Grinder_1 Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Actually the Canucks were one of the hottest teams going into the playoffs. Canucks went 8-1 down the stretch in their last 9 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grinder_1 Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 A president's trophy winning season would be a pretty good season by any other teams standards, but not for the Canucks. Going from 15 wins in the playoffs down to 1 the following year, would be described as a failure. But how did it go this wrong? Somewhere down the stretch the Canucks lost there mojo, and I believed those points were: Win in Boston (I think Kesler was injured around this time too?) and the Trade Deadline. So clearly the Canucks weren't the hottest team going into the playoffs. The Canucks skill is good enough to win 1st in the league (we can all agree surely) but i think the difference between the 10-11 season and 11-12 season was the lack of chemistry. No all you guys are probably thinking "Chemistry!? That was surely not the reason!" But the more I think about it could have been. Lets look at the key moves for the Canucks at the beginning of the 2010-11 season IN: Ballard Hamhuis Malhotra Torres OUT: O'Brien Steve Bernier (can't think of anyone else) Now players have the oppurtunity to get know each other before the beginning of the year and have the pre-season to work on chemistry. Mid-season not so easy Moves during trade deadline 2010-11 season IN: Lapierre Higgins OUT: (no one key) So chemistry wasn't the issue as players were only added. Sure there were injuries (only major ones i can think of were Salo and Malhotra) but we had the right players to step into that role during the year. Different story for 2011-12 Moves at the beginning of the year for 2011-12 IN: Sturm (does he even count?) Hodgson (i know he wasnt an aquisition but he was new on the team) OUT: Ehrhoff Torres Glass So Kesler was injured and Hodgeson was in spot which worked fine but then a major trade happened Booth was in and Samuelson and Sturm was out. Booth I was on a very different team in FLA so it took some getting used to in VAN. Kesler would comeback and the centres would be pushed down one line. This was different style the Canucks were playing compared to last season. 3rd line went from being checkin/physical to more offensive. But the Canucks would adapt to this style and would go on a tear until around late January. Kesler wasn't playing 100% but the Canucks would manage. But then came the Trade Deadline. This really disrupted the Canucks chemistry. Mike Gillis managed to get key players at this time last year without giving up to much but this time he gave one player that changed the Canucks style IN: Kassian Gragnani Pahlson (sp?) OUT: Hodgson This disrupted the Canucks style as they went from and offensive 3rd line which worked to a more defensive 3rd line with the addition of Pahlson, and Kassian was for a physical presence. And then later in the year Daniel was injured which really sunk the Canucks, and kinda put them behind the offensive 8 ball heading into the playoffs. So this off season for Garrison, Booth and Kassian, they will have the chance to get to know each other and get to know each other better. They will also have pre-season (hopefully) to gel. And if know major moves including taking out a piece which worked well, and a change in style, the Canucks can get back to being as dominant as they were in 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 MG could have pbbly landed Carter for Schneider. If possible he should have done it. Sometimes you just have to go for it and make a bold move. Carter on the Canucks instead of on the Kings would have significantly increased the chances of turning the series in our favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 MG could have pbbly landed Carter for Schneider. If possible he should have done it. Sometimes you just have to go for it and make a bold move. Carter on the Canucks instead of on the Kings would have significantly increased the chances of turning the series in our favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keslerian one Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 One name: Jeff Carter. He gave them the extra offensive boost they needed. Without him, the Kings probably wouldn't have even made the playoffs. With the addition of Carter, they went from the NHL basement in goals for to top three in goals for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewdog Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Aside from a couple injuries (not an excuse) and the headache of line shuffling, I don't think there's much they could have done to change the outcome. LA bloody well conquered their way through the Playoffs. I haven't seen that level of domination since the 1988 Playoffs. In fact, I think the '12 Kings would have beaten the '11 Bruins in 5 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 team is built around a soft euro core. no cup for us until that changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Poor 11/12 season? You get the Presidents Cup for having a poor season???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Poor 11/12 season? You get the Presidents Cup for having a poor season???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I think Ninja is on to one key factor, drive? Two others; 1) The demise of our physical game, primarily over the loss of Torres and the diminished capacity of Malhotra. I'll get spammed for this, but we also lost speed from Tambelini and speed and size with Oreskovich. You can argue Higgins is better than Torres and you would be right, but it does not mean we miss and did not replace what Torres offered. And our physical game was already not matching requirements against Boston. Add the fact our best physical talent, Kesler, was injured most of the year and there was an awful lot wrong with our physical game. Him coming back strong might be more important than all the rest? 2) The loss of Erhoff. We did not miss him at the offensive end, Edler replaced him fine there. Erhoff was another weapon to make our transition game start by dynamic passing coming from our end. Plus he also had an ability to carry it up ice, often against pressure, when the pass was not available. This second skill has not been replaced and is sorely missed. Take away the ability