Pouria Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 This could be worse starting out if Kesler, Edler/Garrison (any or all) do not start the shortened season whenever it starts between now and Jan 1 - but in a shortened season while it may help a veteran team, if they hit significant injuries, do they have enough depth to push through for a playoff seed? Compared to a team like Detroit (lots of depth) or Nashville (not much depth)... Side note - does this shortened season now mean Lui stays for the short year in tandem with Schneider (in case of injury)? Whoo, feels good to talk hockey again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 We'll be fine. Lets say best case scenrior we start in January, Garrison and Edler should be fully recovered as we last talked about their injured in Mid October. We have enough depbth for a full 82 game season let a lone a shortened season. INjuries happen to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 So they can make it for 82 games and 21 games in the playoffs before "losing" that last one... So im pretty sure they can do the same with less regular season games to get injured from! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Let's say, & I'm just saying here, if the team wins it all in a shortened season, will there be an asterisk beside the team name in future records because they won it all in a shortened season a la the San Antonio Spurs 98-99 season where they played a shortened 50 game season?? Because the Spurs won it in a shortened season, I seem to recall alot of colleagues saying yada yada yada it's not a full season?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frazzY Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Let's say, & I'm just saying here, if the team wins it all in a shortened season, will there be an asterisk beside the team name in future records because they won it all in a shortened season a la the San Antonio Spurs 98-99 season where they played a shortened 50 game season?? Because the Spurs won it in a shortened season, I seem to recall alot of colleagues saying yada yada yada it's not a full season?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I'm all for winning either way and then winning again the next year too!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 The Canucks have enough depth but my worry is the slow start the team has, a shortened season might be over before it starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Short or long season, the Nucks have gaping holes on the second (RW) and third © lines. If these issues aren't taken care of, they will be wasting another year. This team cannot afford to piss another year away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyHodgson's #1fan Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 If you look at our normal trends: October-November - Roughly .500 hockey December-April - Dominant hockey (I'd guess .750, but don't have time to look at the numbers ATM) May-June - Iffy If that trend were to continue, we'd be right in our wheelhouse for the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorrcoq Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Does any team, if "they hit significant injuries"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lychees Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Luongo ... well known for his amazing starts to the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1970 and beyond Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 At this point I don't really think it matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 The dreaded October turning into the dreaded December/January!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bissurnette Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 I'm kinda dreading a half season, I think it might be worse on our vets health-wise. Here's why: its a WAY shorter season, that means every games will mean a lot more so teams will be fighting hard for every point they can get which will give the whole season more of a playoff feel with lots of body banging and whatnot... Can our vets take it? a 5 month playoff run would be pretty tough to handle on aging bodies, wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OncebeforeIdie Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 We can always call up players from our farm team in Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 This could be worse starting out if Kesler, Edler/Garrison (any or all) do not start the shortened season whenever it starts between now and Jan 1 - but in a shortened season while it may help a veteran team, if they hit significant injuries, do they have enough depth to push through for a playoff seed? Compared to a team like Detroit (lots of depth) or Nashville (not much depth)... Side note - does this shortened season now mean Lui stays for the short year in tandem with Schneider (in case of injury)? Whoo, feels good to talk hockey again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 The Canucks would probably have the best chance at winning the Cup if the season was shortened. Our older players don't have to worry about the grind, we'd have our injured players healed and ready for the playoffs and our goalies won't be mentally fatigued and crumble during the playoffs. However, there are other teams like San Jose in particular with older vets who would thrive in this sort of shortened season. Even a team like Tampa Bay would have an advantage as their older guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Shouldn't a shorter season help us in that respect? Doesn't fewer games = fewer injuries? Atleast that's the way I look at it. I think an shortened season we be a positive for us, it allows time for guys (Kes, Eddie, G52) to heal without the pressure of the ups-down of a season and the burning desire to get back into the line-up. Plus less games should leave us more fresh for the playoffs, which is really the thing I care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.