VegasCanuck

Preseason GDT/PGT Canucks vs Kings Sept. 21st 4:30AM (Red Eye Edition)

Rate this topic

Game Results  

123 members have voted

  1. 1. Simple Survey, who wins. Post score in thread

    • Canucks win
    • Kings win
    • Game is cancelled due to fog :)


Recommended Posts

IF I were Jimbo for a day...

 

- Prob waive Bouch, Vanek

- Arch(sign the guy) & MacEwan recalled at times, to inject attitude when necc

- OJ to Sami in Finland(patience..he'll be a good one)

****TRADE***: Hutton, Baer, Gran, (would even consider a 2nd R..2019?) to Avs for Duchene

of our fwds, these 2 have value, but their ceiling is likely good, not amazing.

 

- Treat twins as leaders, but ask them to play separate lines, & make clear this is likely the last yr.

- Ensure at least 1 fwd is quick enough to get back(every line)

 

On D, make nastiness a priority. Fine if we lose plenty this season..but don't takeShyte from opponents. Especially in your own zone.

 

Duchene - Bo - Eriksson

Rodin/Virtanen - Henrik - Boeser

Daniel - Sutter - Gagner/Burmistrov

 

4th line: Dorsett, Megna/Gaunce, Burm/waiver claim?(make sure some speed)

 

- claim a fwd that gets waived somewhere. Big body that can skate(Cramarossa-type). Since we finished 29th, almost get first dibs.

 

Edler - Stecher

Pedan - Tanev

Del Zotto - Gudbranson

McEneny/Wiercioch - Biega

 

Try to carry 8 D. Give Biega/Pedan the odd game as a 4th liner, to keep intensity & troops fresh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a lazy ass and decided to not wake up that early to watch a preseason game. I'm wondering though what went wrong? Who shined? Who didn't perform as well? How did our newcomers in Gagner, Vanek, Del Zotto do? Who were bright spots/low lights in the forward group/d corps? 

Edited by Beary Sweet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J.R. said:

Eeesh not you too :rolleyes: He's a #2D trending to a #3 as he ages. Not his fault he's overtaxed due to a lack of organizational quality at D and until this year, depth.

 

Easier said than done. If you don't have any #1D to replace his minutes... This year we (at least starting) have better depth. We basically have three 2nd pairs and far more NHL ready call ups when injuries hit. Hopefully that keeps his minutes and situational play more in his comfort zone and he can play within something closer to his game.

 

See above.

 

I still want to see Boes do it against closer to NHL caliber teams, further in to the preseason. But if he can keep this up in those games, he may not be denied a spot.

 

Virtanen is pushing the issue as well.

I know it seems like I'm down on Boeser, but I'm not at all.  Im thrilled that's he's lighting it up, Jake too.  But, I also look at the rest of their game and, to me, the rest of Brock's game isn't as good as the guys he would be knocking out of the lineup.  And, as you well know, it truly isn't as simple as "he played his way on to the team".  Waivers and the ahl vet rule play as big a role in the starting lineup as who is playing well.  That's the reality that many here don't seem to grasp or want to accept.  It's going to be an organizational decision, not just a Canucks decision.

 

Now, all that said, Jake and Boes are certainly making a strong case to be in the lineup on opening day.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

The twins use their sticks on back checks, so  they won't be able to do that now. 

Going to be scary watching them trying to get back on turnovers.

Maybe they should be split up for that reason alone.

This is why I am puzzled that Gagner (not a fast skater of good defensively) was on the same line and really hope we never see Vanek with them.  They need a good skater, who can get the puck to them and have solid defensive skills (and can score a few goals).  This is why Hansen and Granlund are great linemates for the twins.

 

Sedins   Granny 

Baer   Bo  Eriksson

Virtanen  Burm   Boeser 

Rodin/Vanek   Sutter   Gagner

Gaunce (IR)  Dors

 

Goldy/Rodin/Vanek/Gaunce/Dorsett  fighting for final spot & 13th.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, R3aL said:

Yea and the suspensions 

And the back injury. Those suspensions were ridiculous. Hertl forgets to buckle the strap of his helmet and Edler is somehow a headhunter, and Mike Smith gives Daniel Day-Lewis a run for his money, and Edler is a goalie hunter.

 

It also reminds me of when both Hossa and Hansen jump up to reach for the puck during the game against Chicago, and somehow Hossa (who's got a few pounds on Hansen) was devastated by Hansen's reckless elbow......I think that might have been when Hossa developed his allergy to molded plastic...

Edited by PhillipBlunt
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

IF I were Jimbo for a day...

