Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

What brand of hockey should this team play?


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#1 EvoLu7ioN

EvoLu7ioN

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,816 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:21 PM

If you don't have time to read below, what brand of hockey do you think gives us the best chance to win next year?

"Five years ago we came in here and reset this organization and it's time to do it again," Gillis said. "When I took this job we decided on a style of play [skill, speed, puck possession] that resulted in great success, and clearly the landscape has changed and we have to address those changes".

"I don't think the style of play is any longer a one-off; I think it's a trend and we have to address it".

Both of those quotes are from Gillis at the year-end press conference last Thursday, it appears Gillis believes the league is moving away from a skill and speed oriented style, and towards a crash and bang style. He mentioned the landscape has changed, and that the Canucks need to evolve and get bigger and younger.

Honestly, this is the first offseason in a long time I think Gillis has it wrong.

When I look around the league at the teams doing really well, those who are succeeding in the playoffs, I see a lot of speed and skill. Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, Ottawa, Detroit are all built with the same system gillis wants to change. Heck, San Jose beat us with skill while we were outhitting them and trying to be the bigger team. Yeah, Boston, Anaheim, and LA are all big teams that have had success, but all of those teams also have tremendous skill and speed.

And why would the league want to move away from skill and speed which are the exciting parts of the game? These are the part of the game that fill the seats, generate revenue, and grow the sport. The end to end style is so exciting, and makes this sport different from other sports like football basketball and baseball. Who would generate more audience and popularity in the finals, Pittsburgh v Chicago or LA v Boston?

If Gillis moves out skill and brings in size and banks on the league going in the direction of LA and Boston instead of Chicago or Pittsburgh, he is wrong. We have a ton of skill and speed, we should play to our strengths and get even faster and more skilled. We already have decent size, any more and we will sacrifice other aspects of the game,

What do you guys think! Is Gills right in his assessment, or is he out to lunch on this? What aspects of the game should we focus on to give us the best chance of success? For me, it's speed and skill. Size is important too, but we can't go out of our way to be the bigger team. Lets go out of our way to be the better team.

Edited by EvoLu7ioN, 11 May 2013 - 05:37 PM.

  • 1
Posted Image

#2 Henrik Kesler

Henrik Kesler

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:38 PM

I think the best chance at this core winning a Stanley Cup is to try and recreate the 2010/11 team with grittier wingers, so yes I agree MG may be overplaying the need to get big if he brings in bigger players who don't have the skill to produce points.
  • 3

#3 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:48 PM

*
POPULAR

We can't have a team too heavily leaned on by size/toughness or speed/skill. We need a good balance of both. Chicago, Boston and LA all had this recipe. Those teams had the ability to adjust to any style and beat it.
  • 6

#4 Christophe

Christophe

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 908 posts
  • Joined: 26-December 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:49 PM

Big, gritty workaholic team.

Seriously, go for the whole crash-and-bang mentality. That type of play will just destroy teams in the playoffs.

Having huge wingers on the forecheck just kills teams defence.
  • 1

#5 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:50 PM

*
POPULAR

We need to play fast and skilled. Overwhelm teams with our speed, puck possession and transition game.

When the Sedins are the center of this team, you need to support them with players that play their style. That's why we've had our most success ever with players like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Malhotra. It's all about getting the puck, keeping the puck, and moving it quickly up the ice.

The thought that skilled team can't win is wrong. Skilled teams can win, but you have to have enough skill, to counter other teams toughness. We had that winning formula 2 years ago, but ultimately injuries took their toll. At the end of the day, we didn't have enough depth believe it or not. One or two more depth guys, or one or two less injuries and the cup would have been ours.

To build a team of big tough grinders, we would have to blow up the team and start from scratch IMO. We need to just stick to the style that gives us the most success and not worry about what other teams are doing. Really, the league might switch back to rewarding skill next season for all we know. So why constantly change our roster? You don't see Detroit reacting every year to try and keep up. They build teams the way they always have. Because at the end of the day, there's no substitute for skill.

Edited by DeNiro, 11 May 2013 - 05:52 PM.

  • 8

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#6 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:54 PM

The brand of hockey this team needs play is consistent hockey. Oh and winning in the playoffs is always good to
  • 2
Posted Image

#7 Henrik Kesler

Henrik Kesler

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:55 PM

We need to play fast and skilled. Overwhelm teams with our speed, puck possession and transition game.

