Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Was team toughness and size oversold?


Lui's Knob

Recommended Posts

It's easier to teach a gifted scorer to play defence than to get a grinder to develop offensive skill. Sadly, people look at how Kesler blossomed and think it's possible for anyone. It all goes back to the Hodgson trade for me, here is the one guy in the entire system with untapped scoring potential, hockey smarts, the intangibles you can't teach and that no forward on the team not named Sedin really has. And Gillis trades him away for a big body. Naslund for Stojanov in reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overblown. Boston isn't even THAT big. The pug twins in Lucic/Horton are big. Their 4th line is big. Their D is big. Recchi/Krejci/Marchand/Bergeron/Seguin/Kelly/Ryder....not exactly. Their team is gritty/chippy compared to us.

LA on the other hand...is a pretty big team.

Building things for the future, adding a bit of size and grit is a good way to go.

This team could stand to add a bit of size+skill to its top 6/core.

Kassian is a step in the right direction.

Of course, skill is more important than size or toughness.

You don't want to sacrifice too much skill for size.

A super talented team of midgets will almost always lose to an almost as talented, team of giants.

Answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's easier to teach a gifted scorer to play defence than to get a grinder to develop offensive skill. Sadly, people look at how Kesler blossomed and think it's possible for anyone. It all goes back to the Hodgson trade for me, here is the one guy in the entire system with untapped scoring potential, hockey smarts, the intangibles you can't teach and that no forward on the team not named Sedin really has. And Gillis trades him away for a big body. Naslund for Stojanov in reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's easier to teach a gifted scorer to play defence than to get a grinder to develop offensive skill. Sadly, people look at how Kesler blossomed and think it's possible for anyone. It all goes back to the Hodgson trade for me, here is the one guy in the entire system with untapped scoring potential, hockey smarts, the intangibles you can't teach and that no forward on the team not named Sedin really has. And Gillis trades him away for a big body. Naslund for Stojanov in reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As previously mentioned, it isn't one way or the other when comparing skill with team toughness and size. So instead of being oversold, it has been incredibly undersold since it is possible to have both. That being said, it will take some time for the right pieces to fall in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a copycat league unfortunately. So are most of sports leagues. OP brings up an interesting topic, if there was a smaller quicker team with 4 line of scoring against a team like LA. I have a hard time believing they couldn't create a gameplan where they could use their speed to their advantage.

Think outside of the box go a different direction than every other team. Means players would be slightly cheaper since you value different skills than what the typical team values. Play a faster game than teams are used to and you could tire these big teams out. Would definitely be interesting, and I don't think anyone with certainty can say it wouldn't work.

But I think the team just needs to commit to a style. It seems like we transitioning to becoming a bigger grittier team. It's not an easy transition and if you thought it would be seamless without any growing pains, well you are getting proven wrong right now. We will be fine as long in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not oversold, and here is why.

In the finals, the ref's don't want to decide the game, and put away the whistle. This has been happening for years with complaints of ref consistency from many teams. When it's skill vs size in the finals and penalties aren't called for all the banging and cheap shots, the size wins after wearing down the skill team. For this reason, we need to keep the size.

Size not as applicable to regular season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. It just hasn't been implemented properly.

We would have been fine just keeping Torres and Salo and then adding one more guy with some toughness and skill.

Instead, we loaded up on 4th liners to the point that we're losing them on waivers and gave up Hodgson for Kassian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not oversold, and here is why.

In the finals, the ref's don't want to decide the game, and put away the whistle. This has been happening for years with complaints of ref consistency from many teams. When it's skill vs size in the finals and penalties aren't called for all the banging and cheap shots, the size wins after wearing down the skill team. For this reason, we need to keep the size.

Size not as applicable to regular season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you can refer to Kassian in the same manner,untapped scoring potential, hockey smarts, sure he isn't as polished as CoHo, but Snaggletooth has two intangibles that Coho will never have and can't be taught, that being size and toughness.

It all falls on AV for not using the asset the way he should.

"Naslund for Stojanov in reverse." this comment strikes me as odd, and you lost any credibilty that you may have gained by making it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry but he was 2nd in goals in the NHL after 7 games playing on the top line. he was hitting , fighting and dominating like cam neely.

then AV in his brillance bury's him on the 4th line

stop whining about cody. if av had 1/2 a brain kassian would be playing with the sedins and still performing very well.

i guarantee you he is not stojanov, and hodgson is no naslund it was an even trade and if our player was utilzed correctly you'd see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Size and toughness are the exact opposite of "intangibles", you should look up what "intangible" means. Sestito also has size and toughness. Stojanov had size and toughness in spades. Alek was also a very good scorer in junior, 36 goals in 49 games his last year. Kassian's hockey smarts are negated by his poor attitude. I don't care about where my credibility stands with you RtRP, it doesn't affect me one bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stand corrected, partly anyway, and I should have clarified that by seperating the 2, a TANGIBLE that Kass brings and CoHo will never possess is size, INTANGIBLES he brings are strength and toughness.

And to speak to your 2nd point you obviously didn't click on the link I sent in the second post, Kassian had eclipsed Stojanov's CAREER points in the first 10 games of the season, so you are comparing apples to oranges.

Has Kassian displayed a poor attitude? Listen, I agree that Coho is a nice talent, unfortunately with Hank and Kes ahead of him on the depth chart he just wasn't going to get the playing time he felt he deserved, to hold Kassian accountable for that is absurd.

And to turn him into Stojanov to inflate the value of Coho is ridiculous.

You speak as though you have been personally wronged through the Kassian/CoHo trade, I believe even if Kassian turned out to be a 50 goal scorer you would hang another negative TAG on him, give him a year or two and then let's revisit this conversation.

The kid is 22 yrs. old and you speak about him like he is a seasoned vet that has let you down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...