Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

ScotianLifestyle

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    212

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by ScotianLifestyle

    Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

    in Current Roster

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, DollarAndADream said:

    Crazy how different the talk is of this kid on /r/Canucks on Reddit compared to here. It's so negative here with all of these experts. Over on Reddit, there's so much positive talk and hype around him, with people chiming in who've actually seen him play.

     


    I'm pumped for Petts.

    Finally, the level of salt on this forum when the "wrong player" is drafted is comparable to whining child. 

    Quit being gullible, you are the problem with this team.

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    What? Random posts on CDC speak for the whole fan-base of Canucks' Nation... you say?

    Clearly, you see,...what you want to see here. Canucks' Nations is actually...well, millions... strong. But, to you they are all just some frivelous & whiny dirt-bags. I see a lot very passionate fans here, with a plethora of ideas to share, motivate, educate, and sometimes humiliate one another with, on this fan-board. But this fan-base ranks high, travels well, and sells out our building far more often than not.

    We may not have all of the enthusiasm of a recently-returned market like the Winnepeg Jets,... or the innocence of the fans in fledgling marketplace like the Nashville Predators....nor the staunch traditions or clout of an O-6 team. We are quite possibly more jaded & cynical than that...yes....but after 43 years in pursuit of the ultimate prize...we are ripe for conspiracy theories & speculations. Perhaps there is something left to be uncovered. Something that could alter the league to favor our team.... rather than dis-favor them. Many have invested their time & their hard earned money in so many ways to support this team & the many causes that the team fronts or endorses in our community. So many bleed...Canucks' colours.

    Give the FAN-bashing a rest, already. You sir, are an in-grate... if you cannot appreciate the things that this ever-increasing fan-base has done well....including making CDC one of the most-user friendly, informative, welcoming, inter-active & heavily-visited NHL Team fan-boards, in the league. Ask around... but, then again... beauty is in the eye of the beholder....isn't it?

    Nicely put.

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by ScotianLifestyle

    Please. Santorelli should be priority #1 IMO. Tanev & Kassian being Restricted, can wait. Santorelli being Unrestricted, makes me a bit nervous....

    If Booth stays and Santorelli isn't re-signed, I would be very disappointed.

    If you go on Botchfords article, there are people in the comments that say they rather keep Booth than Santo, I clearly they have no idea what they are talking about and its kinda making me nervous that I didn't hear any contract talks yet..

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    Really want to see this guy re-signed. However, I don't see how its possible with all our prospects moving up. We have to get rid of some center depth, or move a lot to the wing. I'm not quite sure he would be able to fit on our second line quite yet, but would be an excellent 3rd liner for sure. With Matthias, Richardson, Horvat, etc, we would have to probably move someone to wing. As I'm pretty sure Kesler will be traded, I don't know what our second line center will be. I'm assuming only two of our rookies(Jensen and Horvat) will make the jump too.

    Sedin Sedin Burrows

    Kassian Horvat Jensen

    Booth Matthias Higgins

    Hansen Richardson Santorelli

    Thoughts? I know it looks weak :sick:

    Hansen could be replaced..

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    There were a lot of games last year where Santorelli outplayed Kesler at the C position. That said he also did well at wing. Like the Twins and Kesler I thought Torts overplayed him. If Kesler is traded

    then the whole question is opened up. Who takes the 2C?

    That's a pretty good question, Santo isn't really a top 6 player but can fill if necessary, yes we all keep talking about how we need to keep spots open for the young guns, but they have to fight and earn it like anyone else on the team.

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by ScotianLifestyle

    I know. That is why I originally voted to keep him. In retrospect I decided that we need to get bigger to be competitive in our division. Playoffs is where it counts most and I believe that he may be rendered ineffective with a large body leaning on him in a 7 game series. Schroeder, Shinkaruk, and Santo are smallish players. Benning and Trevor have some tough decisions to make.

    Agreed, GMJB needs to find the deadweight that's on the team and needs to make some serious choices, I'm down for signing Santo, but size doesn't always mean you have an advantage,

    [Report] Canucks wont ask Alex Edler to waive NTC

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    It's mostly about the two guys who used to wear jerseys #5 and #6 for this team (with a little bit of how #17 and #26 were once used on this club's power play).

    When you trace the numbers back over the past five years (which I've devoted a fair amount of time and effort to doing--as seen in some earlier posts), you can see how important Salo and Ehrhoff actually were to the Canucks getting full value out of Edler.

    And you also see pretty clearly just how much this team botched things by not retaining or replacing either one of those guys (and not successfully developing or acquiring future options in their prospect pool--until very recently at least).