When the Sedins are the center of this team, you need to support them with players that play their style. That's why we've had our most success ever with players like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Malhotra. It's all about getting the puck, keeping the puck, and moving it quickly up the ice.

The thought that skilled team can't win is wrong. Skilled teams can win, but you have to have enough skill, to counter other teams toughness. We had that winning formula 2 years ago, but ultimately injuries took their toll. At the end of the day, we didn't have enough depth believe it or not. One or two more depth guys, or one or two less injuries and the cup would have been ours.

To build a team of big tough grinders, we would have to blow up the team and start from scratch IMO. We need to just stick to the style that gives us the most success and not worry about what other teams are doing. Really, the league might switch back to rewarding skill next season for all we know. So why constantly change our roster? You don't see Detroit reacting every year to try and keep up. They build teams the way they always have. Because at the end of the day, there's no substitute for skill.


I agree. When were the Sedin's 100+ point players? When they had a sweet transition game which created space on the rush to make plays. This year since the transition game was nonexistent, everything they did offensively had to come on the cycle which is easier to defend most of the time, hence the loss of point production.

I fear MG is going to try and make a Cadillac CTS-V out of the Ferrari 458 this team is when the Sedin's are supported by the right players.

Edit: I agree about Detroit too. You can adjust the team to make it bigger and tougher, but you have to do it within the confines of what your best players excel at. Overselling on getting big and tough leaves you with what this years team was, neither overly tough nor supremely skilled. When that happens, said team plays some boring and inconsistent hockey.

Edited by Henrik Kesler, 11 May 2013 - 06:10 PM.

  • 1

#8 Gooby

Gooby

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 311 posts
  • Joined: 04-August 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:01 PM

We need to play the type that wins the cup.
  • 1
Posted Image

#9 PlayoffHockey

PlayoffHockey

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:53 PM

Whatever brand is the complete opposite of what I watched this year. 180 degrees please. This year was total and utter complete joke.
Zero intensity , like watching ikea staff play a game of shinny.
Western hockey league animals that thrive on playoff warfare and finish every check.
  • 1
Posted ImagePosted Image

"I haven't been a supporter of the Canucks for long. Mainly because firstly I knew nothing about NHL GL and secondly ESPN America only started showing NHL 3 years ago. I was unattached to any team when I first started watching although I could easily have gone for the Philadelphia Flyers as my home team which I supported in my youth and for 20 years was the Fife Flyers."
~ Bodee

http://forum.canucks...me/page__st__30

#10 CrippledCanuck

CrippledCanuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:58 PM

*
POPULAR

The brand of hockey where you dont sit back and defend a 1 or two goal lead and fail at it
  • 6

#11 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:59 PM

The question is would you rather watch a team that plays like the Isles?

Or a team that plays like the Blues?

I would personally take a team that plays like the Isles. People that say they just want to play whatever style that wins, don't seem to care that we have to watch that style of hockey for 82 games during the regular season. Sorry, but the Blues and Kings are such a boring team to watch in the regular season.

In 09/10 and 10/11 when we were knocked out it sucked, but at least I was able to look back on the season and realize that I watched some damn entertaining hockey. If I looked back on those same seasons after playing like the Blues or Kings did, or even like we did this season, I would not be very happy.

Edited by DeNiro, 11 May 2013 - 07:01 PM.

  • 4

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#12 Cigano

Cigano

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: 17-November 03

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:21 PM

We need to play fast and skilled. Overwhelm teams with our speed, puck possession and transition game.

When the Sedins are the center of this team, you need to support them with players that play their style. That's why we've had our most success ever with players like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Malhotra. It's all about getting the puck, keeping the puck, and moving it quickly up the ice.

The thought that skilled team can't win is wrong. Skilled teams can win, but you have to have enough skill, to counter other teams toughness. We had that winning formula 2 years ago, but ultimately injuries took their toll. At the end of the day, we didn't have enough depth believe it or not. One or two more depth guys, or one or two less injuries and the cup would have been ours.

