-Vintage Canuck-

[PGT] Calgary Flames at Vancouver Canucks | Feb. 09, 2019

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, apollo said:

Boy I'd kill to squeeze into the 2nd wild card and face off versus Calgary in the first round. 

 

Can you smell it?! Upset! 

 

For the record the 2004 Canucks would easily beat Calgary and go on to the cup final had the old boys club not handed Bertuzzi a knee jerk extreme suspension. He shoulda been suspended for all the regular season. No longer. He didn't clone himself and jump on top and make a pile pressuring Moore's neck. 

 

2004 Canucks are Stanley Cup Champions in my books. 

I could see the Canucks beat the everloving $&!# out of Calgary in a seven game series. 

  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to assess players for a stretch longer then 1 game. CDC has a tendency to make huge judgements after the play of 1 game for certain players.

 

Markstrom - I think he has reached the point of legit #1 NHL goalie.

Petterson- The second coming of Bure and will probably be the best Canuck ever and Will bring this city a Cup

Stecher - Had a great game but needs to do more on a more consistent basis. Think Markstrom's consistency.

Biega- He had a bad game. First bad one this year. He is consistent over all.

Goldy- still needs work

Virtanen - still needs work

Bo/Boes - still need refining but right behind Petterson in learning the ropes.

Lievo - really think once he gets comfortable with a line he is going to be an effective top 6.

Gudbranson - Not a top 4 dman but is needed for his toughness on the team. 

Pouliot  - getting very close to the point of no return. Has raw skills but just doesn't seem to get the mental part of the game down pact.

 

We are rebuilding and I think a lot of these players are being assessed. Who will be part of the future? Still lots of unanswered questions but some patterns are definitely emerging and the cream is rising to the top.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 73 Percent said:

Love burkey

Burkey is pretty much must see tv on hockey night broadcasts. No BS whatsoever. I can't stand Don Cherry the last few years, on tv and his radio bit on 650, hes so irrelevant. "I remember the California seals, had this guy" blah blah blah, honestly, nobody cares

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 1:55 AM, WHL rocks said:

Markstrom is a top 10 goalie in the NHL now. 

 

Ian Clark has dine wonders with him. 

 

I expect him to challenge for the Vezina next season.  It's contract year  Canucks will be more improved team from this year.  

 

 

He 'could' but alot depends on how our defense improves or not. With this defense, I don't care who you are, you're not going to look as elite as you could be. If he had a solid defense in front of him, my guess is his save % wouldn't be .910 but rather .920+. Alot of that is defense and the quality of oppty's your team is giving up. We all know the nucks D gives up alot of high quality chances....Until we fix that, he won't (sadly) get to show how good he really is.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, messier's_elbow said:

Boeser finally looks healthy again. He looks more loose and is skating a lot better. He gonna get paid. 

Noticed that too, he seems to have gained a step in his quickness. Still would love to see him use Bo's skating coach in the summer and move his feet more, but last few games he seems "normal" again. I am sure the back took a while to feel right, then there's the mental aspect of maybe not going as hard into areas etc (all players who go through tough injuries have to over come that, in any sport)...good to see him finding his game. But man, if he would just work his skating like bo, he will become even more of a threat.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IBatch said:

McDavid is unarguably the best talent of his peer group (so far).  That said AM sophomore season and EPs rookie season (if we are going to compare ages), and Laines for that matter, lines up pretty well against so far.  And those guys play with some weapons too, especially on the PP.    And it wasn’t like EP didn’t have bad year draft plus one either, rookie of the year, regular season and playoff MVP in a league that most consider on par or better than the AHL.  

 

Petterson is one of the leagues best stories so far,  the best in a class that wasn’t supposed to have any top end talent.   Glad he’s ours, and glad we didn’t pick first too or we could be talking about Hirshier or Patrick instead.

I personally believe (and I have no sources to back me up) that had we had the 1st pack, that JB would have picked EP. We were really high on him. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, CptCanuck16 said:

Well yeah, I understand he's good defensively, but you don't usually pay a guy in a 4th line shutdown defensive role $7m a season ($8m the previous two seasons).  That isn't the role he was brought here for. He was supposed to be a first line guy scoring 30+ goals a season. That's what the expectation was. But yeah, we're stuck with him so I guess you gotta look on the bright side and say we have one of the best $7m dollar 4th liners in the league! :lol:

But now that he isn’t scoring +30 goals he still bring something to the team. Gagner brought very very little... with regards to the 7mill, so what? It is, what it is... both he and Gagner were signed to contracts and neither lived up to their salaries. So now they are both in the system, you use the one, that gives you the most, and in this case its Eriksson by a mile... simples...

