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

[PGT] Canucks @ Oilers


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, canuckleheads fan said:

That's just dumb. He wasn't benched for using his instincts. It was his first game with the team, he had not even had a practice. He scored a nice goal, WD decided that it was a nice positive to leave the kid with. They were ahead, still technically in the playoff race and WD was going to milk it the rest of the way. Besides that, they suffered a string of penalties and found themselves on the kill late in the second and into the 3rd. This season WD had shortened his bench in the third with a lead, and gone with players he trusts defensively. The team took both games in So Cal and all anybody could do was bitch about not using Goldobin more. Sorry,  but to WD he was an unknown commodity. Are you going to risk your coaching career on a 20 year old kid making a bad giveaway and costing the game? Of course not.

Drew Shore and his 17 min fresh off a plane from Timbuktu says hi.

 

And they got into penalty trouble AFTER Goldobin was benched, not before.

 

Shortening the bench has not been a very positive thing this year. How many comebacks have happened against us? How many near comebacks? It's a flawed and scared to lose coaching strategy. Especially when the team actually isn't very efficient at it and rely on the goalie to make 40 saves including multiple premium scoring chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, canuckleheads fan said:

Aside from a very few top first rounders who are drafted because they are prolific scorers, most players taken high in the draft are looked at for their basic skills, hockey IQ and total game. I went back and read the scouting reports on Bo. Most NHL ready player in the draft, good all around game, good on face offs, compared to Ryan Kessler. It's not a surprise that he's turned out to be a good 200 foot player, that was his game in Jr. It is a surprise that he turned out to be a 1C. 

 

The Laine situation is somewhat unique, but not unheard of. I've watched a few Toronto games and their young players, including Matthews, seem to be defensively responsible. It appears to be expected. McDavid also seems to play hard in his own end. Yoi don't get many offense only players in todays NHL. For most young players, the NHL is a big jump, and offense often takes time. They get ice time to acclimate if they're not costing the team with stupid turnovers and blown assignments. Young players should be expected to play whatever system the coach has installed and be responsible in their zone.

Matthews gets 63.4% ozone starts and averaged 2:27 of PP time per game.

Nylander gets 57.2% ozone starts and averaged 2:20 of PP time per game

Marner gets 53.27% ozone starts and averaged 2:21 of PP time per game

 

These players are not counted on for their "strong" D games.  In fact if you read most reports. Matthews started off playing very sheltered in the ozone with very little responsibility in the D zone.  About the halfway point he started getting bit by bit more D zone responsibility. 


 

Quote

"We need him to be a dominant, dominant center for us," Babcock said. "We think he's going to be by Christmastime. We think he's a very good player already, but we think he can be lights out both with and without the puck. You know he takes a lot of pride."

 

Babcock feels Matthews can handle learning on the fly and make progress quickly in this environment. He already sees it. He pointed out how Matthews' faceoff percentage was 44 percent over his first five games, 50 in his second five and 55 in his third five.

Imagine if Babcock benched Matthews right off the bat and said "you aren't gong to get opportunity until you've proven you can be counted on defensively first."

 

The key thing to note is, confidence in the NHL comes first, D zone play comes second.  Not the other way around. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, khay said:

Are you comparing Bo to McDavid?  You take Bo out, and the Canucks are still a bad team. You take McDavid out and Edmonton goes from good team to a mediocre team. Nuge and Eberle (and Hall, who is no longer there) showed that they cannot get it done by themselves. In other words, they are supplementary players. 

 

This is basically Bo's first year as the leader. We will see if Bo can get it done or if he will be like Nuge and Eberle. I have a feeling that Bo isn't like those two but at the same time, he ain't McDavid.

 

 

Not comparing them, but they are their respective teams best player. Take the best player off most teams and you'll see a drop depending on depth. And given Talbot's season and the fact that the Oil are likely going to give up 40 fewer goals this year than last its more than just the McDavid factor. Oh and BTW you take Bo off the Canucks and they would arguably be an historically bad team this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, coastal.view said:

come on now

i get your point

but you seriously suggest bo is worth 15 to 20 extra points in the standings to the canucks this year ?
it must be because if he was not with the canucks one line would be playing without a center ?

it is a silly suggestion on your part

his impact is not that big.. that is actually bigger than gretzky's impact in my view

 

the only player on this team worth even 5 to 10 extra points to the canucks in the standings is miller

no one else is close

Uh yes I do actually...If Horvat had a season ending injury on opening night I feel the loss of his 47pts and overall impact to the team and in-game and the serious lack of centre depth in the organization would have translated to on average about 1.5 losses per month, 6 month season, somewhere around 9 losses extra. Look how many OT and one goal wins the 'Nucks have had this year.

