Archived

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

BurrsArrows

TSN Grades the Canucks

Recommended Posts

lol this is like purely based on points what a useless list, no way should Edler be higher than Tanev and Vrbata being ahead of horvat is a joke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miller at a C- is too harsh. He was stellar to start and is just now beginning to falter.

Burrows at a C is too low; he's not shocking anyone, but he's doing better than last year.

Horvat's C- is also too low, though you wouldn't think so by looking at the stats. He's been playing well, but just not producing well. My guess is that the C- is based off his lacklustre statistics and not on his actual performance in-game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I grade TSN

 

Hotness of Female Hosts : A

100% Un-bias Coast to Coast Coverage : F

No Damien Cox : A-

 

Overall Grade: B+ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look fairly accurate to me....only Burrows' grade is unfair ...Millers low grade is obviously ascertained by his big salary....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I don't disagree with their rating of Miller. He's been pretty average after the first few games. Of course, his stats also partially the reflect the team in front of him too, not just his own performance. And he is still playing well enough for us to win if the team plays well for the entire game. I'd love to say it's growth that has resulted in how fans and the media here are viewing Miller's stats as being acceptable but thought Luongo's even better stats were completely unacceptable. I'd love to, but I'm not an idiot...

Now, rating Burr a C is BS. He's 5th on the team for points and first on the team for takeaways (good for 55th in the league). His -2 rating is mostly the result of the fact that 5 of his 11 points came on the PP and he's been shuttled around and asked to play different roles on different lines repeatedly throughout the season.

And how does Horvat get rated lower than Vrbata? Vrbata makes more money, people also had high expectations for him, and he's been given better chances, like first line time. I don't understand why people are hating on Horvat all ready. It's his sophomore year on a slumping team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, poetica said:

Unfortunately, I don't disagree with their rating of Miller. He's been pretty average after the first few games. Of course, his stats also partially the reflect the team in front of him too, not just his own performance. And he is still playing well enough for us to win if the team plays well for the entire game. I'd love to say it's growth that has resulted in how fans and the media here are viewing Miller's stats as being acceptable but thought Luongo's even better stats were completely unacceptable. I'd love to, but I'm not an idiot...

Now, rating Burr a C is BS. He's 5th on the team for points and first on the team for takeaways (good for 55th in the league). His -2 rating is mostly the result of the fact that 5 of his 11 points came on the PP and he's been shuttled around and asked to play different roles on different lines repeatedly throughout the season.

And how does Horvat get rated lower than Vrbata? Vrbata makes more money, people also had high expectations for him, and he's been given better chances, like first line time. I don't understand why people are hating on Horvat all ready. It's his sophomore year on a slumping team.

Bo's stats took a beating on this last road trip....(he's had to shoulder more responsibility)...He's coming around now,and was probably the best player for the Canucks last night..I expect his rating to improve for the second quarter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hansen deserves an A.  Hansen may also deserve an "A".  Dude is killing it this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These 4 rankings show all we need to determine how fair these grades are:

Hutton: B-

Tanev: B-

Sutter: B-

Hansen: B

Each player should all be in the A range, let alone barely in the B grade. Toronto Sports Network strikes again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 5Fivehole0 said:

Aside from Baertschi and Burrows ratings I actually agree with them. 

Team has been under performing in a big way.

Really?

 

They're perfectly mediocre.  Under performing based on....?  Because this is where a lot of people expected them to be.  Not good enough for the playoffs to good for a decent pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Tortorella said:

Very poorly done. Perhaps next time they will send someone to grade the canucks who watches the canucks. 

Miller c-?

vrbata higher then horvat? Vrbata has been largest disappointment this year.  

Hutton is low, your telling me you had expected more from hutton?

cracknell that low? Your telling me hes not our most consistent player based on position and expectations. 

 

Toronto Sports Media

I don't understand why they bother to put in salary because Cracknell has been playing pretty well for his salary, ice time, and initial expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost me pretty quickly with the list, but Hutton as a B- really blew my mind. Considering the grades are based on expectations coming into the season, they're telling us that they expected Hutton to be performing BETTER than he has so far? What kind of crystal ball were they looking into? Hutton wasn't even expected to challenge for a spot on this team and they're saying the guy playing top-4 minutes and who is second among Canuck defencemen in scoring is playing below expectation level?

Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same old song and dance. Sedins carry this team....and people want to ditch them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do find it funny they had to include the salary. That shouldn't matter when grading the player. Either they are playing well or they aren't. Would Miller get a B if his salary was 3 million?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miller has been great although, because we lose by 1 goal all the time, those missed saves become glaringly obvious. 

For his age, the minutes he has played and the quality of our d-corpse he needs at least a B. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how anyone can disagree with Miller's grade.  He's been terrible since the first 4 games.  That many games with a save percentage below .900 is brutal.  Only grade I didn't agree with was Hanks.  He's been A+ this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know about you guys but I really don't give 2 squats about these 'Grades'. Miller C-? Vrbata higher than Horvat? Ugh. TSN pisses me off sometimes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.