elvis15 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 We had snipers....Hodgson, Grabner and Bernier have 25 goals between them, that equal to the same number that Daniel, Henrik, Burrows, Kassian, Schroeder and Lapierre have combined. In case you wonder if Gillis should still have a job, in return for those three players and their 25 goals we got 5 goals from Kaaaian and Ballard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 *OFFENSE Grammar police has arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Last Year: 2.94 goals/game This Year: 2.77 goals/game That equates to a difference of 14.76 goals/82 game season. Thats while missing our 2nd line center. Biggest difference is were averaging 3 less shots/game compared to last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kack Zassian Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Not much difference then. The extra 3 shots a game would be Keslers'. All this and we haven't really had a 2nd line. In a few weeks, I think we will have a far better 2nd line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 *OFFENSE Grammar police has arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 And yet Hodgson wouldn't have been playing on the first line here with Vanek and Pominville, Grabner would likely have been waived when he stunk up another training camp (just like in Florida), and Bernier would have either still been paid to much to be on our 4th line or waived (again, just like in Florida). All three of those aren't a reflection on Gillis as much as a reflection on the situations those players are in now because of their past actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 It is the "Detroit Model" that needs to go. The reason it doesn't work in Van is that we do not have a seemingly endless supply of late round draft picks that are patiently and properly developed and inserted strategically into the lineup as holes develop. Young, fast, big, and aggressive is the new NHL. And unfortunately the Canucks are a day late and a dollar short in following the model that worked last decade..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Just because your American style spellcheck underlines a word does not mean it's wrong, ok neighbour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Further to my point above about the model the team is following..... The Detroit Model only works when roles are clearly defined for players. That does not really happen with AV. Everyone is expected to play the strategy first rather than play a role that will take advantage of their strengths. It is a critical mistake in trying to follow what Detroit does. They have a very obvious plan for every single player and that plan meshes perfectly with the overall strategy of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Yes ,it is a total reflection on Gillis. Throw in Sami Salo without a suitable replacement. Too bad we are fed the 'Detroit Model' patience line when in fact,no patience on the part of Grabner and Hodgson was ever exercised to the extent that Detroit employs. Grabner and CoHo would man a second line in the absence of Kes and Booth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 So you would have given multiple years to an injury prone defenceman on a 35+ contract (and more salary than he's ever earned), kept a player that would have likely been lost on waivers after another poor training camp, and continued to groom a player in a 3rd line role after he'd verbally requested more icetime despite being behind a Hart/Art Ross winner and a Selke winner in the depth chart? We don't hear Detroit losing their prospects to waivers for nothing, or their prospects complaining about ice time. Detroit does love keeping their aging players around on multi year 35+ contracts though, I'll give you that's an area where the Canucks differ from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 In terms of Salo: If there was not a suitable replacement? Absolutely yes. If Garrison is supposed to be his replacement then the coaching staff needs to start using him as it. Because 35+ or not, this team misses Salo....... Would Detroit have let Ehrhoff leave? Under any circumstances? Would they have let Hodgson get that disgruntled? Would they have miscast players to the extent the Canucks do? No, and that is why they can actually make their "model" work and Vancouver can't. That and the fact that the coach wants to do things his way even at the expense of what makes sense given his personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Certainly a lot less drama and controversy surrounding the WIngs than the Nucks. Says something about coach.management. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 But where does that drama come from? A media with a penchant for sensationalism, and a fan base without a cup in 40 years? Look how people on here overreacted to losing a 4th liner on waivers. Maybe there are areas to be concerned over, but we certainly don't have any proof of issues based on what's being suggested here. We did line up a replacement for Salo in Garrison and were in the hunt for Schultz too. Even still we did offer Salo a contract for one year and promise to keep renewing it for as long as he wanted to play. Maybe Gillis and the scouting staff should be faulted for drafting a player with a father very interested in the future of his son's career, unfortunately marred by an injury that wasn't diagnosed at a few turns. It says something about a player when he's been through a few agents as is, never mind on his second NHL team after asking for more icetime. They might come under fire for drafting a player with talent in Grabner who wasn't mentally prepared for training camps and didn't change his ways (by his own admission) until getting waived by Florida and getting picked up by the Isles. Certainly it was an issue how the trade turned out, although it seemed sound at the time. We did miss out on a few players that could have helped our offence (to get this post back on topic) but that wasn't fault of the management and coaches. Certainly not all of it was, and the actions (or inactions) of all the players mentioned have a lot to do with the resulting situation we're in now - which isn't all that bad, but we'd love to be better. But all this has been discussed before. I've just yet to see anything to convince me this is all due to faults of Gillis and Vigneault, as most of the threads here are speculating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not A Fruit Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Just because your American style spellcheck underlines a word does not mean it's wrong, ok neighbour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 With all due respect, AV and Mike Gillis both fan the flames with the media and stir up controversy with their comments. And I would almost guarantee it is on purpose. They WANT the fans and the media talking about them and the team..... The coach won't use the replacement as a replacement so the exercise certainly looks futile. It is not always 100% the players fault. Grabner and Hodgson have both shown that they are not uncoachable or that it was not possible for them to change whatever criticisms AV and MG may have had towards them. In fact, both look like they just needed the proper coaching direction and opportunity. There is a certain responsibility on the Canucks as well to properly communicate and manage expectations on those players as well. Have you ever considered that perhaps the Canucks lost out on players because of the way they have handled Hodgson, Samuelsson, Grabner, Ballard, etc? It is certainly not unrealistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raph Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Our offense has been static for the last few years. Teams have figured us out. Much like Ovechkin. And we have no snipers, we usually just get garbage goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALTtimegreat Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 3 years been asking and waiting for Gillis to provide LEGIT 2nd line wingers for Kesler. This year, 2nd line is still a mess. Booth, Raymond, Higgins are not LEGIT 2nd liners. Booth needs to traded asap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 3 years been asking and waiting for Gillis to provide LEGIT 2nd line wingers for Kesler. This year, 2nd line is still a mess. Booth, Raymond, Higgins are not LEGIT 2nd liners. Booth needs to traded asap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Karlsson Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Sedin-Sedin-Burrows Hodgson-Kesler-Grabner/Shirokov Sedin-Kesler-Sedin Hodgson-Edler Dat powerplay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.