20 hours ago, coastal.view said:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2017 at 4:28 AM, alfstonker said:

The core? How were they healthy?

Do you mean Hansen - 22 Edler - 57, Tanev - 42 and two ageing and slow, frail, superstars. Man we don't have a core. We are trying to build a new core.

 

Simple logic should tell you that if you have "core" injuries, your top two players have been past it for 2-3 years now (age is not an injury but it hurts you just as bad) and you are having to rely on AHL players, waiver grabs and projects you are going to be in big trouble.

 

At the time Torts said that I think Edler was having a nightmare (due mostly to Torts) Hansen was "dormant" (again Torts) Burr was in a slump, and the Twins were starting to show their age - so technically he was correct to say the core was stale but some of the blame must go on him.

Again with the reading comprehension problem. 

 

The bolded above -- I've said the same thing. The Sedins have cratered, and there's no depth. Simple.

 

You bring up Hansen and Burrows. Vets, but not core. Some people even add Sutter to our "core", but if that's the case, the core is then meaningless since it makes up at least half the team (along with Gudbranson, Granlund, Baertschi, the latter three being, I suppose, the "new core"). 

 

I've already listed my core. Aside from Horvat, they've declined dramatically, either by performance or, in Tanev's case, injury. 

 

Listing over 20 players who've been with the bigs for a cup of coffee -- or in Megna's case, for a quart of battery acid -- doesn't move the needle down  in any meaningful way since who they replaced weren't difference makers.. Gudbranson was sub-par when he went down. And he sure wasn't helping Hutton. Vet Ericksson was healthy most of the year, and underwhelmed. Ditto Sutter, who, unlike last year, has been healthy.. (If he's playing injured, it can't be catastrophic since he's still WD's star pupil at 20 min TOI.) The only player, outside of the core, who would've made a difference was oft-injured Hansen.

 

You say Canucks don't have a core. Maybe you're right. But that's only because they cratered so hard this year. Before the season, everyone was relying on the Sedins, Edler, and Tanev to provide quality minutes, with only a small decline in production from the twins, and for Horvat to continue to develop. Only the latter happened. Next year, the expectation will be that this is Bo's team.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theilluminati said:

Not comparing them, but they are their respective teams best player. Take the best player off most teams and you'll see a drop depending on depth. And given Talbot's season and the fact that the Oil are likely going to give up 40 fewer goals this year than last its more than just the McDavid factor. Oh and BTW you take Bo off the Canucks and they would arguably be an historically bad team this season.

 

Historically bad? 3rd worst is historically bad after building for a decade for ONE cup run. 

 

Canucks ARE historically bad already. Our best player is under 50 points @ the 71 game mark... and losing Bo wouldn't make us worse than the Avs.

 

You can't compare Bo to Mcjesus,  only a Canucks fan would try 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, coho8888 said:

So you are saying that Bo was playing a 200 foot game in jr and was already a good 2 way forward yet Willie played Bo on the third and fourth lines through the first 2 full seasons and the beginning of his third because he needed to learn how to play defensively?  What about the kids coming in that have more offensive skills but not as good defensively, are they going to be playing as fourth liners for 3 to 4 years?

 

 

I never said that Bo played third and fourth line to learn defense.  He played there because WD didn't want to overwhelm him.  It was pretty obvious last season, where Horvat had one of the worst +/- ratings in the NHL that that ate at him, and he went into a funk.  When Sutter went down, Bo was forced into second line duties, and he simply wasn't ready.  Bo is not McDavid or Crosby or Matthews, who all expected to be the best player on the ice at every level he's played.  Bo has had to work for his success, even in Jr.  His work ethic is unmatched, and probably hides some other limitations in his game.  He was obviously not ready to play 2C last season, and it showed.  That line gave up a lot of goals, while not scoring a bunch.  It was obvious that Bo felt the weight of letting the team down.  WD has been good a building or rebuilding player confidence, in players like Bo, who came back very strong this year, and Baer, who arrived in Vancouver a mess.

