D.B Cooper Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 30 minutes ago, Boudrias said: I am as you described a 'tanker'. Things have gone better this year than I anticipated. Fans are excited about a possible playoff berth. Sorry but my objective is a CUP. I think Van has the core group in Goal tending and d-core to build towards that CUP. The forward group is no where close. The retirement of the Twins WILL happen. I was hoping for a Top 5 pick this year to nail down a 1C prospect that could help Horvat provide a middle that was CUP quality. That won't happen now which increases the odds against acquiring that center that is desperately needed. It comes down to Benning to work some magic. So while many fans want playoffs my direction does not change. Benning should trade the Twins, Burrows, Skille up front and one of Edler or Tanev off the d-core. Miller goes as well. In return Benning has draft options and some forward prospects. Realistically the Twins aren't going anywhere so the main focus should be moving Burrows, Skille, Tanev and Miller at the TDL. Failing this and the Canucks will slowly move forward to a also ran franchise. To timid to grasp at the brass ring. Pretty much agreed. It is really nice to see such big steps taken by some of the youth. But we realistically have next to 0 chance at a cup this year. We really should be focusing on a high pick and stocking our forwards cupboard. It really wasn't that long ago we were all talking about Patrick, liljegrin, Heis.....er. A 10-15 pick isn't what our future needs right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 minute ago, drummerboy said: Pretty much agreed. It is really nice to see such big steps taken by some of the youth. But we realistically have next to 0 chance at a cup this year. We really should be focusing on a high pick and stocking our forwards cupboard. It really wasn't that long ago we were all talking about Patrick, liljegrin, Heis.....er. A 10-15 pick isn't what our future needs right now Benning's hand will be forced on the d-core or he loses a top d-man for nothing to Vegas. May be he can parlay that move into something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 5 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: OR those players have bigger roles if vets are traded away and have even better seasons and get more experience thanks to more ice time. Their good seasons wouldn't offset the loss of the vets so we'd still get a great pick. Possibly a future 1st line winger for Horvat. Oh wait.. we don't need any 1st line forwards. I forgot this is CDC and Gaudette and Boeser are the next Lemieux and Jagr, my bad. But it's not fair to expect someone like Baertschi to be a first line winger this year. And how beaten down would Horvat had have been if he was expected to take on the same match-ups that he did last year (due to injury) right from game 1 in October? It's almost like saying, Demko is going to be the future #1, might as well have him on that role on the Canucks right now. Not everyone can go 0-100km in a second, some you have to develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianRugby Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Just now, Wilbur said: But it's not fair to expect someone like Baertschi to be a first line winger this year. And how beaten down would Horvat had have been if he was expected to take on the same match-ups that he did last year (due to injury) right from game 1 in October? It's almost like saying, Demko is going to be the future #1, might as well have him on that role on the Canucks right now. Not everyone can go 0-100km in a second, some you have to develop. I don't think anyone is expecting Baertschi to be a 1st line player ever. But that's how teams tank. Players and coaches don't tank, the GM/Owner does by icing a lineup that won't do well (aka Baertschi on top line and Markstrom being your #1). Also, Horvat isn't some skinny rookie. I think he can handle big minutes if Sedin can at his age and size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptKirk888 Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 12 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: OR those players have bigger roles if vets are traded away and have even better seasons and get more experience thanks to more ice time. Their good seasons wouldn't offset the loss of the vets so we'd still get a great pick. Possibly a future 1st line winger for Horvat. Oh wait.. we don't need any 1st line forwards. I forgot this is CDC and Gaudette and Boeser are the next Lemieux and Jagr, my bad. And you are guaranteeing that 1st rounder will turn out any better than Boeser or Gaudette (or Lockwood for that matter)? Does your psyhic ability also tell you that pick WILL be the next Lemieux or Jagr? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptKirk888 Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 3 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: I don't think anyone is expecting Baertschi to be a 1st line player ever. But that's how teams tank. Players and coaches don't tank, the GM/Owner does by icing a lineup that won't do well (aka Baertschi on top line and Markstrom being your #1). Also, Horvat isn't some skinny rookie. I think he can handle big minutes if Sedin can at his age and size. See my previous post, same applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianRugby Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Just now, CaptKirk888 said: And you are guaranteeing that 1st rounder will turn out any better than Boeser or Gaudette (or Lockwood for that matter)? Does your psyhic ability also tell you that pick WILL be the next Lemieux or Jagr? If you don't think 1st overall picks almost always do way better than 23rd overall picks, then I don't have the type of help that you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey2 Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Two things on the tank: 1) tanking is for losers 2) we have too much talent to do it organically and honorably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptKirk888 Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 4 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: If you don't think 1st overall picks almost always do way better than 23rd overall picks, then I don't have the type of help that you need. Did I say that? Please re-read my post or refer to guarantee in a dictionary. If beyond being a Psyhic, you are also a psychologist, you may have the help I need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 ...no one knew the impact that Stecher, Tryamkin, Sbisa would have on this team. Our improved "D" and goaltending is the main reason for the current success. The goaltending was known...however Miller is now playing like a $6M goalie...last year he was not; Stecher is a surprising talent...his impact was unknown, he is similar to TJ Brodie and will have the same kind of impact to the team...which is huge; Tryamkin we saw a small sample size last year (so we saw potential)...he had a slow start, but he is having now the impact that we hoped he would and more; Sbisa is having a "coming out" party. His play has been stellar...this was unknown; his play has been consistently good, which gives the Canucks a legitimate top 4 dman, his impact has been huge; In additon, Tanev and Edler were injured and are now playing somewhat healthy, and they are having a huge impact. The snow ball effect, their minutes (Edler, Tanev) can be managed better because the other "D" are playing good therefore the minutes can be evenly distributed, which may cut down on injury because the "D" are not playing tired (as much). All this is happening while Hutton and Gud were having below average performances and are now injuried and not playing. And, the Larsen experiment was happening and ended badly, except for the emergence of Stecher (who was sent to Utica because Larsen was selected over him). With the roster on "D" starting to sort itself out (keep in mind, Hutton and Gud will return eventually and more moves will be made), the team is now in a better position because they know what they have. The next three games are important. Chicago will be the toughest, but the team is healthy and playing well so this game is winable...Arizona and Colorado should be winable games...after that, their schedule gets tough for the next two months, but the important thing here is they now have depth on "D" and it is important to use that depth during the tough stretch of games. For example, if a "D" is injured, then give him a maintenance day and play the next "D" in line. So the unexpected result of the team is mostly due to the improved performance of the "D" and the commitment to a defensive game first. However, the "D" still have a lot of things to improve on such as their breakout passing and breakouts. The most simplified approach to the game is "if we get more goals than the other team, we win". However, a team can focus on keeping the puck out of the net first; and if they do, then the team only needs one goal to win. This is how Scotty Bowman coached the Montreal Canadians and I believe Doug Jarvis is a big contributor to the Canucks team game because he has been coached by the best. On another note, If all this was known (i.e., the good "D" performance) before last years draft, would JB have selected OJ over MT? I'm not saying OJ is a bad choice, what I'm saying is would he have made the same choice if he knew how the "D" would be playing now. The good thing is the Canucks have OJ in their back pocket, which will only improve their "D". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 On 10/20/2016 at 1:30 PM, kilgore said: Now only 59 points to go! USA today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/columnist/allen/2016/10/07/nhl-point-record-projections-explanation/91734284/ Question: Are the Vancouver Canucks (65 points) really going to be worse than the Maple Leafs (69 points) were last season? This prediction is only 10 fewer points than the Canucks managed last season. They won 31 games last season, and I’m saying they will win 28 this season and have less luck in the shootout. People are getting too hung up on the points. History says there might be unexpected fluctuations in points near the bottom because we can’t be sure how many extra points we will see because of overtimes and shootouts. While the Canucks made moves in the offseason, I believe the Flames, Arizona Coyotes and Edmonton Oilers are more improved. ESPN: http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/17761628/nhl-power-rankings-pittsburgh-penguins-begin-top-perch 30. Vancouver Canucks Everyone else seems to be moving forward while the Canucks, most charitably, seem to be going sideways -- or is that in circles? ................... I thought it might be good to keep track of how we are doing through the season. Gee, I sure hope we get to 65! Maybe even 70! Lets see. Wow first time I've seen this, terrible predictions here not just for the Canucks but almost every team. Its like this person know nothing about hockey at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Yeah, I don't think any of the "semi-science" they were using helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, WiDeN said: Yeah, I don't think any of the "semi-science" they were using helped. Ya they probably used the Trump theory, whatever, whoever and whenever? Seems appropriate for the times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 This is the team Doug Jarvis played on in his rookie year... Imagine the knowledge he can provide...note, Scott Bowman was coach. They won 4 straight Stanley Cups from 1975 on 1975-76 Montreal Canadiens roster and statistics League Search Page -> NHL -> 1975-76 -> Montreal Canadiens -> Roster & Statistics Click to view Player Register Game-by-game results Head Coach: William "Scotty" Bowman (58-11-11-0) View photo gallery [15 photos of 25 players] Regular Season Playoffs # Player Name Birthdate Age Pos. GP G A Pts PIM +/- GP G A Pts PIM Totals 337 556 893 977 10 Guy Lafleur 1951-09-20 23 R 80 56 69 125 36 68 13 7 10 17 2 20 Pete Mahovlich 1946-10-10 28 L 80 34 71 105 76 71 13 4 8 12 24 22 Steve Shutt 1952-07-01 23 F 80 45 34 79 47 73 13 7 8 15 2 12 Yvan Cournoyer 1943-11-22 31 F 71 32 36 68 20 37 13 3 6 9 4 5 Guy Lapointe 1948-03-18 27 D 77 21 47 68 78 64 13 3 3 6 12 11 Yvon Lambert 1950-05-20 25 L 80 32 35 67 28 10 12 2 3 5 18 25 Jacques Lemaire 1945-09-07 29 F 61 20 32 52 20 26 13 3 3 6 2 18 Serge Savard 1946-01-22 29 D 71 8 39 47 38 52 13 3 6 9 6 8 Doug Risebrough 1954-01-29 21 F 80 16 28 44 180 18 13 0 3 3 30 19 Larry Robinson 1951-06-02 24 D 80 10 30 40 59 50 13 3 3 6 10 17 Murray Wilson 1951-11-11 23 F 59 11 24 35 36 25 12 1 1 2 6 21 Doug Jarvis 1955-03-24 20 C 80 5 30 35 16 17 13 2 1 3 2 23 Bob Gainey 1953-12-13 21 F 78 15 13 28 57 20 13 1 3 4 20 14 Mario Tremblay 1956-09-02 18 F 71 11 16 27 88 5 10 0 1 1 27 6 Jim Roberts 1940-04-09 35 D 74 13 8 21 35 7 13 3 1 4 2 3 John Van Boxmeer 1952-11-20 22 D 46 6 11 17 31 17 -- -- -- -- -- 26 Pierre Bouchard 1948-02-20 27 D 66 1 11 12 50 20 13 2 0 2 8 24 Don Awrey 1943-07-18 32 D 72 0 12 12 29 30 -- -- -- -- -- 27 Rick Chartraw 1954-07-13 21 D 16 1 3 4 25 12 2 0 0 0 0 2 Bill Nyrop 1952-07-23 23 D 19 0 3 3 8 21 13 0 3 3 12 1 Michel "Bunny" Larocque 1952-04-06 23 G 22 0 2 2 4 0 -- -- -- -- -- 29 Ken Dryden 1947-08-08 28 G 62 0 2 2 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- Ron Andruff 1953-07-10 22 C 1 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- Glenn Goldup 1953-04-26 22 F 3 0 0 0 2 -1 -- -- -- -- -- Sean Shanahan 1951-02-08 24 L 4 0 0 0 0 -1 -- -- -- -- -- Bench 80 0 0 0 14 0 -- -- -- -- -- Goalies Player Name GP Min GA GAA W L T Svs Pct EN SO Ken Dryden 62 3580 121 2.03 42 10 8 1531 0.927 3 8 Michel "Bunny" Larocque 22 1220 50 