to transition from our end, and then add offering an easier time hemming us in cuz we're less physical and its easy to see a less dynamic team; perhaps even one that appeared less driven? I think it was our lack of drive. I felt like we didn't play with the same passion we did the previous year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Mojo = D. Sedin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Puck possession went way down late in the season and our goaltending had to bail us out. Fatigue. Realizing that another lengthly cup run is highly improbable. Meh. When we won the President's i was like, now there's our consolation prize. Yay! With Daniel down we weren't goin' nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winacup Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Game seven says hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Having ehrhoff drove up the SEdins stats. Having Samuelson drove up Keslers stats. We lost both Ehrhoff and Samuelson which effected Keslers and Sedins Stats. Samuelson was Keslers main line mate in 2011, as Ehrhoff was our minute man defencemen that created a lot of offence. We do have Edler but offensively he is not nearly as fast and as offensive as Ehrhoff. Wasn't lack of Chemistry. I think, Mike Gillis was fully aware that the loss of Ehrhoff will be a huge hit against the teams overall offence, but the money he was asking for was way too much. Samuelson just struggled in 2011, and was "ok" during the Panthers playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 One name: Jeff Carter. He gave them the extra offensive boost they needed. Without him, the Kings probably wouldn't have even made the playoffs. With the addition of Carter, they went from the NHL basement in goals for to top three in goals for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuckFanLivingInCalgary:( Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I agree with the puck possession concern. Yes, LA were big with a strong forecheck and their goalie played lights out. I think Van's puck possession game during playoffs is still a questionable winning strategy against CUP quality d-cores. Detroit won playing that game but I would argue that those teams were much more physical than Van has ever been. I watched games where Detroit finished absolutely every check. It made no dif who the player was. Although the Canucks had some decent 'shutdown' games during the regular season I was never comfortable in their ability to 'fall back' and defend a lead. Pointing the finger at the d-core is a tough case as both offence and defence feed off one another. This is especially true when your transition game is genenerated from puck possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 A president's trophy winning season would be a pretty good season by any other teams standards, but not for the Canucks. Going from 15 wins in the playoffs down to 1 the following year, would be described as a failure. But how did it go this wrong? Somewhere down the stretch the Canucks lost there mojo, and I believed those points were: Win in Boston (I think Kesler was injured around this time too?) and the Trade Deadline. So clearly the Canucks weren't the hottest team going into the playoffs. The Canucks skill is good enough to win 1st in the league (we can all agree surely) but i think the difference between the 10-11 season and 11-12 season was the lack of chemistry. No all you guys are probably thinking "Chemistry!? That was surely not the reason!" But the more I think about it could have been. Lets look at the key moves for the Canucks at the beginning of the 2010-11 season IN: Ballard Hamhuis Malhotra Torres OUT: O'Brien Steve Bernier (can't think of anyone else) Now players have the oppurtunity to get know each other before the beginning of the year and have the pre-season to work on chemistry. Mid-season not so easy Moves during trade deadline 2010-11 season IN: Lapierre Higgins OUT: (no one key) So chemistry wasn't the issue as players were only added. Sure there were injuries (only major ones i can think of were Salo and Malhotra) but we had the right players to step into that role during the year. Different story for 2011-12 Moves at the beginning of the year for 2011-12 IN: Sturm (does he even count?) Hodgson (i know he wasnt an aquisition but he was new on the team) OUT: Ehrhoff Torres Glass So Kesler was injured and Hodgeson was in spot which worked fine but then a major trade happened Booth was in and Samuelson and Sturm was out. Booth I was on a very different team in FLA so it took some getting used to in VAN. Kesler would comeback and the centres would be pushed down one line. This was different style the Canucks were playing compared to last season. 3rd line went from being checkin/physical to more offensive. But the Canucks would adapt to this style and would go on a tear until around late January. Kesler wasn't playing 100% but the Canucks would manage. But then came the Trade Deadline. This really disrupted the Canucks chemistry. Mike Gillis managed to get key players at this time last year without giving up to much but this time he gave one player that changed the Canucks style IN: Kassian Gragnani Pahlson (sp?) OUT: Hodgson This disrupted the Canucks style as they went from and offensive 3rd line which worked to a more defensive 3rd line with the addition of Pahlson, and Kassian was for a physical presence. And then later in the year Daniel was injured which really sunk the Canucks, and kinda put them behind the offensive 8 ball heading into the playoffs. So this off season for Garrison, Booth and Kassian, they will have the chance to get to know each other and get to know each other better. They will also have pre-season (hopefully) to gel. And if know major moves including taking out a piece which worked well, and a change in style, the Canucks can get back to being as dominant as they were in 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Exhibit A: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 We ran into a hot team with a hot goalie. We played great but Kings played better. Ya the Kassian trade did work out that well but that shouldn't be the reason why we didn't get pass the first round. Daniel's injury is one of the main reason but there are other factors as well. Either way it was a disappointing season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.