To build a team of big tough grinders, we would have to blow up the team and start from scratch IMO. We need to just stick to the style that gives us the most success and not worry about what other teams are doing. Really, the league might switch back to rewarding skill next season for all we know. So why constantly change our roster? You don't see Detroit reacting every year to try and keep up. They build teams the way they always have. Because at the end of the day, there's no substitute for skill.


Tried it, didn't work. See Boston Bruins 2011. When guys are getting banged into the boards every shift, they don't have the same speed.
  • 0
Posted Image
credit to VINTAGE CANUCK

#13 Neversummer

Neversummer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,989 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:25 PM

Depends on who wins the SC ... then we will try to mimic them :sadno: :picard:
  • 1

#14 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:29 PM

Tried it, didn't work. See Boston Bruins 2011. When guys are getting banged into the boards every shift, they don't have the same speed.


Making it to game 7 and saying it didn't work is idiotic. It wasn't them hitting us that made us lose.

Hamhuis injred himself, Kesler, Samuelsson, and Edler were already injured, and Raymond was injured on a fluke play.

And because of these injuries we couldn't score, and couldn't keep the puck out of the net.

If you read my post I said that we needed even more depth to overcome these injuries. Depth on the level of the Blackhawks of 2010. That's the type of depth you need to win in the playoffs. It wasn't the style of play.

If we play the Lightning that year, it may have been a completely different series. You don't prepare your team in order to beat one type of team. A team has to be adaptable, and ultimately injuries took that ability away from us.
  • 4

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#15 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:40 PM

We need to play fast and skilled. Overwhelm teams with our speed, puck possession and transition game.

When the Sedins are the center of this team, you need to support them with players that play their style. That's why we've had our most success ever with players like Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Malhotra. It's all about getting the puck, keeping the puck, and moving it quickly up the ice.

The thought that skilled team can't win is wrong. Skilled teams can win, but you have to have enough skill, to counter other teams toughness. We had that winning formula 2 years ago, but ultimately injuries took their toll. At the end of the day, we didn't have enough depth believe it or not. One or two more depth guys, or one or two less injuries and the cup would have been ours.

To build a team of big tough grinders, we would have to blow up the team and start from scratch IMO. We need to just stick to the style that gives us the most success and not worry about what other teams are doing. Really, the league might switch back to rewarding skill next season for all we know. So why constantly change our roster? You don't see Detroit reacting every year to try and keep up. They build teams the way they always have. Because at the end of the day, there's no substitute for skill.


Actually in the video of MG's press conference MG said he talked to Ken Holland and that Mr. Holland said that he has seen the trend of big, tough teams and that he is working towards that too.
  • 0

#16 Neversummer

Neversummer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,989 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 10

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:42 PM

Actually in the video of MG's press conference MG said he talked to Ken Holland and that Mr. Holland said that he has seen the trend of big, tough teams and that he is working towards that too.


Look at Detroit this year ... that is far from the truth. They do not have big tough guys unless you consider Tootoo big and tough ... :sadno:
  • 0

#17 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:45 PM

Look at Detroit this year ... that is far from the truth. They do not have big tough guys unless you consider Tootoo big and tough ... :sadno:


I guess I should have underlined "working towards that"


Also, they do have quite a few big bodies, Bertuzzi 6'3 230, Abdelkader 6'1 219 (who has been playing with Datsyuk btw), Franzen 6'3 229, Samuelssson 6'2 219, etc. They have a few more forwards around 210 also, and that's just their forwards...

Edited by Kesheniel, 11 May 2013 - 07:50 PM.

  • 0

#18 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:48 PM

Actually in the video of MG's press conference MG said he talked to Ken Holland and that Mr. Holland said that he has seen the trend of big, tough teams and that he is working towards that too.


Well he's taking his time then, cause if you look at his recent drafts he's drafted nothing but skilled Europeans as usual.

I don't think it takes a hockey genius to realize that it has been the trend. The only question is will that trend continue?

I don't think it will. Cause at the end of the day, it's exciting hockey that sells. In some markets they only wanna see blood, but I think most of the marketts respect skill and fast paced excitement.

Edited by DeNiro, 11 May 2013 - 07:52 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#19 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:55 PM

Well he's taking his time then, cause if you look at his recent drafts he's drafted nothing but skilled Europeans as usual.