2.46 16 1 3 486 0.907 0 2 Home | Advertise | Feedback | Us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt kilgore Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 On 2017-01-21 at 4:54 PM, Wilbur said: So, to make Tankerz happy we can have a terrible season and get a chance at a good pick. In order to this that would mean: Horvat wouldn't have taken the next step Tryamkin would've looked too slow for the NHL Stecher would've been too small for the NHL Granlund and Baertschi would have continued to be enigma's Burrows would've have had a resurgence this year etc. Basically, everything being built would've had to falter and looked like it wasn't going to turn out. But hey, we would have had a better chance at selecting 1 good player come June. I could understand crying over draft position if the Sedins, Edler, and Miller were doing all the heavy lifting, but this year (more than ever) the Canucks are getting production from the middle aged and young guys. Benning isn't incapable of trading vets, he just only trades them when they are no longer in the teams plans. And that usually means they have depth in that spot. Garrison, Bieksa, and Lack were all traded for picks. And it also sounds like Benning is mulling over trading another defenseman soon (although positioning for the expansion draft may throw a wrinkle in things). Agreed. The reason WHY we would get into a top position in the lottery would mean that the whole team collapsed, including the vets and the youth. Is a few positions higher in a relatively weak draft to land ONE player better than MANY players improving this year and going forward? (that was rhetorical) On top of that we have greatly exceeded production in our point totals if you also take into consideration how we have missed Hansen for most of the season, injuries to the D, including our top pair for long stretches. Rodin who was projected to make the team has not been able to contribute due to injury. Burrows predicted decline. And I'm sure many of those pundits also thought Eriksson would have contributed more, and also that Virtanen would be an emerging force. Yet they still predicted only 65 points. I'd rather watch some playoff games knowing that team as a whole is improving (also anything can happen once you are in the dance), than know the whole team needs improvement and all we got is one 18 or 19 year old prospect, high though he may be, to pin all our hopes on to lift the rest of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 miss post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Pete M said: This is the team Doug Jarvis played on in his rookie year... Imagine the knowledge he can provide...note, Scott Bowman was coach. They won 4 straight Stanley Cups from 1975 on 1975-76 Montreal Canadiens roster and statistics League Search Page -> NHL -> 1975-76 -> Montreal Canadiens -> Roster & Statistics Click to view Player Register Game-by-game results Head Coach: William "Scotty" Bowman (58-11-11-0) View photo gallery [15 photos of 25 players] Regular Season Playoffs # Player Name Birthdate Age Pos. GP G A Pts PIM +/- GP G A Pts PIM Totals 337 556 893 977 10 Guy Lafleur 1951-09-20 23 R 80 56 69 125 36 68 13 7 10 17 2 20 Pete Mahovlich 1946-10-10 28 L 80 34 71 105 76 71 13 4 8 12 24 22 Steve Shutt 1952-07-01 23 F 80 45 34 79 47 73 13 7 8 15 2 12 Yvan Cournoyer 1943-11-22 31 F 71 32 36 68 20 37 13 3 6 9 4 5 Guy Lapointe 1948-03-18 27 D 77 21 47 68 78 64 13 3 3 6 12 11 Yvon Lambert 1950-05-20 25 L 80 32 35 67 28 10 12 2 3 5 18 25 Jacques Lemaire 1945-09-07 29 F 61 20 32 52 20 26 13 3 3 6 2 18 Serge Savard 1946-01-22 29 D 71 8 39 47 38 52 13 3 6 9 6 8 Doug Risebrough 1954-01-29 21 F 80 16 28 44 180 18 13 0 3 3 30 19 Larry Robinson 1951-06-02 24 D 80 10 30 40 59 50 13 3 3 6 10 17 Murray Wilson 1951-11-11 23 F 59 11 24 35 36 25 12 1 1 2 6 21 Doug Jarvis 1955-03-24 20 C 80 5 30 35 16 17 13 2 1 3 2 23 Bob Gainey 1953-12-13 21 F 78 15 13 28 57 20 13 1 3 4 20 14 Mario Tremblay 1956-09-02 18 F 71 11 16 27 88 5 10 0 1 1 27 6 Jim Roberts 1940-04-09 35 D 74 13 8 21 35 7 13 3 1 4 2 3 John Van Boxmeer 1952-11-20 22 D 46 6 11 17 31 17 -- -- -- -- -- 26 Pierre Bouchard 1948-02-20 27 D 66 1 11 12 50 20 13 2 0 2 8 24 Don Awrey 1943-07-18 32 D 72 0 12 12 29 30 -- -- -- -- -- 27 Rick Chartraw 1954-07-13 21 D 16 1 3 4 25 12 2 0 0 0 0 2 Bill Nyrop 1952-07-23 23 D 19 0 3 3 8 21 13 0 3 3 12 1 Michel "Bunny" Larocque 1952-04-06 23 G 22 0 2 2 4 0 -- -- -- -- -- 29 Ken Dryden 1947-08-08 28 G 62 0 2 2 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- Ron Andruff 1953-07-10 22 C 1 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- Glenn