 

- Prob waive Bouch, Vanek

- Arch(sign the guy) & MacEwan recalled at times, to inject attitude when necc

- OJ to Sami in Finland(patience..he'll be a good one)

****TRADE***: Hutton, Baer, Gran, (would even consider a 2nd R..2019?) to Avs for Duchene

of our fwds, these 2 have value, but their ceiling is likely good, not amazing.

 

- Treat twins as leaders, but ask them to play separate lines, & make clear this is likely the last yr.

- Ensure at least 1 fwd is quick enough to get back(every line)

 

On D, make nastiness a priority. Fine if we lose plenty this season..but don't takeShyte from opponents. Especially in your own zone.

 

Duchene - Bo - Eriksson

Rodin/Virtanen - Henrik - Boeser

Daniel - Sutter - Gagner/Burmistrov

 

4th line: Dorsett, Megna/Gaunce, Burm/waiver claim?(make sure some speed)

 

- claim a fwd that gets waived somewhere. Big body that can skate(Cramarossa-type). Since we finished 29th, almost get first dibs.

 

Edler - Stecher

Pedan - Tanev

Del Zotto - Gudbranson

McEneny/Wiercioch - Biega

 

Try to carry 8 D. Give Biega/Pedan the odd game as a 4th liner, to keep intensity & troops fresh.

Come on man... You can't possibly want a guy waived based on a preseason game.... that was held in China... I didn't watch any of it, but come on. Pre season game in china...  

 

Usually a fan of what you've got to say... but we're talking about pre-season... pre... season... 

 

Also way overpaying on Duchene and splitting the greatest 1-2 punch in the history of entertainment? That's like making 4 slices of toast instead of 2... making a sandwhich with 2 with only peanut butter, then another sandwhich with the other two with only jam... then throwing at the jam sandwich out the window, cutting your left hand with a butchers knife and just eating the peanut butter one.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My qualm about Edler is no matter whose coaching this team, they still continuously put him on the PP, when he brings nothing on the man advantage. He's not fast enough to rush the puck up and enter the opposition's zone. His shot and passing decision are brutal. Never knows when to shoot or pass it off and by the time he figures it out the opponent is already in the correct line to defend it. 

 

The "first unit" should be:

Granlund - H. Sedin - Vanek

D. Sedin - Stecher

 

PP2:

Bärtschi - Horvat - Eriksson/Boeser

Hutton - Gagner

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only comment I have to make on this mornings game is that god damn drop pass needs to go. If any player makes a drop pass on the power play he should be in the stands for the next week! &^@# do I ever hate that damn drop pass.  It has basically destroyed our power play and made Edler look like a completely incompetent defenseman. Enough said!! 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so maybe my perception is off because I watched the game on PVR and knew what to expect scorewise, but other than the PP, I didn't think the team looked too bad. Obviously there are areas to improve but I thought we did pretty well at 5v5 (even before score effects became a factor) and were unlucky not to have potted a couple goals. And even with all the issues, we still managed to get within a goal of tying the up the game. 

 

I kinda felt like if you replay that game, with the guys more acclimated to each other, and some PP practice, we might even win that kind of contest more often than we lose.

 

Not saying there aren't problems. There are. Clearly. But I saw a lot of things that should improve with more coaching and practice and as this team, and all the new pieces (and the returning young players), starts to fully solidify as a unit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, shiznak said:

My qualm about Edler is no matter whose coaching this team, they still continuously put him on the PP, when he brings nothing on the man advantage. He's not fast enough to rush the puck up and enter the opposition's zone. His shot and passing decision are brutal. Never knows when to shoot or pass it off and by the time he figures it out the opponent is already in the correct line to defend it. 

 

The "first unit" should be:

Granlund - H. Sedin - Vanek

D. Sedin - Stecher

 

PP2:

Bärtschi - Horvat - Eriksson/Boeser

Hutton - Gagner

To be fair during the game I noticed he was getting it on the net pretty well. Problem is unless we have Virtanen and Granlund manning the slot, we're not getting deflections. Just need someone to cause frustration on tips/rebounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, apollo said:

Come on man... You can't possibly want a guy waived based on a preseason game.... that was held in China... I didn't watch any of it, but come on. Pre season game in china...  

 

Usually a fan of what you've got to say... but we're talking about pre-season... pre... season... 

 

Also way overpaying on Duchene and splitting the greatest 1-2 punch in the history of entertainment? That's like making 4 slices of toast instead of 2... making a sandwhich with 2 with only peanut butter, then another sandwhich with the other two with only jam... then throwing at the jam sandwich out the window, cutting your left hand with a butchers knife and just eating the peanut butter one.

Who knows what the price will wind up as? Sounds like Sakic is dreaming big.