I don't think it takes a hockey genious to realize that it has been the trend. The only question is will that trend continue?

I don't think it will. Cause at the end of the day, it's exciting hockey that sells. In some markets they only wanna see blood, but I think most of the marketts respect skill and fast paced excitement.


You are making it far too black and white. It's not like we can't (at least try) to have both. Size and toughness has always on almost every championship team (if not every championship team), had its place. I think we should try to get back to what made us so potent in 2010/2011, but I also think we should try to make ourselves more versatile and give ourselves the ability to play the LA/ST/BOS style if need be.
  • 0

#20 PlayoffHockey

PlayoffHockey

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 07:57 PM

40 years of watching playoff hockey and its always the same, you need savages not pacifists.

Time to load up on some savages.
  • 1
Posted ImagePosted Image

"I haven't been a supporter of the Canucks for long. Mainly because firstly I knew nothing about NHL GL and secondly ESPN America only started showing NHL 3 years ago. I was unattached to any team when I first started watching although I could easily have gone for the Philadelphia Flyers as my home team which I supported in my youth and for 20 years was the Fife Flyers."
~ Bodee

http://forum.canucks...me/page__st__30

#21 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:09 PM

You are making it far too black and white. It's not like we can't (at least try) to have both. Size and toughness has always on almost every championship team (if not every championship team), had its place. I think we should try to get back to what made us so potent in 2010/2011, but I also think we should try to make ourselves more versatile and give ourselves the ability to play the LA/ST/BOS style if need be.


Of course you need some size. That's pretty much what the third and fourth lines should be for. And we do have some size, but need a little more.

Every year Gillis harps on the importance of a good fourth line, yet never goes out and does anything to improve it. It's a constant revolving door every season.

I'm talking about the style of play though. No matter if our player are big or small we have to play an agressive attack style of hockey. Sitting back and defending with the roster we have won't equal success.

My point is, we don't need to suddenly change this teams identity, just some of it's personnel. Surround the Sedins with skilled players, and their level of skill will increase.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#22 Puck'nAnimal

Puck'nAnimal

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:19 PM

TOUGH GRITTY PLAYERS WHO CAN SCORE!!! 5 SIMPLE WORDS. That's how San Jose is working. That's the way Boston beat us in 7 in 2011. We can either follow the herd and hope to heck that the NHL will swing the other way in a few more years or we can opt to get grittier, tougher and beat the other team into submission. Now "how to do it" is the question. Right now, the prospective trade-bait that we have on the Canucks isn't attracting any buyers and the ones who are producing are the ones we want to keep. Depleted prospects pool; players who's values have gone down because of this season in the toilet. Lack of effort means lack of marketability on the open market and results in the GM having to eat a lot of potential trade opportunities because other teams will turn around and say "Forget it if he's not showing any upside and his stats stink this year, what's the chance he'll turn it around next year."


Edited by Puck'nAnimal, 11 May 2013 - 08:20 PM.

  • 0

HistoryVisionDrive-HeartofaCanuck_rs.jpg


#23 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:35 PM

TOUGH GRITTY PLAYERS WHO CAN SCORE!!! 5 SIMPLE WORDS. That's how San Jose is working. That's the way Boston beat us in 7 in 2011. We can either follow the herd and hope to heck that the NHL will swing the other way in a few more years or we can opt to get grittier, tougher and beat the other team into submission.


How many years have the Sharks used the philosophy of size and toughness? And how many years have they had success in the playoffs?

Sure they made it to the second round, but they did it on the backs of their skilled guys and their powerplay. Not grinding it out goon hockey. If they win the cup this year, it won't be because of size or toughness, it will be because of skilled guys like Thornton, Marleau, Couture, and Pavelski.

They also got rid of their grittiest players at the deadline and signed Scott Gomez. Maybe they're realizing that there's no substitute for skill after all. Their top powerplay is also key to their success. Not too many teams other than the Bruins make it to the finals without a lethal powerplay.

This happens every year after there's a new champion. The Ducks win and everyone thinks they have to be big and nasty. Then the Wings, Penguins, and Hawks win and it's skill that rules. After that it's the Bruins and Kings, and then it's size and defense that wins.

