-Vintage Canuck-

[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Chicago Blackhawks | Feb. 07, 2019

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, Tre Mac said:

Once again this team doesn't quit, they'll be a force in the playoffs when they do in fact make it.

 

Tanev is obviously injured, I mean he's never 100% but I think with Edler out and the lack of depth means he's battling through something.  Also doesn't help that he's been asked to play on the wrong side - yet somehow that wont stop idiots in blaming Gudbranson for that.

 

See a lot of "Fire Newell Brown"  Why?  Overreact much?  This guy is a offensive guru.  I see the struggles on the PP fall on the players not the coach.  Hutton has got to stop shooting, his shot sucks, EP40 and Horvat have to stop with that down low move as it is never going to work.  Once they move the puck around faster the open lanes will be there for Boeser and EP40.  How on earth do you blame an assistant coach on a 5 on 3 PP in which they muster one weak ass shot?  Lol, how is that on coaching? 

 

And speaking of Petey he tipped that first goal!  This same #$%^ happened with Boeser last year, he got screwed out of at least 2 or 3 goals last year. 

Over reaction is a CDC right of passage.  

 

Special teams isn't our problem.  We have a weak defence and very little available depth.  Our 3-4 best defenders not in the NHL are Hughes, Woo, OJ and Trymakin.  If any of these guys were available to take minutes would we be on a 3 game skid after Edler gets hurt?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

I think countless posts should have made it pretty clear that Guddy's game is not solely assessed by the + / -. I would like to emphasize that it's only one metric. In addition you have to consider that Guddy played most of the games on the 2nd pairing while Pouliot played most of the games on the 3rd. Guddy was mostly overmatched on the 2nd pairing, whereas Pouliot faced weaker forward lines playing on the 3rd pairing. Might be an explanation for the difference in +/ between Pouliot and Gudbranson.

 

I think it's obvious that both of them have no future on the canucks roster.

Pouliot's contract won't be extended. Gudbranson will be replaced by Nikita Tryamkin. From what I understood in the Tryamkin thread he agreed to terminate his contract with Avto. I expect him to be back next season.

 

You're right that it is one metric, but people seem to dump on him for that as it's the most negative thing that they can point out easily. Much like with Juolevi for those that insist on dumping on him (same goes for Virtanen, etc). Gudbranson provides a role that we do not have. Out defense is far from perfect and we haven't seen someone that can compliment him regularly. He has looked good in spurts with Hutton (who makes his own mistakes but has been much better about it this year) and he had looked good with Edler, maybe even upping Edler's physical game when Guddy was on the ice with him. Pouliot panics in his own zone and has made some glaring errors, but yet his +/- doesn't look too bad. So while I agree that Pouliot probably needs to go (more so that Hughes and Juolevi coming up pretty much bumps him out), it's a wonder how people can trash on Gudbranson and Juolevi (as a couple of examples) for their +/- and yet still find other reasons to trash on Pouliot.

 

I don't think the return of Tryamkin (where did you read that he terminated his contract?) means Gudbranson is gone. It would be nice to have a couple of guys with size, especially to offset smaller guys like Hughes and less physical guys like Juolevi.

 

I wouldn't mind a defense like

Juolevi - Tryamkin

Hughes - Gudbranson

Edler - Stecher/Tanev (we might trade him or he may not be durable much longer)

 

Woo would hopefully come in a couple years and replace Gudbranson maybe or even Stecher. Brisebois would be groomed for Edler's spot eventually and maybe Chatfield has a shot. The point is we can have both Guddy and Tryamkin and it instantly makes our D look intimidating while have young offensive talent as well (Tryamkin has hidden offensive talent as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 5:38 PM, Quantum said:

I think the issue with Granlund is that, though he has a little offensive knack, it doesn't make up for the fact that he's so "meh" all over the place. He's not a great goal scorer, he's not a good playmaker, he's not a good defender, he's not good in the face off circle, he's just not that good. Add in that he only had 8 goals last season (in 53 games, mind you) and had 6 goals the year before his big "19 goal year" and it doesn't bode well for his future on the Canucks. He could get to 12-15 goals by the end of the season but that's not good enough for a third line winger. For comparison sake to the Canucks, the Canadiens already have 9 players on there roster to have scored 10 or more goals. The Canucks have 4. Granlund and Eriksson will push it over to 6 soon (both players have 9 goals a piece). Followed by Baertschi (who has 8 goals this year). But that's still not good enough. If Granlund was in Schaller's spot as the 23rd man who was rotating into the lineup regularly when there's injuries/players playing poorly -- I'd be happy with it. But the fact that he's a regular bothers me. He's just prone to a lot of mistakes that he shouldn't be making at this stage in his career.

Yours is the 'glass half empty' assessment of Granlund as opposed to the 'glass half full'.

 

He may not be a great goalscorer, but he is a good one.  Given the opportunity, he will score more often than most 3rd/4th liners.  He may not be a great playmaker, but he is a good one.  Given the opportunity, he will make a good pass more often than most 3rd/4th liners.  He is one of the team's better shootout scorers.

 

Where you are completely wrong is in assessing his defensive play.  He is one of the team's better PKers, he consistently covers his assigned check well, he is back in the D zone when needed and backchecks hard.

 

Granlund is not a top six player unless he is put with players like the Sedins, but he does have decent talent and he does deserve to be on the team.

 

Can the Canucks find/develop someone better?  Yes.... but not right now.  Next year he may be replaced by Gaudette.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: hey look I’m in the wrong thread 

Edited by drdeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.