    The good thing is that JB seems to know just how important it is for a defense (especially on a team that wants to play "exciting" and "up-tempo" hockey) to have strong PMD options who actually want to handle/carry the puck and are comfortable and confident leading the rush.

    And if we're talking about the current "Boston model" it's certainly worth noting that the direction taken with the Bruins' defensive group (which Benning has had a large role in building) is one built not merely around Chara (this was much more the case a few years ago) but also strong puck-movers like Dougie Hamilton and Torey Krug (and they even added another one in Meszaros to their 2013-14 lineup). That's three more rushing PMD options than the Canucks had in their group last season (as we had ZERO guys who are really "puck rushing" types--Bieksa is probably the closest we have but he's really not--at least consistently--that type of player). And the most striking thing, for me, is that Boston doesn't even need these kinds of players nearly as much as Vancouver does (for their offense to work--as the Bruins can play more of a deliberate style and still be successful). But the Boston braintrust still understood the value of having strong puck rushing options on their back end (even if they stand only 5'9" tall).

    The Canucks (under Gillis) seemed to forget a key element of what really drove the offense when this team was at the top of the league in nearly every category. This team needs puckmovers on the back end if they want to play an up-tempo style. The Sedins need the support and options that a PMD provides in transition and working the offensive zone. The Canucks are a "fast team" with a very dynamic offense when they have the necessary personnel to move the puck well but they become very "slow" and plodding when they lack the key personnel to drive their attack.

    Getting away from this was the biggest cause for this team's decline over the past couple seasons (and much more so than an "aging core" or the group "getting stale" IMHO).

    And playing a style under Torts that created almost no neutral zone pressure and had a very tepid transition game (albeit lacking the right personnel to really be effective--they just didn't need to be as bad as they were under Tortorella's systems) only served to highlight this absence and make this team's desperate need for a top rate PMD all the more painfully obvious.

    The Canucks haven't truly had any dynamic puckmoving options on their back end since 2011-12.

    And it's no coincidence that 2011-12 was the last season Edler scored at a 0.60 points/game rate and was a positive in +/-. In fact, I'd say that there is a clearly defined pattern of success and failure for Alex Edler and it's written through the history of his D pairings. Edler is the "good Edler" when he has a mobile and offensively dynamic puck handler playing beside him. And he's "bad Edler" when his partner lacks these skills and forces Edler to be the primary puck handler and the "offensive" minder partner (this has even been the case when Edler's been paired with the Canucks' best "defensive" Ds).

    We can have "50 point" Alex Edler back. He just needs the right partner playing beside him.

    He hasn't had that for two years and counting.

    Fortunately, from what's been said recently, I have a high degree of confidence that Linden and Benning understand all of this and will try to do what's necessary to get Edler back playing like "good Edler."

    And if that happens, this team as a whole will be markedly improved.

    Getting Edler back playing at the level he has in the past, and also adding more mobility and puck skills to the D in the process, will likely have a greater net positive effect on scoring than adding a top flight free agent forward to this roster.

    And on the other side of the puck, this team would also become tighter defensively and more imposing physically with Edler back playing at a high level.

    It might seem counter-intuitive, but Edler really needs to be the "defensive" guy on his pairing. When Edler only needs to think about the basic fundamentals of his position and can play the rest of his game instinctively, the offense just kind of "comes" to him. When he's thinking too much, he quickly gets off his game and starts making a lot of errors (which then increase exponentially the more he handles the puck).

    He's not a guy who can drive the offense, lead the rush, push the puck through transition, or be a "puck general" in the offensive zone. But he's very capable of following the play, joining the rush, finding open ice, and getting into the right areas. As a secondary offensive option on the back end (playing alongside a dynamic PMD), Edler is money. His offensive instincts are high level and his shot is a true weapon.

    Similarly, when Edler isn't the main puck handler on his pairing but can comfortably defer to his partner, his physical game is unleashed. He finds the opportunities for the big hits (and makes them at the right time and in the right way).

    Edler's also a great skater, especially for his size, when he's not handling the puck. He's very fast going North-South and he has no problem keeping up with the play. When he's freed up and can really use his speed (hard to believe I know), his potential really comes out on the ice. Unfortunately, he's been pushed into roles and usage patterns where you just don't get to see him skating the way he can--and he's looked "slow" as a result.

