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

Size and Intensity


JamesB

Recommended Posts

Should the Canucks care about getting bigger?

Most people will probably not be interested in this post, but I have been thinking about this issue and maybe I am not the only one.

Here are some not quite random facts about size, followed by some questions and comments about size and intensity.

1. It is frustrating that NHL.com stats on size tend to stay out of date for long periods of time. (These are the same numbers that appear on this website.) A lot of players are recorded at the size they were at the draft (at age 18) even though players gain, on average, about 1 inch in height and maybe 15 pounds in weight over the following 2 or 3 years (i.e. up to age 21, after which height gains are rare but weight continues to rise for a few years).

The website http://www.eliteprospects.com/team.php?team=77 seems to have up to date data. For example, that website has Bo Horvat at 6' 1" and 216 lbs, whereas NHL.com has him at 6 feet even and 206.

In this case we know that 216 is accurate as WD indicated late in the year that Bo had gained weight and was up to about 216, while simultaneously lowering his body fat percentage and gaining both strength and skating speed! (It is nice to be 19.)

2. The median NHL forward is 6' 1" and weighs 200 lbs. For defencemen the median is 6' 2" and 205 lbs.

3. The Canucks are the second lightest team in the league. The only lighter team is Calgary.

4. The smallest Canuck is Linden Vey at 5' 11" and 179 lbs. Horvat is the heaviest forward. The only D who is above the NHL median in size in Edler.

Benning recently re-signed both Dorsett and Sbisa for higher cap hits and longer terms than most people expected or liked, especially in Sbisa's case. The reasoning seemed to be similar in both cases. Benning likes their toughness, even though both players had very poor "advanced stats". And neither player is big. Sbisa is exactly average in height and weight for a D, and Dorsett is shorter and lighter than an average forward.

Obviously Benning thinks that intensity is a lot more important than size, and both Dorsett and Sbisa play with intensity, as does Kenins. And being big does not mean being intense. Think of the long list of big players who did not contribute enough physically on a consistent basis, including Pyatt, Oreskovich, Steve Bernier, Matthias, and I am going to put Kassian on that list as well. All those guys lack intensity. (Kassian is sometimes intense and sometimes in a daze, although he did get much more consistent in the second half of this year.)

My sense is that size is actually over-valued in the draft and in the free-agent market and that intensity and skill are more important. Of course if you can get a good player who is big, intense, and skilled that is great. (And Virtanen should end up at maybe 6-2 and 220 in a year or two, and he is both skilled and intense, all of which is very good.)

So my questions are as follows.

1. Is it a problem that the Canucks are a small team, and not an intense team either? Our main advantage is skill. This seems to be more of an issue in the playoffs than in the regular season.

2. Should Benning make it a priority to add size? Or intensity? Or should he just try to get good players with no particular urgency for size or intensity.?

3. If we need a stronger physical game are Sbisa and Dorsett the right guys to provide that? And who should be replaced (if anyone) to add size and/or intensity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting look;

Intensity goes a long way!

Its still tough for a Richardson to knock a guy like Kassian (assume they were on different teams) off the puck. The Richardsons of the world earn and keep jobs until the bigger guys with great talent wake up and match that intensity. Brad does us a great favour by not letting us settle, as say Edmonton does, for letting talent guys not put up the right effort. I love the guy. The coach was right to play Brad more while he is working harder.

But the fact Richardson is not re signed yet, and that LA let him go also tells you something. When Kassian does man up Richie has no chance.

Ultimately you want your core high end talents, and top athlete competing at that level.

That's when you win!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defence need to get bigger and faster. Benning should focus on the defence. The size in general with forwards is yes you need some size but skill > matters more.

For instance, the ducks got size and skill. eg Perry,getzlaf. The problem with this team at the moment is a over-rated defensive core. This defence can never do the simple things, for instance, pucks dumped in, well clear the puck instead they somehow manage turn overs. Our defence been a problem since the Boston series. It wasn't Luongo's fault but the defensive core's inability to make the simple plays.

Benning has to clean house on defence and get faster,bigger and younger. Flames' have built their team through the defence, believe it or not without Russel and Brodie were would the young guys be? Oilers are a perfect example how a team ends up with bad defence. Just imagine Oilers had Russel, Gio and Brodie. The problem on our team is the defence and the offensive lines have some minor problems, but it's hard to blame the forwards when the defence can't do the simple things right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defence need to get bigger and faster. Benning should focus on the defence. The size in general with forwards is yes you need some size but skill > matters more.