All of these teams had grit, it's the personnel and the style of play that was different. The Hawks, Wings and Pens built around skill because that's what their core was made up of. And the Bruins, Ducks, and Kings built around size and defense because that's what their core was made up of.

The Canucks core is built around skill, and need to supplement that core with skill. Does that mean we don't need some size and grit? Of course not. But thinking that we're going to win playing like the Kings and Bruins, when the team just isn't setup that way is a recipe for failure.

Edited by DeNiro, 11 May 2013 - 08:37 PM.

  • 3

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#24 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,899 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:37 PM

We can't have a team too heavily leaned on by size/toughness or speed/skill. We need a good balance of both. Chicago, Boston and LA all had this recipe. Those teams had the ability to adjust to any style and beat it.


This. It's all about balance...should be a speed/skill game, however, with the crappy reffing it doesn't hurt to have guys out there who will send a message when the refs don't.
  • 1

Posted Image


#25 Phil_314

Phil_314

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,150 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 09

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:51 PM

Build out from solid goalie; get big, physical power forward-types, smaller "heart" guys are okay too and pair them with skilled guys who can dish the puck or snipe (like what Boston or L.A. does); it won't be cheap but there's value in doing that since they can survive even against more skilled teams or when the play gets tougher physically. The bigs can also protect their linemates well.

If Kassian pans out, Kes/ Twins can keep their intensity up and Burr stays clutch that would be a decent foundation up front. On D they could use work on tightening the play back there (for starters, pair the shutdown guys with the puck movers who make mistakes-- I'm looking at you Edler). Hopefully Schneider can be the young stud goalie who catches fire as the #1 in the playoffs. As for the "foot soldier" types, it's tough to tell who'll step up but guys with skill and determination should be good pieces for the bottom 6 (e.g. Hansen, Lapierre); they just need to find their way through.

Edited by Phil_314, 11 May 2013 - 08:52 PM.

  • 0

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.


Jesus LOVES YOU!
2012, meet Matthew 24:36-47!

14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.


#26 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:53 PM

How many years have the Sharks used the philosophy of size and toughness? And how many years have they had success in the playoffs?


I'm pretty sure the Sharks have the second most playoff wins in the last 4-5 years.
  • 0

#27 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,026 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:58 PM

I'm pretty sure the Sharks have the second most playoff wins in the last 4-5 years.


Yep second to the Wings.

But how many years were they a top team, and how many years did they make the finals?

If size and toughness is the sure recipe for success, surely they would have made the finals once in the last 5 or 6 years.

Edited by DeNiro, 11 May 2013 - 08:58 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#28 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 11 May 2013 - 09:03 PM

Yep second to the Wings.

But how many years were they a top team, and how many years did they make the finals?

If size and toughness is the sure recipe for success, surely they would have made the finals once in the last 5 or 6 years.


There is no "sure recipe for success" in the playoffs. Not in the cap era at least.
  • 0

#29 Plum

Plum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,189 posts
  • Joined: 06-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 09:26 PM

We need players who can forecheck hard, play good along the boards, cycle well and can score goals. Not just speed/skill or big tough guys. Get a big guy with Sedins, a big guy with Kesler and a speedy guy. Big guys who can put the puck in the net.
  • 0

Kevin Fiala will be a star.


#30 Henrik Kesler

Henrik Kesler

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,698 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 13

Posted 11 May 2013 - 09:32 PM

Of course you need some size. That's pretty much what the third and fourth lines should be for. And we do have some size, but need a little more.

Every year Gillis harps on the importance of a good fourth line, yet never goes out and does anything to improve it. It's a constant revolving door every season.

I'm talking about the style of play though. No matter if our player are big or small we have to play an agressive attack style of hockey. Sitting back and defending with the roster we have won't equal success.

My point is, we don't need to suddenly change this teams identity, just some of it's personnel. Surround the Sedins with skilled players, and their level of skill will increase.


Definitely agree.

A fourth line that can actually play hockey (besides just Lappy) would be a good start for this offseason, and fairly cheap to acquire.

Next on the list should be someone who can play Manny's role and center Higgins and Hansen. Higgins and Hansen as third liners would be deadly because they can play the shut down role while providing above average offense from the third line.

These two things alone put the team back to where it was in 2010/11 plus there is a 4th line that can actually play some minutes.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.