    In the defensive zone, when he's playing with a "wanderer" type who covers a lot of the ice, Edler instinctively simplifies his game and just plays the physical defending role staying close to his net (and keeping guys out of the "home plate" high percentage areas). Once again, it probably seems counter-intuitive but putting Edler with a more "risky" offensive partner actually makes him a better defender than putting him with a stay-at-home type (the stats have always born this out--with a striking degree of clarity). Mentally, he just focuses on the basics and fundamentals and he's effective. And when he's playing with a clear head, his instincts are top-notch, both offensively and defensively.

    Edler has pretty much said all of this himself (although not quite to the degree and complexity that I'm getting at here).

    And Benning has shown that he knows what makes good D pairings. Boston added some very good PMDs to their lineup and have used them alongside Chara to great success. This provides the perfect model for how we get Edler back to playing like a potential #1D for this team (not saying that Edler is Chara--but the way they both benefit from mobile partners with strong puck skills is what I'm highlighting).

    The Canucks made the right call by not asking Edler to waive. He's made it abundantly clear that he won't accept a trade anywhere. Approaching Edler regarding a potential trade, after he's already made several unequivocal public statements on the matter, would have been very foolish (unless the team was so hell-bent on moving him that they'd force the issue--which would be even more foolish because of the blowback it would have created). Much better management decision to make it clear that he won't be asked to waive his clause--and then start the real work of targeting new acquisitions who can help make Edler (and the entire D) more effective.

    Well said.

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by ScotianLifestyle

    Gut feeling says he won't be back. He played well, but he isn't size and he isn't youth. Journeymen of his ilk are available all over the place.

    Name one center that we can get as cheap as Santorelli who was on par for 51 points and can play any position.

    +1. Santorelli was one of the few bright spots this write off season, like the above poster who can play a variety of positions like Santo? Consider this: what happens if some of the prospects aren't ready to make the jump? He proven himself and he will again, I'm sure Benning will give him a offer of some kind and I'd really like to know who can replace him and at the price point we have for him now.

    • Upvote 1

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by ScotianLifestyle

    Well any young guy that played his heart out like he did, at least deserves an offer, providing he shows he is fit. Let's face it some nights he was our best player. I'm not for holding spaces open for prospects when there is someone who has proved he can cut it on any line.

    Prospects have to fight their way into the team imo, just like anyone else. The way Santorelli played reminded me a bit of how Gallagher played in the SC for the Habs.

    +1. Everyone is talking about how its important we bring in youngsters(which is true), also a lot of posters claim that he can be easily replaced(I feel he punches his weight way more than hansen) but your bang on.

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    The biggest problem with Santorelli is that unless he's a depth forward, I don't see a spot for him if the Canucks are finally getting serious about giving the kids a chance. He'd be a nice luxury, but I don't see much ice time for him unless we get into injury trouble.

    The guy can play both Centre and Right Wing..pretty versatile

    Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by ScotianLifestyle

    I just read the article by Botchford,(pretty good read) and some of the comments after by other posters:

    Santorelli for me is the ideal 13th forward. Someone you can plug in anywhere either for injury, or to get a spark. If the Canucks are counting on him being a major roster piece, theyre in trouble. And if theyre not going after a big fish via UFA, I'd keep Booth around. The guy had a significant injury and was told it'd be a full year before feeling normal again, which coincidentally resulted in notably better and consistent hockey from him. Still not worth his contract, but he's one of the more physical forwards on the team when hes going.

    Another person: You have to be careful about doling $2M to another under-sized player. We all have seen the contribution he made, but his play levlled off. I think that will be his steady level of play and on the occasion he will have an offensive explosion where he will surprise people and put some pucks in the net. If they can nab him for less, good depth signing. But I would rather see them keep Booth then sign Santo if it comes down that.

    so apparently David Booth is the better player than Santo, ( I really think they should re-sign him) but comparing him to Booth and could do way better than Santo?

    Thoughts?

    [Report] Torts wanted to buy out Alex Burrows

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    I agree both Burrows and Booth came on strong at the end of the season and I look forward to them have an injury free and productive year in the upcoming season.

    The team as a whole though needs to get young bigger and faster. To compete we need 4 pretty good lines, we have great players for a 4th line. Its the top three lines that need some life. I hope Kesler stays, that would help or we will have to make some nifty trades. Horvat looks like he may be ready to come up and perhaps one of the other young snipers, but we are still a piece or two away from being dangerous.

    Sedin Sedin Shinkaruk???

    Kassian Kesler Jensen???

    Booth Horvat Burrows

    Higgins Matthias Richardson

    Or some combination of these players, Santo would be nice but I doubt we get him back.

    Go Canucks :towel:

    Santo will be returning, it depends if that injury he sustained will affect his play.

×
×
  • Create New...