 

I guess the kids coming in will have to prove themselves to the coach, just the way that Bo, Baer, Stecher and Granlund have.  I've said in another conversation, the NHL is a 200 foot league these days.  The best players play well at both ends of the ice.  Crosby, Bergeron, Marchand, Toews all a 200 foot players, even McDavid back checks hard.  The Canucks don't have guys who are going to score 50 goals, so they'd better stop some goals with responsible play in their zone.  You look at a guy like Kessel, pure scorer, and a minus player in eight of his 11 years.  That's unacceptable.  The days of Wayne Gretzky floating around the red line waiting for the stretch pass are over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Matthews gets 63.4% ozone starts and averaged 2:27 of PP time per game.

Nylander gets 57.2% ozone starts and averaged 2:20 of PP time per game

Marner gets 53.27% ozone starts and averaged 2:21 of PP time per game

 

These players are not counted on for their "strong" D games.  In fact if you read most reports. Matthews started off playing very sheltered in the ozone with very little responsibility in the D zone.  About the halfway point he started getting bit by bit more D zone responsibility. 


 

Imagine if Babcock benched Matthews right off the bat and said "you aren't gong to get opportunity until you've proven you can be counted on defensively first."

 

The key thing to note is, confidence in the NHL comes first, D zone play comes second.  Not the other way around. 

 

 

Matthews is a generational player, just like McDavid.  He was an honest to god, no-doubt #1 pick, He compares to who on the Canucks?  A player like that is going to get some slack, because he will score 40 goals in the next few years.  That kind of production will cover a lot of defensive zone issues.  The Canucks have nobody on the team or in their system who compares.  Get off the OZone start crap.  Bo gets so many DZone starts because he is TRUSTED to win tough face offs he plays responsible defensive hockey and hopefully stops the other team from scoring.  The Bo fans should be flattered that WD shows so much confidence in him.  You know what else?  DZone starts work better with Bo's game.  I'm not sure if you've noticed but at this stage in his career, Bo is a transition player.  He and Baer are their most dangerous on the rush, breaking out of their zone, fast through the neutral zone and crashing the net.  They get a lot of their goals that way.  They are not nearly as dangerous when they start in the OZone, because they're not as good at the cycle game yet.  Maybe the cycle game will never be their thing. 

 

Who on the Canucks has been benched right off the bat for not playing defense?  Is this the butt hurt over Goldobin in his first game?  Jesus, give it an f'n rest.  The Canucks were still numerically in the playoff hunt at the time, and Goldobin, who had not even had a practice with the Canucks was a total unknown quantity to WD.  The team was ahead half way through the game, ended up on the PK a bunch in the second half of the game and WD shortened the bench to play for the win, which they did.  Goldobin got a nice goal, and had a positive memory of his first game as a Canuck.  At the time WD was coaching the team toward the playoffs.  It doesn't matter if the CDC crowd wanted to see their new shiny object, the focus was the team, which was where the focus should have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Drew Shore and his 17 min fresh off a plane from Timbuktu says hi.

 

And they got into penalty trouble AFTER Goldobin was benched, not before.

 

Shortening the bench has not been a very positive thing this year. How many comebacks have happened against us? How many near comebacks? It's a flawed and scared to lose coaching strategy. Especially when the team actually isn't very efficient at it and rely on the goalie to make 40 saves including multiple premium scoring chances.

Difference is, when Goldobin premiered, the team was reasonably healthy.  When Shore played his first game, the team was very short handed.  Besides, Shore was not the unknown commodity that Goldobin was to the coaching staff.  They had seen Shore in Calgary, and knew what they had.  They also knew that Shore's game had likely not changed that much.  I think the only time the Canuck coaching staff had seen Goldobin play, was in one pre-season game.  Hard to judge what a young player will do later the same season, when you haven't seen him play at all.  WD talked about Goldobin not being sure of some assignments in the defensive zone, since he hadn't had any practices to work on things with the Canucks.  Would have sucked for the team (who still had dreams of the playoffs) and the kid if his player had scored the tying or winning goal.  Yes they got into penalty trouble after Goldobin was benched.  But you're assuming that WD wouldn't have sent him out again if they hadn't gotten into penalty trouble.  He might have had Goldobin watch a few shifts from the bench, while explaining his responsibilities.  Fact is water under the bridge.  All you WD haters need to get over it.  The Canucks won back to back games in SoCal, maybe the best two games of the season.  They were well coached, and the team played their guts out.  And all you guys can do is bitch because WD didn't play your shiny new toy enough.  Maybe he's more concerned with the team, and winning than he is about placating the haters on CDC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is anyone who criticizes anything about Desjardins a hater?

