Sign in to follow this  
Templeton Peck

[GDT] Vancouver Canucks vs Colorado Avalanche | Mar. 6, 2020 7 PM PST | The Darkest Timeline Edition

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

By hockey standards only Petey, Gaud, and Hughes are young, or lack experience.   We are actually a very experienced team, and have a lot of older players, who play key roles.  

Hockey standards? That's hilarious....please...point me to the age section of the big book of hockey standards.

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


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

Are we really a young team though?  Petey and Hughes are clearly young.  Who else is young?  Jake’s in his fourth year, right?  Bo is in his fifth?  Stecher is in his fourth?  IMO we are not young at all.  We have a lot of experienced players.  Edler, Tanev, Myers, Benn, Fanta, Miller, Pearson, Tofu, Sutter, Rooster, Beagle, Loui.  We are actually kind of old, when looking at our veterans.  Either our team is just not good, or our coaching is holding us back.  

Nice to see you are opening up to at least considering this....(because it's the correct answer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GritGrinder said:

Hockey standards? That's hilarious....please...point me to the age section of the big book of hockey standards.

24 is not a young NHL player, but is the common person’s world.  30 is getting old fir an NHL player, especially a role guy.  

Share this post


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

24 is not a young NHL player, but is the common person’s world.  30 is getting old fir an NHL player, especially a role guy.  

I'd say 24 is young for a goalie or Dman. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nice to see you are opening up to at least considering this....(because it's the correct answer)

It’s a question, and not an answer.  

However, if we are not as good a team as most we play against, then absolutely our systems are wrong.  Weaker teams do not play systems that promote run and gun, trade chances hockey.  That’s bad coaching.  So in both scenarios (good team or bad team) our coaching is poor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 73 Percent said:

I'd say 24 is young for a goalie or Dman. 

agreed. 

Share this post


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

Keenan.  Could be a two-for one 

Keenan was actually asked for his thoughts on how he would proceed with Vancouver!  This was his answer:

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Are we really a young team though?  Petey and Hughes are clearly young.  Who else is young?  Jake’s in his fourth year, right?  Bo is in his fifth?  Stecher is in his fourth?  IMO we are not young at all.  We have a lot of experienced players.  Edler, Tanev, Myers, Benn, Fanta, Miller, Pearson, Tofu, Sutter, Rooster, Beagle, Loui.  We are actually kind of old, when looking at our veterans.  Either our team is just not good, or our coaching is holding us back.  

Actually Alf the Canucks are still one of the youngest teams in the league even with the vets.

They are in the top 5 in the nhl 

 

https://www.rosterresource.com/nhl-roster-breakdowns/

Edited by Devron44
  • Thanks 3
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Alflives said:

You think JB gets to hire a third coach?  Has any other GM got to do that?  

Nashville. Poile. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

It’s rookie-D race night. 

Maker going to race Hughes in a wheelchair?  :P  

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its gonna be a great game tonight. Boys are gonna come together and show us all what real Canuck hockey is all about. Haters can hate but will be crawling in their cave after this game. Let's goooooo! Positive vibes all around, sun is shining and beer is on ice for after work. 

  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting up at 4am to watch this game

Time to turn the whale (ship) around with a big victory. 

We need everyone at 120%, giver balls for 60 minutes boys, make us proud. 

 

Go Canucks go 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 3

Share this post


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

Maker going to race Hughes in a wheelchair?  :P  

Even from the press box, it’s still on. 
First it will the media showcasing the race, then each time will do as they always do and ramp it up when an individual trophy is on the line for their peers. 
Injured or not, we will see just as much about them on TV tonight. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The age of players is not the only thing to consider. For the last fore years we have been in the bottom of the league. Just adding a few players dose not automatically make you a winning team. It takes a while to build chemistry.  Then they need to be tested by fire or prove what they can do. They need to prove it to themselves.  Build confidence. I see a team that is still fragile.

Making the playoffs would be nice but would also be a huge step over last season. Maybe too big of a step.

Share this post


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

Are we really a young team though?  Petey and Hughes are clearly young.  Who else is young?  Jake’s in his fourth year, right?  Bo is in his fifth?  Stecher is in his fourth?  IMO we are not young at all.  We have a lot of experienced players.  Edler, Tanev, Myers, Benn, Fanta, Miller, Pearson, Tofu, Sutter, Rooster, Beagle, Loui.  We are actually kind of old, when looking at our veterans.  Either our team is just not good, or our coaching is holding us back.  

Yep we really are young.  It's the core that matter the most important players aren't even in their early prime yet (23-24 is usually when it starts).  Horvat and Miller are the elder statesman in that regard.  Yes the league is getting younger as reliable journeyman aren't getting long or any fourth contracts anymore (check out how many UFAs got one or two year deals last year)...but our team has one of the youngest cores in the entire league.  Almost all of those guys you mentioned will be gone in two years  - sure some of them might get replaced by another vet, but some won't as like other teams that's the part of the cycle we rely on ELCs to balance the books. 

 

All the contenders cores are five-ten years plus older then ours (TB, Boston, St Louis, WSH and maybe PIT as with them you never know).   That's when our true window will be at its widest too.  

 

Saying we arent young is pretty funny.  Factually we are tied with ARI for second youngest roster in the league - and MTL and CAR are tied for first.  26.5 and we are 26.6....barely a difference.   That's definitely a young team.  Overall our forwards rank 4th youngest - and that's with LE.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t wanna say this is a must win but this is a must win game. Let’s see how the boys show up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are old players going to be there tonight? can't imagine Bertuzzi would be there with our opponent being Colorado.....

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, appleboy said:

The age of players is not the only thing to consider. For the last fore years we have been in the bottom of the league. Just adding a few players dose not automatically make you a winning team. It takes a while to build chemistry.  Then they need to be tested by fire or prove what they can do. They need to prove it to themselves.  Build confidence. I see a team that is still fragile.

Making the playoffs would be nice but would also be a huge step over last season. Maybe too big of a step.

Would it though..? The Canucks finished with 81pts last season and the 2nd WC was Colorado at 90pts. The 2 WC positions this season are on pace for 92pts which would be an 11pt improvement over last season which equates to one win a month over a 6 month season. That's how fine a line it is...for last season if the Canucks had won one more game in 5 of the 6 months they would have made the playoffs and that's the pace they are now...one extra win a month. You can go to any month last season and pick out one game that the Canucks should have won but didn't...same with this season, go to any month and you can probably find a game the Canucks won that they shouldn't have. Thats the difference between a playoff team and a bottom 12 team...one win a month.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.