For instance, the ducks got size and skill. eg Perry,getzlaf. The problem with this team at the moment is a over-rated defensive core. This defence can never do the simple things, for instance, pucks dumped in, well clear the puck instead they somehow manage turn overs. Our defence been a problem since the Boston series. It wasn't Luongo's fault but the defensive core's inability to make the simple plays.

Benning has to clean house on defence and get faster,bigger and younger. Flames' have built their team through the defence, believe it or not without Russel and Brodie were would the young guys be? Oilers are a perfect example how a team ends up with bad defence. Just imagine Oilers had Russel, Gio and Brodie. The problem on our team is the defence and the offensive lines have some minor problems, but it's hard to blame the forwards when the defence can't do the simple things right.

So just to be clear...you're saying it's the defence's fault....? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So just to be clear...you're saying it's the defence's fault....? :P

Well this year

Playoffs

Bieksa 6gp -1

Sbisa 2 points -2

Weber -5

Hamuis -1

Tanev 6 gp +3

Edler +3

So two points provided by our defence in a 7 games series. Reality is our top guys Tanev and Edler are better fit for a shutdown role. We don't have offensive defensive and my god Weber was a -5 and some of you want him to resign?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this year

Playoffs

Bieksa 6gp -1

Sbisa 2 points -2

Weber -5

Hamuis -1

Tanev 6 gp +3

Edler +3

So two points provided by our defence in a 7 games series. Reality is our top guys Tanev and Edler are better fit for a shutdown role. We don't have offensive defensive and my god Weber was a -5 and some of you want him to resign?

Shea Weber didn't end the playoffs with a single plus, clearly BoSang is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this year

Playoffs

Bieksa 6gp -1

Sbisa 2 points -2

Weber -5

Hamuis -1

Tanev 6 gp +3

Edler +3

So two points provided by our defence in a SIX games series. Reality is our top guys Tanev and Edler are better fit for a shutdown role. We don't have offensive defensive and my god Weber was a -5 and some of you want him to resign?

I really believe this is due to the powerplay. I would really like to see what we could do with more size on the back end and a stronger forth line.... and by 4th line I mean the "2nd line" :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Is it a problem that the Canucks are a small team, and not an intense team either? Our main advantage is skill. This seems to be more of an issue in the playoffs than in the regular season.


I'd say so. Being small is fine if they have a team of Pat Kane's with Dustin Browns, but when the "size" available in Matthias isn't fully utilized in intensity and the high-end, pure skill is limited mostly to the Europeans (Twins and Verb) and they don't have the intensity on their line to complement them and match their opponent's of course it'd be an issue.

There were times in the first round when the Twins were passing on the outside and no screen or shooter in the middle was available in the tighter areas, and they were limited to putting pucks on net from the blue-line. That happened because both Burr and Zack, the Twins' complementary line-mates, were injured, Radim wasn't going to thrive in such tight checking and no one else had the size/ grit to do well in those tight quarters.

Meanwhile, most of the upper-middle six scoring depth consists of jack-of-all-trades types without the high-end skill OR grit to contribute (Higgins, Bones, Matthias, Hansen) when needed. Guys like Bo, Ronny and Richie seem to have the right mixture to thrive in the playoffs, but the guys higher in the depth chart also need to be able to step up esp. in times of injury, and Linden isn't strong or fast enough to thrive when checking gets tight.

2. Should Benning make it a priority to add size? Or intensity? Or should he just try to get good players with no particular urgency for size or intensity.?

Intensity and good players.

3. If we need a stronger physical game are Sbisa and Dorsett the right guys to provide that? And who should be replaced (if anyone) to add size and/or intensity.

They're a good starting point. For that other question, I'm sure trade proposals will stream in, so I'd leave it for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand what Desi means by "two points provided by our defense" when the D totaled 9 points in the Calgary series (Edler 3, Tanev 3, Sbisa 2, Hamhuis 1, Bieksa 0, Weber 0).

Still not enough scoring from the back end, however (IMO).

But not sure where the "2 points" comes from?

woops I looked at the point total wrong, but either way our defence are over-rated because they can't do the simple things right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude. Pedan, Tryamkin, Virtanen, Gaunce, Horvat... we are getting bigger.

Dude. Baertschi, Shinkaruk, Clendenning, Corrado, Vey... We are also not getting bigger.

