That's why they act like they deserve to win. That's why there is no fight to earn it.

/post-season rant 2012
Quando omni flunkus moritati

#63 CanucksSayEh

CanucksSayEh

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,469 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 12

Posted 04 September 2012 - 11:05 AM

Even without Danny we should have beat the Kings. Everyone just played so bad, the guys that looked consistent and were supposed to excel in the playoffs turned into our worst players.

Phalsson was no match to shut down the Kings top 6
Kesler.........
Hammer was a turnover machine and just overall bad
Edler, by far the worst player on the team
Bieksa was completely void of contact and a turnover machine.
Salo just wasn't himself since Boston
Higgy lost every puck battle and missed the net by a bus length on every shot
Manny was brutal
Burr spent the entire series getting lined up for highlight reel hits and couldn't finish on any point blank chances


It was basically a handfull of nucks fighting a losing battle. We may as well have handed them the cup ourselved, no one else after us had a chance to stop them. Quick wasn't nearly as good as people say, he let in some softies and never had to deal with the scoring chances anyone else did. Schnieder, Smith and Brodeur all equaled his performance and were sometime better.

Edited by CanucksSayEh, 04 September 2012 - 11:07 AM.


#64 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 04 September 2012 - 11:44 AM

and so do all the bruins who skated around our rink with the cup.


Don't understand that argument; yeah we lost the final game, but we came about as close as you can.

#65 dorrcoq

dorrcoq

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: 12-September 05

Posted 04 September 2012 - 12:46 PM

We also lost Grabner at the first interval.


Hilarious

#66 dorrcoq

dorrcoq

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: 12-September 05

Posted 04 September 2012 - 12:49 PM

The Canucks fail because they think they're better than they actually are.. That's why they act like they deserve to win. That's why there is no fight to earn it.

/post-season rant 2012


I think you have that a bit wrong - it's the Canuck FANS who think the team is better than it is and deserves to win

#67 dorrcoq

dorrcoq

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: 12-September 05

Posted 04 September 2012 - 12:52 PM

team is built around a soft euro core. no cup for us until that changes.


Clueless...and just plain ignorant.

#68 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,161 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 04 September 2012 - 02:11 PM

Exhibit A:

Posted Image

How can you even call yourself a Canucks fan if you hate on every one of our players?

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#69 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 04 September 2012 - 02:38 PM

only the canucks can win a presidents trophy and fans say they had a poor season

they had a poor playoffs

dumb thread title = dumb thread
Posted Image

#70 Guest_Gumballthechewy_*

Guest_Gumballthechewy_*
  • Guests
  • Joined: --

Posted 04 September 2012 - 02:48 PM

only the canucks can win a presidents trophy and fans say they had a poor season

they had a poor playoffs

dumb thread title = dumb thread


Imposter Clutch, why are you the exact opposite of the real Clutch?

This post was smart (relatively) and truthful, while less popular Cluth probably would have blamed the whole thing on Burrows.

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 04 September 2012 - 02:49 PM.


#71 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 04 September 2012 - 03:07 PM

Don't understand that argument; yeah we lost the final game, but we came about as close as you can.


the point is that until we replace our soft euro core we aren't going to win the cup. getting to game 7 of the scf doesn't mean squat unless you you're the team with 4 wins when the final buzzer sounds.
Posted Image

#72 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,061 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 04 September 2012 - 03:56 PM

Don't understand that argument; yeah we lost the final game, but we came about as close as you can.


We got blown out on our home ice in a winner takes all game 7. Presidents Trophy winners by a wide margin with a 2-0 and 3-2 lead in the SCF. We were close but farther away than it actually appeared, I do believe that was the most lopsided 7 game Final in NHL history.
In retrospect, it almost seemed as though we were the Cup-favorites on a cinderella run, if that makes any sense.
We beat Chicago by the slimmest of margins after being way ahead.
The Nashville series went longer than it should have, and Kesler was the main reason we won.
We were pretty lucky to get past San Jose in 5 (the stanchion goal).
We all remember how it went against Boston.
Much lesser teams who weren't expected to do anything have actually come closer to the Cup in recent memory than we did in 2011.
Van in 1994
Cgy in 2004
Edm in 2006
My point is that winacup isn't totally off the mark in his assessment of our team, I dont entirely agree with what he said but this team needs something changed if we want to win, what that is I'm not sure.

#73 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,929 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 04 September 2012 - 04:24 PM

Jeff Carter hasn't really impacted Kings in any meaningful way whatsoever. At least from the playoff games, and espeically against the Canucks, Carter didn't matter too much.

It was Kopitar, Dustin Brown, Justin Williams, Drew Doughty, stifling defense a la Sutter and most importantly Quick that turned out to be the difference.


The added depth, albeit a single player, allowed Kopitar and Brown among others to thrive. The numbers since Carter's arrival back that up.
Posted Image

#74 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,929 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 04 September 2012 - 04:26 PM

Exhibit A:

Posted Image


They aren't physically tough or mean to play against by any means. That particularly looks bad only because the officials weren't doing their jobs.

Edited by Tortorella's Rant, 04 September 2012 - 04:26 PM.