 

& you're likely right Apollo..maybe I'll retire this armchair GM-gig :^)  ..to delight of the masses, no doubt !

Have become tired of this perimeter, Euro, turn the other cheek nonsense. Like speed, attitude & skill.

How them kids played yesterday was beautiful. We haven't seen much of that style for quite some time.

I think we can build that type of team, but I've got a lot more faith in the future(starting 1~2 yrs out) than the present.

Just trying to be honest about it.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

If Vanek doesn't look engaged..waive goodbye. Boucher also seems likely.

 

Baer - Bo - Eriksson

Virt - Henrik - Boeser

Daniel - Sutter - Gagner/Granny?

 

Split up the twins!

It might be time to try that again...it's always ended in a fail in just a few games of pretty much 0 production and then they would sulk a bit and end up back together...

 

The Sedins need to be on the PP with Boeser and Vanek...TV seemed to have some chemistry with Daniel on the PP....they did set each other up for good try's.

They also need to play 3rd line minutes....at most, given no PK time.

I wish I knew how to fix Eriksson....he seems to only be able to score the greasy goals now (last year) so maybe he just needs to park himself net-front more, but that's where Bo goes.

Boucher shouldn't be in the mix....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just confused that people think the Sedins will make us better if they are separated. No, just no. 

Share this post


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

I know it seems like I'm down on Boeser, but I'm not at all.  Im thrilled that's he's lighting it up, Jake too.  But, I also look at the rest of their game and, to me, the rest of Brock's game isn't as good as the guys he would be knocking out of the lineup.  And, as you well know, it truly isn't as simple as "he played his way on to the team".  Waivers and the ahl vet rule play as big a role in the starting lineup as who is playing well.  That's the reality that many here don't seem to grasp or want to accept.  It's going to be an organizational decision, not just a Canucks decision.

 

Now, all that said, Jake and Boes are certainly making a strong case to be in the lineup on opening day.

 

 

Doesn't seem that way at all FWIW ;) Different priorities.

 

As I posted elsewhere I'm ok with either option so long as they keep earning it.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J.R. said:

Agreed.

 

The failure to replace either Ehrhoff or Salo is what closed this teams window more than any other one thing IMO. We have a legit ,even #2, PMD to this team and the Sedins PPG ability lasts longer, our PP is still top 10 etc. 

 

Then again, it likely would have prolonged the rebuild further too :lol:

2kns to agree, bang on!

 

I mentioned this in summer 2011.  No quims about losing Ehrhoff. He was not worth $40 mil. But we failed to replace him. 

 

And in 2012. And I also stated, signing day as it happened straight up, Garrison was no solution. Nor was that a hater position. He just brought precious little we did not have already in Hamhuis & Edler. None of the puck moving or snarl we were missing.

 

In 2013.

 

By 2014 I was starting to get some pissed off. Was happy Gillis was ultimately gone as a result. Too long not addressing shortcomings on D. When he was so good at it early.

 

I was sceptical Benning did not address the D his first year. But happy he drafted Tree.

 

1 step short of lynching him when he went with with Bartkowski & Weber. Again day one of signing, sceptical and on record as. When many hailed it as a money puck PMD. With the speed to get to a puck, and get it out. I never bought it.

 

Last year I was over the moon. 5 years post Christian Ehrhoff.  We got a D with some capacity to move the puck up ice in Stecher & Juolevi. We also got Guddy, whom I still like. 

 

This year Jim gets some credit for the forward group. And prospects, well deserved. But I believe on D just stop gap. So we wont be much better, if?  FTR, I'm also ok with stop gap & buying time for youth. But I am nervous as to whether we should have had a little higher D content in the draft. Next year we are going to have to stock up. 

 

On balance, we have much better prospect, and real life depth at forward. In comparison to D. I don't agree we are deep there at all. The fact we waited 5 years to draft a D that would take 8 years to arrive, post CE, is a cycle we cannot repeat. My point is we need to draft more D!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Canuck Surfer said:

2kns to agree, bang on!

 

I mentioned this in summer 2011.  No quims about losing Ehrhoff. He was not worth $40 mil. But we failed to replace him. 

 

And in 2012. And I also stated, signing day as it happened straight up, Garrison was no solution. Nor was that a hater position. He just brought precious little we did not have already in Hamhuis & Edler. None of the puck moving or snarl we were missing.

 

In 2013.

 

By 2014 I was starting to get some pissed off. Was happy Gillis was ultimately gone as a result. Too long not addressing shortcomings on D. When he was so good at it early.

 

I was sceptical Benning did not address the D his first year. But happy he drafted Tree.