That said it matters less than our overall ability and skill level. Pedan and Tryamkin to bring up our average size means nothing if they aren't useful players. That goes for skilled players who don't bring size as well though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Is it a problem that the Canucks are a small team, and not an intense team either? Our main advantage is skill. This seems to be more of an issue in the playoffs than in the regular season.

I'd say so. Being small is fine if they have a team of Pat Kane's with Dustin Browns, but when the "size" available in Matthias isn't fully utilized in intensity and the high-end, pure skill is limited mostly to the Europeans (Twins and Verb) and they don't have the intensity on their line to complement them and match their opponent's of course it'd be an issue.

There were times in the first round when the Twins were passing on the outside and no screen or shooter in the middle was available in the tighter areas, and they were limited to putting pucks on net from the blue-line. That happened because both Burr and Zack, the Twins' complementary line-mates, were injured, Radim wasn't going to thrive in such tight checking and no one else had the size/ grit to do well in those tight quarters.

Meanwhile, most of the upper-middle six scoring depth consists of jack-of-all-trades types without the high-end skill OR grit to contribute (Higgins, Bones, Matthias, Hansen) when needed. Guys like Bo, Ronny and Richie seem to have the right mixture to thrive in the playoffs, but the guys higher in the depth chart also need to be able to step up esp. in times of injury, and Linden isn't strong or fast enough to thrive when checking gets tight.

2. Should Benning make it a priority to add size? Or intensity? Or should he just try to get good players with no particular urgency for size or intensity.?

Intensity and good players.

3. If we need a stronger physical game are Sbisa and Dorsett the right guys to provide that? And who should be replaced (if anyone) to add size and/or intensity.

They're a good starting point. For that other question, I'm sure trade proposals will stream in, so I'd leave it for now.

Thanks for the thoughtful responses. Makes sense to me.

Dude. Pedan, Tryamkin, Virtanen, Gaunce, Horvat... we are getting bigger.

Dude. Baertschi, Shinkaruk, Clendenning, Corrado, Vey... We are also not getting bigger.

That said it matters less than our overall ability and skill level. Pedan and Tryamkin to bring up our average size means nothing if they aren't useful players. That goes for skilled players who don't bring size as well though.

I was thinking along the same lines as Elvis. Horvat is already on the team so we won't be "adding" him next year. As for Virtanen, Gaunce, Pedan and Tryamkin, the odds are better than 50-50 (in my view) that NONE of them are on the team next year. Virtanen might get a look.

The guys who are pretty much certain to be added are Baertschi and Clendening, and they are both high skill players who are on the small side and do not play an intense physical game. Corrado is also quite likely to be on the team and he is also a smaller "skill" defenceman.

And all three of those guys have been great in the stretch run and first playoff round in Utica.

So I do not see the team adding much size or intense physical play next year. I guess that is why JB was willing to overpay to keep Sbisa and Dorsett around. The other guy who used to provide intensity on D (although he was below average in size for a D) is Bieksa, but he does not really do that any more and I am not sure he will be around next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting look;

Intensity goes a long way!

Its still tough for a Richardson to knock a guy like Kassian (assume they were on different teams) off the puck. The Richardsons of the world earn and keep jobs until the bigger guys with great talent wake up and match that intensity. Brad does us a great favour by not letting us settle, as say Edmonton does, for letting talent guys not put up the right effort. I love the guy. The coach was right to play Brad more while he is working harder.

But the fact Richardson is not re signed yet, and that LA let him go also tells you something. When Kassian does man up Richie has no chance.

Ultimately you want your core high end talents, and top athlete competing at that level.

That's when you win!

Richie was allowed to walk in LA because of their organizational depth. They need to make room for their prospects like Pearson and Toffoli to play more minutes. Just no more room for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to be tougher to play against. And by tougher I mean we need more grit, compete level, nastiness, hitting, size, and hitters. We need guys that other teams hate to play against but love to have on there team. Guys like, Matt Martin, Chris Neil, Cal Clutterbuck, Lucic, Dustin Brown. Dorssett is a good start but our 3rd and 4th lines need more of in your face guys that can play 10-13mins a night. We have been too soft for a while and was a major reason we lost to the Bruins. Its ridiculous that we have not fixed our weakness for so long. Our D also needs some toughness and guys that clean out the front of the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richie was allowed to walk in LA because of their organizational depth. They need to make room for their prospects like Pearson and Toffoli to play more minutes. Just no more room for him.

I think you missed the point that was sitting right in front of you.

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...