 

I have met him and spoken with him and think he is a genuine nice person who was very pleasant to talk to. I don't hate him at all. I dislike some of his strategies, his stubbornness, and his favouritism schtick but that doesn't mean I hate him. I just don't think he is the right coach for what the team needs going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Barry_Wilkins said:

Again with the reading comprehension problem. 

 

The bolded above -- I've said the same thing. The Sedins have cratered, and there's no depth. Simple.

 

You bring up Hansen and Burrows. Vets, but not core. Some people even add Sutter to our "core", but if that's the case, the core is then meaningless since it makes up at least half the team (along with Gudbranson, Granlund, Baertschi, the latter three being, I suppose, the "new core"). 

 

I've already listed my core. Aside from Horvat, they've declined dramatically, either by performance or, in Tanev's case, injury. 

 

Listing over 20 players who've been with the bigs for a cup of coffee -- or in Megna's case, for a quart of battery acid -- doesn't move the needle down  in any meaningful way since who they replaced weren't difference makers.. Gudbranson was sub-par when he went down. And he sure wasn't helping Hutton. Vet Ericksson was healthy most of the year, and underwhelmed. Ditto Sutter, who, unlike last year, has been healthy.. (If he's playing injured, it can't be catastrophic since he's still WD's star pupil at 20 min TOI.) The only player, outside of the core, who would've made a difference was oft-injured Hansen.

 

You say Canucks don't have a core. Maybe you're right. But that's only because they cratered so hard this year. Before the season, everyone was relying on the Sedins, Edler, and Tanev to provide quality minutes, with only a small decline in production from the twins, and for Horvat to continue to develop. Only the latter happened. Next year, the expectation will be that this is Bo's team.

 

 

No comprehension problem this end.

You said. "I've stated at least twice that it's the core who've been healthy for the most part"

And I have shown that was not the case.

 

Many including myself would disagree. Burr always and Hansen the last 3 seasons.

 

It is immaterial if they were difference makers, they were all we had. 

 

So you have written off Gudy's season just because his first 13 games were not great. And as I recall Hutton wasn't helping him at that time either.

Ericsson did not figure as much on the board as we would have expected but you can't say the effort wasn't there. We just lack o/a quality.

Sutter - go look at his FO figures. Hence the TOI. Please tell me you understand the correlation.

 

Your last para is not something I would disagree with.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, canuckleheads fan said:

Matthews is a generational player, just like McDavid.  He was an honest to god, no-doubt #1 pick, He compares to who on the Canucks?

 

You're the one who brought up matthews, not me, you're the one that stated that based on the few games you've watched that matthews was expected to be good defensively.  I just used facts to show you how the players in toronto were developed. 

 

Quote

The Bo fans should be flattered that WD shows so much confidence in him.  You know what else?  DZone starts work better with Bo's game.  I'm not sure if you've noticed but at this stage in his career, Bo is a transition player.  He and Baer are their most dangerous on the rush, breaking out of their zone, fast through the neutral zone and crashing the net.  They get a lot of their goals that way.  They are not nearly as dangerous when they start in the OZone, because they're not as good at the cycle game yet.  Maybe the cycle game will never be their thing. 

Based on? You're eye ball test.  Well here's some facts to verify that you need to get your vision checked

 

October

9 games played

3 Even strength points

38.75% ozone starts

.33 ppg

 

November

14 games played

10 Even strength points

55.9% ozone starts.

.714 ppg

 

December

15 games played

6 Even strength points

41.9% ozone starts.

.4 ppg

 

January

12 games played

6 Even strength points

45.67% ozone starts.

.5 ppg

 

Feb

11 games played

6 Even strength points

43.33% ozone starts.

.545 ppg

 

March

9 games played

5 Even strength points

47.31% ozone starts.

.55 ppg

 

Shocking that the month of November was Bo's highest producing even strength month and it also happened to be Bo highest ozones starts.  Crazy, and yet some people still claim that ozone starts hurt him and he will produce more with higher dzone starts. Funny how the data doesn't back up the claim

 

 

Quote

Who on the Canucks has been benched right off the bat for not playing defense?  Is this the butt hurt over Goldobin in his first game?  Jesus, give it an f'n rest. 