Goldup 1953-04-26 22 F 3 0 0 0 2 -1 -- -- -- -- -- Sean Shanahan 1951-02-08 24 L 4 0 0 0 0 -1 -- -- -- -- -- Bench 80 0 0 0 14 0 -- -- -- -- -- Goalies Player Name GP Min GA GAA W L T Svs Pct EN SO Ken Dryden 62 3580 121 2.03 42 10 8 1531 0.927 3 8 Michel "Bunny" Larocque 22 1220 50 2.46 16 1 3 486 0.907 0 2 Home | Advertise | Feedback | Us Wow what a team that was back then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 19 hours ago, Pete M said: ...no one knew the impact that Stecher, Tryamkin, Sbisa would have on this team. Our improved "D" and goaltending is the main reason for the current success. The goaltending was known...however Miller is now playing like a $6M goalie...last year he was not; Stecher is a surprising talent...his impact was unknown, he is similar to TJ Brodie and will have the same kind of impact to the team...which is huge; Tryamkin we saw a small sample size last year (so we saw potential)...he had a slow start, but he is having now the impact that we hoped he would and more; Sbisa is having a "coming out" party. His play has been stellar...this was unknown; his play has been consistently good, which gives the Canucks a legitimate top 4 dman, his impact has been huge; In additon, Tanev and Edler were injured and are now playing somewhat healthy, and they are having a huge impact. The snow ball effect, their minutes (Edler, Tanev) can be managed better because the other "D" are playing good therefore the minutes can be evenly distributed, which may cut down on injury because the "D" are not playing tired (as much). All this is happening while Hutton and Gud were having below average performances and are now injuried and not playing. And, the Larsen experiment was happening and ended badly, except for the emergence of Stecher (who was sent to Utica because Larsen was selected over him). With the roster on "D" starting to sort itself out (keep in mind, Hutton and Gud will return eventually and more moves will be made), the team is now in a better position because they know what they have. The next three games are important. Chicago will be the toughest, but the team is healthy and playing well so this game is winable...Arizona and Colorado should be winable games...after that, their schedule gets tough for the next two months, but the important thing here is they now have depth on "D" and it is important to use that depth during the tough stretch of games. For example, if a "D" is injured, then give him a maintenance day and play the next "D" in line. So the unexpected result of the team is mostly due to the improved performance of the "D" and the commitment to a defensive game first. However, the "D" still have a lot of things to improve on such as their breakout passing and breakouts. The most simplified approach to the game is "if we get more goals than the other team, we win". However, a team can focus on keeping the puck out of the net first; and if they do, then the team only needs one goal to win. This is how Scotty Bowman coached the Montreal Canadians and I believe Doug Jarvis is a big contributor to the Canucks team game because he has been coached by the best. On another note, If all this was known (i.e., the good "D" performance) before last years draft, would JB have selected OJ over MT? I'm not saying OJ is a bad choice, what I'm saying is would he have made the same choice if he knew how the "D" would be playing now. The good thing is the Canucks have OJ in their back pocket, which will only improve their "D". I agree with your point about Jarvis. He is like a ghost, no interviews. One of the premier defensive forwards during his era. Trained by Gainey and Carbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Sportsnet StatsVerified account@SNstats Follow More #Canucks 50 points are their fewest through the first 48 games of a season since 2001-02 when they were 20-23-4-1 with 45 points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 On 1/21/2017 at 11:45 PM, Bandwagon38 said: I am just impressed at how many gems JB may have drafted! Boeser should be a stud for us. OJ should turn out to be a great d-man! After that you have Brisebois and Carl Neil putting together great seasons and holding leadership poditions. Gaudette is turning heads in the NCAA the same way Boeser was last year. And several more role players with potentially good upsides. Not to mention Tryamkin and landing Stecher. Schooling Calgary...twice for Baerschi and Granlund. And turning a one team trade demand into Sutter, Gudbranson and Sbiza. Well done JB!! Well done! well said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.