Edited by spook007
  • Hydration 2

Share this post


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

I personally believe (and I have no sources to back me up) that had we had the 1st pack, that JB would have picked EP. We were really high on him. 

Pretty sure he had a couple of Dmen ahead of him.. 

 

Heiskanen and Makar..

 

They got EP highest he was going to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, stawns said:

Again, his salary is, and should be, irrelevant.  He plays hard mins against the other teams gest players, to me that is just as valuable as a player who gets points.

This. Exactly...,

Once he’s signed, he is part of a pool of players. If, what he brings, is good enough to make him one of the 20 any given night, he stays, if not he doesn’t... 

the money has been spent, so it’s irrelevant. Bringing it up is just nonsense...

Just like it is with Guddy. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spook007 said:

But now that he isn’t scoring +30 goals he still bring something to the team. Gagner brought very very little... with regards to the 7mill, so what? It is, what it is... both he and Gagner were signed to contracts and neither lived up to their salaries. So now they are both in the system, you use the one that gived you the most, and in this case its Eriksson by a mile... simples...

They got Vanek for far less than both Gagner and Eriksson, and he scored more than both of them combined. Was it $1M per? I'll still take LE and the "stuff" he brings.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

I personally believe (and I have no sources to back me up) that had we had the 1st pack, that JB would have picked EP. We were really high on him. 

We’d sure have hoped so, but at the time Patrick and Hirschier were the clear number 1/2 by virtually every list, and most said their was a bump down to an unspectacular but decent second tier group which included EP (8-14).  Even at 5 they went a little off board, good thing they had done their homework thanks mostly because of Hammerstrom proximity to where he played.  He also improved dramatically post draft, working on his shot mostly (he identified 21 things to improve it and worked on each one thing until satisfied and went on to the next), a self taught (Alien), GMs around the league have commented on this as a way of saying “well this is why we didn’t pick him “(his shot wasn’t as good)  ha ha too bad.

 

I don’t know what they would have done, but I do know they’d have been ripped a new one by the media and fans if we didn’t pick one of the top two..glad we didn’t go through that, so much crow would have to be eaten they’d be an endangered species in the lower mainland right about now.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, johngould21 said:

They got Vanek for far less than both Gagner and Eriksson, and he scored more than both of them combined. Was it $1M per? I'll still take LE and the "stuff" he brings.

Vanek was an impressive bit of business... Think they needed one another.

He could easily have been playing on this team still. Was great with Boeser, but Benning was true to his word and shipped him out for an asset.

Its rare to get a sniper for a mill per year. In two years when we hopefully are getting close to being a contender or at least a proper playoffs team, this is the kind of deal that would solidify our top 6....

But Eriksson bring something different to the group. His defensive awareness is something that takes time to learn, and I'm for one am satisfied, he is around to show and help the younger players on the team with that part of the game.

And despite not hitting the heights expected, he has not been that bad. Just not quite, what fans expected, (and he probably expected), when he signed the contract.

Share this post


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

We’d sure have hoped so, but at the time Patrick and Hirschier were the clear number 1/2 by virtually every list, and most said their was a bump down to an unspectacular but decent second tier group which included EP (8-14).  Even at 5 they went a little off board, good thing they had done their homework thanks mostly because of Hammerstrom proximity to where he played.  He also improved dramatically post draft, working on his shot mostly (he identified 21 things to improve it and worked on each one thing until satisfied and went on to the next), a self taught (Alien), GMs around the league have commented on this as a way of saying “well this is why we didn’t pick him “(his shot wasn’t as good)  ha ha too bad.

 

I don’t know what they would have done, but I do know they’d have been ripped a new one by the media and fans if we didn’t pick one of the top two..glad we didn’t go through that, so much crow would have to be eaten they’d be an endangered species in the lower mainland right about now.

This is exactly how it played/would have played out. 

While there were a few here, that were high on Pettersson, they were few and far between, when it came to drawing top 2.

I also believe we would have drafted either Hircher or Patrick, as they were both looked as close to be being surefire NHL'ers as could be.

I don't quite remember (maybe wrong), but as far as remember Hircher and Patrick were top two on all draft list bar 1 or 2... 

The rest EP included, did had massive potential, but needed more development before they would considered sure thing NHL players. We were just incredible lucky Benning took the chance on EP, and that we didn't have to make that decision.... 

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.