Goldobin, Boucher, Virtanen, McCann, Baertschi

 

Quote

The Canucks were still numerically in the playoff hunt at the time, and Goldobin, who had not even had a practice with the Canucks was a total unknown quantity to WD.  The team was ahead half way through the game, ended up on the PK a bunch in the second half of the game and WD shortened the bench to play for the win, which they did.  Goldobin got a nice goal, and had a positive memory of his first game as a Canuck.  At the time WD was coaching the team toward the playoffs.  It doesn't matter if the CDC crowd wanted to see their new shiny object, the focus was the team, which was where the focus should have been.

Player development is far more important for the long term of this franchise than an imaginary hope of making the playoffs.  We are still numerically in the playoffs today, why the change of heart. The writing was on the wall, you knew it, i knew it, everybody knew it -Trump

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TimberWolf said:

Bo wasn't being sheltered playing defensive minutes, he was sheltering Sutter. The guy that Willie thought was what Bo is now. 

gotta suck when you talk like this and then sutter shows the skill and finesse that proves you theory wrong .. 12 hours later..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Only if you are shortsighted enough to form your opinions based on one game.

Oh yeah cause according to you this is the first time Sutter had made a nice move right bud.. the irony was him saying this the day of such a nice goal.  It was ironic.. you should know irony.. wait nvm you prefer to use hypocrisy that's right my bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheOgRook said:

gotta suck when you talk like this and then sutter shows the skill and finesse that proves you theory wrong .. 12 hours later..

Just like when the Brabarian went on to get multiple 30 plus goal seasons

 

Sutter having a good game (and couple of other okay ones) does not prove that he's better than Bo or that Bo wasn't sheltering him playing defensive minutes so that Sutter could get more offensive opportunities when Willie first started evaluating him.

 

Willie is not a good coach. Willie saw Bo as pure defense (his own words) and Bo made him look silly. Wille doesn't see Sutter as a defensive player with occasional offensive upside and saw him more as what Bo is which also makes him look silly

 

I'm sure you'll love the next coach and if he is good, I'll like him too. So why worry?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TimberWolf said:

Just like when the Brabarian went on to get multiple 30 plus goal seasons

 

Sutter having a good game (and couple of other okay ones) does not prove that he's better than Bo or that Bo wasn't sheltering him playing defensive minutes so that Sutter could get more offensive opportunities when Willie first started evaluating him.

 

Willie is not a good coach. Willie saw Bo as pure defense (his own words) and Bo made him look silly. Wille doesn't see Sutter as a defensive player with occasional offensive upside and saw him more as what Bo is which also makes him look silly

 

I'm sure you love the next coach and if he is good, I'll like him too. 

 

 

You can cherry pick whatever interviews you want.. did you not know that coming out of junior thats what BO specialized in?? That's what he was used for at the world juniors?? I guess not..  there were a lot of of us who believed Bo would shatter the ceiling of a second line centre.  Whether you like to think it or not.  The way Willie handled his assignments was one of the contributing factors to Bos growth.  Granted it was Bos hard work that got him there.  But you can't  blame every failing prospect on Willie then turn around and say he had nothing to do with Bo, even thats what you guys continue to  do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TheOgRook said:

You can cherry pick whatever interviews you want.. did you not know that coming out of junior thats what BO specialized in?? That's what he was used for at the world juniors?? I guess not..  there were a lot of of us who believed Bo would shatter the ceiling of a second line centre.  Whether you like to think it or not.  The way Willie handled his assignments was one of the contributing factors to Bos growth.  Granted it was Bos hard work that got him there.  But you can't  blame every failing prospect on Willie then turn around and say he had nothing to do with Bo, even thats what you guys continue to  do

Why are u 2 arguing? We have 2 good players that I am happy we have moving forward. Who cares which one is better? They both add good value to the team. Bo will continue to get better, Sutter will, at worst, stay at the same level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Why are u 2 arguing? We have 2 good players that I am happy we have moving forward. Who cares which one is better? They both add good value to the team. Bo will continue to get better, Sutter will, at worst, stay at the same level. 

Lol we are discussing.. it's an Internet forum after all. ;) 

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...