Angry Goose Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 It's more boring to watch. Defensively speaking, the Canucks are massively prone to various break downs in their zone. It gives the impression that they are being out played. And Yeah goals are way more fun to watch. But it's a good reality check. The top two defensive pairings have to be better. Better to be pushed now and figure it out then when it's all on the line. (I'll add that Ballard and Tanev have shown they can be counted on) The forwards have to play better in their zone, (especially clearing the zone). Its a tough test for the goalies but good 'tenders benefit from being challenged. Adversity helps you succeed. And you never know because the Canucks might have to resort to this style at times when it counts in the playoffs. So better to see the need for improvement right away so it can be worked on early in the season. Everyone knows that how you win in the playoffs is about being sound defensively, first & foremost. Scoring goals doesn't matter if you let more in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DING Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I can't stop looking at your signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skittles360 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I can't stop looking at your signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigbond Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I think the term "boring defensive hockey" gets thrown around too freely. Watching a tight, disciplined game shouldn't be boring to anybody that knows anything about hockey. Simply not winning games because of zero offensive ability is where it gets frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rey Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 The problem is that you got a soft team. A defensive team, with team full of grinders and big hitters is real fun to watch but it's hard to follow through when the top 2 guys are soft. Team watches their best player get hit, and do absolutely nothing about it. Have a 20 year old fighting their fights. You need all 1-4 lines hitting hard, being physical, and big defense shut down defense man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I would agree with Ray's sentiment that the Sedins have been brutalized over their years here and Gillis had nobody to take care of them. Now Kassian is a deterrent but do you want a potential 20-30 goal scorer suffering a concussion by having to be the one that is holding the team up? Besides the fourth line and the third d in Ballard nobody will protect the Sedins. Hank and Dan are not soft.Their style of game is skill,not brawn. However,skilled players that can -and will-protect one another should not be relied upon with a rookie goal scorer or a third pairing d man or the fourth liners like Volpatti. Kass should rarely fight and third/fourth liners do not see enough ice time. The second and third liners should have bruisers and they are simply not there. Gillis,after five years on the job,has failed to address this absolute necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I think the term "boring defensive hockey" gets thrown around too freely. Watching a tight, disciplined game shouldn't be boring to anybody that knows anything about hockey. Simply not winning games because of zero offensive ability is where it gets frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 The trap and solid defence wins cups and brings playoff success. Look at last seasons final - the two best defensive-coached teams in the NHL breezed into the playoffs, slapping around big offences on their way. The season before, a good defence in Boston absolutely demolished a good offence and fragile, small, mobile defence in Vancouver. The season before that, a team studded with stars on the blueline in Chicago beat a physical defence in Philadelphia. Defence wins championships, it's won one over us the last 3 seasons and will win another this season. It starts with quality players on the blueline of any team, but includes the play of the forwards and most importantly - coaching. None of the 6 teams above except for Vancouver really gambled much defensively. They all made smart plays on the blueline, didn't risk stupid pinches or get caught out of position often and their forwards collapsed back quickly to help defence. In the playoffs it all starts with quality goaltending accompanied by a solid defence. The scoring is much more limited, and comes off building off from strong defence and not letting up many chances. Opportunistic teams have the most success in the playoffs - those that don't gamble or try to force offence, but create offence out of bad defensive mistakes by the opponent. That's how Los Angeles won most of their games and scored the majority of their goals - likewise with Boston. Just see the Canucks games against these 2 teams, almost all of the goals against were created off our mistakes. If you limit mistakes in the playoffs you limit opponents scoring opportunities, hence a good defence is paramount to winning Cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I agree but the Canucks have shown in the past that they can play the trap and play it well. For some reason, however, AV chooses not to play like that come playoff time. I've always thought that we should be a puck possession, defence first hockey team, and capitalize on the power plays and the odd 5 on 5. We have grinders, great defensemen, and stellar goaltenders, so grind the other team down, force them to take penalties, and keep them from scoring more than 2 goals a game on us; our goal scorers can take care of the rest. Why AV sends our team in the playoffs on a score-5-goals-a-game kind of strategy is beyond me. The defence tries to pinch and score goals for us and we consistently get burned, it's so frustrating. Defence first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 No, watching the team ice the puck for a period and a half after obtaining a 1 or 2 goal lead in the first 20 minutes is not a good mind set to have. But, I suppose it doesn't matter.... Canucks will sell out every night anyways, so why should they care about the on-ice product? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheels22 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Defensively, it is where they will miss Salo. That guy was a master of breaking up cycling plays and 99.9% can clear and make a good first pass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canidiot Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 playing defencive hockey plays into the wheelhouse of teams with less talent. if you have no offence you play defence. because thats all you have. it takes no skill to play in your own zone all night. plus as a fan, its like watching paint dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonz Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Defensive style is ok for us markets where ticket prices are cheap but if I'm paying 300 to 400 for lower bowl and have to watch the way they been playing, i rather stay home and watch on TV. I see why the crowd is so quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.