 

1 step short of lynching him when he went with with Bartkowski & Weber. Again day one of signing, sceptical and on record as. When many hailed it as a money puck PMD. With the speed to get to a puck, and get it out. I never bought it.

 

Last year I was over the moon. 5 years post Christian Ehrhoff.  We got a D with some capacity to move the puck up ice in Stecher & Juolevi. We also got Guddy, whom I still like. 

 

This year Jim gets some credit for the forward group. And prospects, well deserved. But I believe on D just stop gap. So we wont be much better, if?  FTR, I'm also ok with stop gap & buying time for youth. But I am nervous as to whether we should have had a little higher D content in the draft. Next year we are going to have to stock up. 

 

On balance, we have much better prospect, and real life depth at forward. In comparison to D. I don't agree we are deep there at all. The fact we waited 5 years to draft a D that would take 8 years to arrive, post CE, is a cycle we cannot repeat. My point is we need to draft more D!

I like the looks of Brisbois too.  I'm wondering if there will not be a spot for Tryamkin, if he wants to come back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cyoung said:

I'm just confused that people think the Sedins will make us better if they are separated. No, just no. 

Why wouldn't you try it? Both have had success in the past when the other has been hurt. Henrik lit it up during his Hard and Art Ross year when Daniel went down for 20 games or so. Plus with their current game speed it kind of makes sense to not play the two slowest guys together. Maybe just give them O-Zone starts together or 2nd PP. What is your argument for why we shouldn't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

2kns to agree, bang on!

 

I mentioned this in summer 2011.  No quims about losing Ehrhoff. He was not worth $40 mil. But we failed to replace him. 

 

And in 2012. And I also stated, signing day as it happened straight up, Garrison was no solution. Nor was that a hater position. He just brought precious little we did not have already in Hamhuis & Edler. None of the puck moving or snarl we were missing.

 

In 2013.

 

By 2014 I was starting to get some pissed off. Was happy Gillis was ultimately gone as a result. Too long not addressing shortcomings on D. When he was so good at it early.

 

I was sceptical Benning did not address the D his first year. But happy he drafted Tree.

 

1 step short of lynching him when he went with with Bartkowski & Weber. Again day one of signing, sceptical and on record as. When many hailed it as a money puck PMD. With the speed to get to a puck, and get it out. I never bought it.

 

Last year I was over the moon. 5 years post Christian Ehrhoff.  We got a D with some capacity to move the puck up ice in Stecher & Juolevi. We also got Guddy, whom I still like. 

 

This year Jim gets some credit for the forward group. And prospects, well deserved. But I believe on D just stop gap. So we wont be much better, if?  FTR, I'm also ok with stop gap & buying time for youth. But I am nervous as to whether we should have had a little higher D content in the draft. Next year we are going to have to stock up. 

 

On balance, we have much better prospect, and real life depth at forward. In comparison to D. I don't agree we are deep there at all. The fact we waited 5 years to draft a D that would take 8 years to arrive, post CE, is a cycle we cannot repeat. My point is we need to draft more D!

In fairness to Gillis, #1 (or even #2) PMD don't grow on trees and are pretty hard to add to a team already at/near the cap. But that is probably his biggest failing (or tied with poor drafting), damn hard too do or not.

 

Agree we need more D. Or more specifically, more high ceiling, blue chip, future top pair D. We actually have decent depth for potential mid, bottom and spare pairs but so far we have OJ as anything close to projecting to 1st pair. Some of those other guys could very well surprise but....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Doesn't seem that way at all FWIW ;) Different priorities.

 

As I posted elsewhere I'm ok with either option so long as they keep earning it.

 

 

I agree with that post that it's a fight between being a fan and what's best for the org as a whole.  As you said, it's a great problem to have.  

 

I do think that there's a better case for Jake to stay than Brock as his game is much more versatile, right now, and that means he can move all over the lineup.  He also brings a physical factor that BB doesn't.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I like the looks of Brisbois too.  I'm wondering if there will not be a spot for Tryamkin, if he wants to come back?

I also like the Brisbois pick.

 

As far as notable draft picks expended, he is one of three key picks since Benning arrived. Along with Tree & Juolevi. To be fair he picked Rathbone early in the 4th round this year. But...To keep on par we need to be expending more than 3 picks, in the top 3 rounds, each 4 years. Which is what Benning has invested. Unless you have a near perfect strike rate, development rate & retention rate. it is too little attention.

 

We need to be drafting D, including in top rounds, proportionate to the fact they make up 1/3rd of the players on the ice. 

 

I like Lind. But I also had my eye on Hague. That would have brought our proportions right where they needed to be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.