Posted Image

#75 thehamburglar

thehamburglar

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:56 PM

We got hemmed in. We got out played.

It happens, but I bet there's chemistry.
Posted Image

#76 icycold

icycold

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 923 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 11

Posted 04 September 2012 - 09:34 PM

Our defence was the biggest issue. The only reason we didn't get blown out every single game was the play of both our great goalies. Sure we couldn't score, but it all starts from us getting hemmed in our own zone because our pathetic excuse for a defence couldn't get the puck out against the L.A forecheck, and kept giving up glorious opportunities to their forwards, including countless odd-man rushes and breakaways against our netminders.

Hamhuis was the only defenceman who played well, and even he at times struggled against the big Kings forwards. Our defence needs to play a much safer, more stay-at-home style and be more physical as opposed to jumping up in the rush so often and getting caught gambling because good coaches can easily exploit that - it's much harder to exploit a stay-at-home defence, which seems to be the way to win Cups nowadays.

Hopefully Garrison will help in that direction, and Tanev can develop enough to become a good stay-at-home guy. I still believe we need more physicality so hopefully Alberts will draw into more contests because we really should of used his size more in the playoffs - he's the only guy who could have contested the L.A (and even Boston) giants up front, who basically cake-walked our fragile D.


THIS!!! Wow dude.. exactly THIS for yrs now, from the first chicago series where buffy and co. ran all over us. Would love to see Lou+ traded for a big mobile D-man and a bigger center. This issue really hasn't been resolved as of yet, if it ever does.. look out!
HABS SUCK!!!

#77 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 05 September 2012 - 12:27 AM

the point is that until we replace our soft euro core we aren't going to win the cup. getting to game 7 of the scf doesn't mean squat unless you you're the team with 4 wins when the final buzzer sounds.


"our soft euro core" who's that? Hansen, Edler and the Sedins are the only European players on the team.

Hansen isn't "soft", neither is Edler. I could give you that the Sedins aren't the toughest of players, but they are the best players on our team. We're not getting rid of them.

#78 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,079 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 05 September 2012 - 01:34 AM

Didn't Hoff take a long cap/team loyal contract vs the big $ that was expected? I definitely don't get the Torres thing, he was a beast and seemed well liked.


Hoff took a fat payday with a lengthy guarantee. Getting paid well into the future when he had one good season behind the Sedins made sense, he wasn't going to produce like that again and he knew it. Torres has said he only keeps in touch with a couple Canucks, but when one of them is Tanner Glass...you get the idea.

Keswho.jpg


#79 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 05 September 2012 - 04:19 AM

only the canucks can win a presidents trophy and fans say they had a poor season

they had a poor playoffs

dumb thread title = dumb thread


They played poorly in quite a few games.

I don't care whether they won the PT or not..............I watched every game and they constantly fell to teams they underestimated...............sound familiar?

Calgary, (2x) Phoenix, Montreal, Dallas, Buffalo, Ottawa, Minnesota (2x) Anaheim, (2x) Florida, LA, Carolina, Nashville (2x) Look at some of our narrow wins over the worst team in the league.......1-0, 3-2OT, 2-2 SO,

Just about anyone could beat us because we messed about with our lines, we lacked focus, we lacked pushback if bullied and we hardly ever were able to imposed our A game

23 of our wins came from OT or SO.............many of these against lower table teams.

We won the PT but anyone who watched EVERY MINUTE of these games wondered how.

The poor teams tried to bully us, often succeeding and the better teams tried to bully us when they couldn't beat us by skill alone.



All of the above points to PLAYOFF misery, especially when combined with the injuries near the end of the season.
Kevin.jpg

#80 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 05 September 2012 - 04:33 AM

"our soft euro core" who's that? Hansen, Edler and the Sedins are the only European players on the team.

Hansen isn't "soft", neither is Edler. I could give you that the Sedins aren't the toughest of players, but they are the best players on our team. We're not getting rid of them.


The Sedins are NOT soft.......they are two of the toughest players on our team.

I wish people would stop repeating this crap. Soft implies easily intimidated.............they are NOT easily intimidated because they are never "cowed" they take all the crap and still don't let it affect their game. They are two of the top points scorers in the league every season.

THEY DON'T PUSHBACK or FIGHT, that is something totally different and maybe why they have had so few injuries in their career.

(They attracts the bullies, and that is why we should have a fighter on the 1st line)

There are imo NO soft players in our team.
Kevin.jpg

#81 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 05 September 2012 - 04:38 AM

The Sedins are NOT soft.......they are two of the toughest players on our team.

I wish people would stop repeating this crap. Soft implies easily intimidated.............they are NOT easily intimidated because they are never "cowed" they take all the crap and still don't let it affect their game. They are two of the top points scorers in the league every season.

THEY DON'T PUSHBACK or FIGHT, that is something totally different and maybe why they have had so few injuries in their career.

(They attracts the bullies, and that is why we should have a fighter on the 1st line)

There are imo NO soft players in our team.


I know, they're strong, but don't play physical. I think that's why people call them fake

#82 Samuel Påhlsson

Samuel Påhlsson

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined: 29-February 12

Posted 05 September 2012 - 04:45 AM

Samuel Pahlsson...why are the Canucks hanging him out to dry..?


maybe waiting for his stock to hit rock boomer..so they can slowly bring it up again

Pahlsson and the Sedins are worth a $2 Mill experiment..I mean Hometown Burrows could not argue with that..

after all..

he's the wonderwall $2 Mill experiment as I type...


he would love a second top line ...get a day off once and a while!!


Pahlsson for 2 Million


any body have a problem with that?


Yes I'd like to know this as well.

Sig too big. -SN


#83 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,642 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 05 September 2012 - 05:35 AM

After the game against Boston in January both the Canucks and Bruins hit the wall hard. Both teams had no time to recover from a long playoff. The Canucks were mentaly burnt out same as the Bruins, combine that with the injury to Daniel and the Thomas saga both of these teams were a mirror image of themselves.

#84 hockeywoot

hockeywoot

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 09

Posted 05 September 2012 - 11:19 AM

Tired of reading of how LA was on a hot streak. They were a solid team and they found ways to win. Which, after the fact, is summed up as a hot streak.

Tired of reading about the President's Trophy. Does anyone actually believe the Kings are complaining about their regular season performance last season? 1st place guarantees home ice advantage. Not very useful if you can't win on home ice.

Tired of reading about how it's all 1 player's fault. Daniel was injured, Henrik isn't a good captain, Luongo is mentally fragile, Hamhuis/Bieksa/Edler aren't true top defenders, and somehow more fighting majors equals more goals, etc.... When it's obvious it's all based on the result. Win = good. Loss = bad.

Tired of the defence of Vigneault. How there is no suitable replacement good enough. While other teams seem to find suitable replacements and improve. A 3 year contract extension? Because the players are comfortable with him? WTH?

The Canucks had a poor post-season performance in 2012. They've also had less than stellar performances in the 2nd round in 2007, 2009, 2010. The Cup Finals in 2011 is the anomaly, not the other way around.

The Canucks fail because they think they're better than they actually are.. That's why they act like they deserve to win. That's why there is no fight to earn it.

/post-season rant 2012


Tired of these kind of comments.
People over-analyze things. There are far too many factors to account for.
Simply put, team A outperformed team B. End of story.

Such is the nature of sports.

In regards to the Canucks' attitude: Should they have a loser mentality? Of course not. Ridiculous. They should know that they can beat any team in this league (as long as they execute).

AV. Not a massive supporter, but I don't think firing him would change to much.
In fact, I don't think we're a particularly talented (at not least super-elite) team.
I think we've overperformed our actual talent level, thanks in part to AV.

In regards to subpar performances. Losing to the Hawks in 2009 and 2010. Sure, wasn't great to lose. May have ranked
higher in the regular season. However, these Hawks teams were some of the most stacked cup winners in recent memory.

#85 Captain Aerosex

Captain Aerosex

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 08

Posted 05 September 2012 - 12:09 PM

AV. Not a massive supporter, but I don't think firing him would change to much.
In fact, I don't think we're a particularly talented (at not least super-elite) team.
I think we've overperformed our actual talent level, thanks in part to AV.

In regards to subpar performances. Losing to the Hawks in 2009 and 2010. Sure, wasn't great to lose. May have ranked
higher in the regular season. However, these Hawks teams were some of the most stacked cup winners in recent memory.


We didn't even really rank higher than them in the regular season...only reason we had home ice in 2009 was because the NW had gotten weak and we didn't have the reigning champ Red Wings to deal with. The Canucks have gone up against great teams in the playoffs...in fact, the road to the Cup has gone through the Canucks 6/10 times dating back to 2001 (Flames went to the Finals in '04, Blackhawks to the WCF in '09, missed playoffs twice).

We can talk about patching holes, etc. but we've got a great team...rarely are there perfect teams. The '07 Ducks (and the reigning champs) were incredibly deep and balanced...the '02 Wings were a HOF team. But none are invincible. As you said, it's all about performance. The Kings clicked, played to their potential and beyond. The Canucks have shown how dominant they can be when they perform as one. The team's more than good enough to win right now, it's all about execution.

dontforgettolentil.png


#86 Walkin'2929

Walkin'2929

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 316 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 08

Posted 05 September 2012 - 10:15 PM

Lack of chemistry? It's an argument...... I guess. So are injuries, and lack of goal scoring.

But, enough of the excuses. These guys and their coaches are "professionals", and it's up to them to create the chemstry, overcome deficiencies due to key players being injured, and find ways to score goals in vital playoff games.

The disappointing early playoff exit in 2012 clearly highlighted the Canucks were not able to find a way to do any of those things satisfactorily this time around.

Is it because they are incapable of doing so? No, I refuse to believe this team managed to lower it's IQ in less than 12 months since their appearance in the SCF. More likely, the Canucks were suffering a playoff hangover, from which they should be well and truly recovered this summer, particularly if the season starts late due to the expected lockout.

I predict the Canucks can go deeper into the Playoffs in 2013, particularly if MG makes some astute trades during the season for more grit and depth up front




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.