gameburn
Members-
Posts
2,566 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by gameburn
-
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
I wish you had some say somewhere. Too many pluggers on this team Tanev and Stecher (and now Benn) -- all skate as far as they can with it, then give up and shoot at the goalie with no screen, no chance of deflection, even less chance of scoring outright. Team needs an identity, and I think you have hit upon an option: think puck control and creativity. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
And I think you are being generous. Edler is uneven to say the least, as well as often-injured. Tanev and Stecher are okay 2nd or 3rd pairing guys, but do have a knack for killing offensive plays. Benn has been, imo, poor for weeks. Myers is no better than Tanev, although he has moments where he can make a difference. As you say, Hughes is a genuine number 1 or 2. Guy is fantastic both ways. And plays in a way that should keep him uninjured. We've had some bad luck: Juolevi should have been a second pairing guy by now, and Tryamkin should be here too. Woo is almost workable, as is Chatfield, but neither is going to help us much right now. Our forwards are receiving all the attention for wasted money (Eriksson, Sutter, Beagle, Baertschi, even Schaller and Motte aren't much for puck control, let alone scoring), but I think you are right: it's the D that is the bigger problem. To have 13 forwards in the lineup and only 5 or at most 6 playable D does seem to set the D up for fatigue/injury. Dealing with Benning's bad contracts/UFAs has to be a top priority, just barely ahead of replacing Green with a genuine NHL caliber coach. I still remember when Trotz was available... I'm not sure they even interviewed him, incredible. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Eriksson should have been dealt with by October 15th... so... not sure if this will happen as quickly as we all want. DeBoer looks like a logical choice, and there have been enough teams with fired coaches that the Canucks might want to pick him up before it's too late. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Do you think they should wait until the end of this homestand or fire him tomorrow? I thought he was vulnerable to firing after the Vegas game, tbh, especially after losing those games when they had decent leads. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
He was not very good at all tonight. To Green's credit, he is starting to reward some of the better players with more ice time. (Virtanen and Hughes, Miller as usual, Myers before his defensive errors and Gaudette.) If this continues for him all year? We could be talking buyout. He's a more affordable buyout than Eriksson, who will probably be waived and then press-boxed in Utica. Big changes are coming I'm guessing. Sutter was too slow too. (More tradeable? Or buyout too?) Canucks have a very hard time with teams that are fast or that cycle effectively. Which is 2/3rds of the NHL now I think lol. Gaudette now and Horvat for a year now have made these guys increasingly unnecessary, especially if Pettersson has Miller available to help with faceoffs. The veterans are failing this team. With the exception of Markstrom and Miller and most of the time Tanev. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
In the short term it is the thing to do, in the long run it is the only thing that can be done. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
I hadn't noticed it was that bad, but I think you are right. Hughes was good, Jake was good (other than that penalty) Gaudette was good. Pettersson fell down a lot -- tired? But otherwise, EP and Boes had some moments. Beagle, Sutter, Benn again, Tanev… Myers on the defensive side... not a good night for these guys. On the bright side: Baertschi and Eriksson's 10 million was resting nicely out of fire. Is it coaching mainly or coaching and GM together? -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Now, that's a drink. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Not, the team, strictly speaking, but those two players. And btw, I agree you with you: both have far exceeded our expectations or what this management deserves. -
[PGT] Montreal Canadiens at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 17, 2019
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Well put. -
They have to stop playing a perimeter game, it's as if Kyle Wellwood has come back.
-
Confidence. Luck. Not a top-6 forward as we have been hearing about, but maybe new coaches?
-
I am both educated, and not thinking about this game... I owe you twice over.
-
The Hockey Guy had a whole YouTube thing on who is at fault here: Benning for the players/contracts or Green for the way the team is playing. He seemed to suggest that this is a post-season decision that's coming, assuming the season is lost again by late January/early February. I'm thinking you may be warmer on this one: why wait til Spring? Benning showing a bit the last few games hints it could be sooner than later.
-
Is it true that crown royal is best in class? Just asking.
-
Which actually doesn't sound too bad... given the picks available this year. Still.... we had higher hopes, lol.
-
Predictable pk and pp systems, poor starts in games come to mind. Poor effort on the road. Poor utilisation of players, too much line juggling, poor line changes (happens five times a game.) And the second year in a row with a November swoon. JB's UFA signings and poor contracts are probably even more of a problem, but coach will be first change to be made if they continue downwards for another 15 games.
-
And Carolina too, they pressured every second on pk.
-
Yes, totally. I feel that when Green is replaced (January? this April?) we will see Jake get a bigger role. It's amazing how many more players are getting pp and regular time than he does, and they have half the goals and hits.
-
I think you have captured exactly what a LOT of us are thinking lately. Well written. "PK mode" -- should be copyrighted lol.
-
Re: Pettersson. Tonight was revealing. And I'm heading a bit in your direction on his upside. He was held in check most of the night by Carolina. Who we could really learn something from on pk and team defense. But then all of a sudden EP pots a beauty in OT to win the game. Because he finally has some space. Which he won't get very often, ever. Crosby and McD win all kinds of games, seem to be able to push through their checkers. Not sure EP can do this yet. Boeser on the other hand, had a fantastic game. Horvat's line was good too.
-
Graovac made the Washington team (that won a cup) out of training camp I think. Although he didn't stick I assume. Goldobin is unknown as to his potential. But now that Vancouver is a middling team, we know there are teams like NJ, Ottawa, and Detroit, and probably Chicago that need more NHL caliber players.
-
I wasn't referring to the talent of the best 8 players each, we have only 4 players who are as good as their best 9. And Markstrom is no Dryden, agreed. I grew up watching those teams (I lived in Sherbrooke.) I saw them win a lot of games. I know how good they are. What I was referring to was the bottom 21 -- especially the forwards -- beyond the best 5 each. I.e., the top 26 players in an organization, with the emphasis on the ones in the pressbox or in the minors. Like Montreal, we have more NHL players than we can play. They were able to protect theirs better because the waiver rule was very different then to say the least. Like Montreal we have more depth than many teams in the league. Our depth has less total talent, obviously, but still we have a a lot of players capable of playing in the NHL far too many in fact. We waived better players than some teams have playing now, we let players like Hutton and Gagner go because we couldn't find a way to use them or pay them. Baertschi and Eriksson could both play somewhere else, so could Goldobin I suspect. Juolevi and Chatfield could both play on some teams right now. We used FAs to get most of our surplus, while Montreal used Pollock's drafting/trading. Re your list. Henry Richard played too long, a third of his career was quite mediocre. Tremblay, Houle, Jarvis, Lambert, these players were carried by the rest of the team and were largely workable as players because so many of the expansion teams were so weak. No parity then, which makes our depth all the more interesting, imo. Pete Mahovlich was a centre, more like Horvat than Boeser. Shutt was a classic sniper, more like Boeser. Although Boeser is already a better playmaker than Shutt ever was. Pettersson is a generational talent, certainly the equal of Lafleur at the start of his career who mostly sat on the bench his first two years. (Weird coaching decision, I know.) Cournoyer was unique, his speed could kill a team and was effective on any line. He ruled on that first Team Canada. That guy we really have no equivalent to, I mean he had Virtanen's speed and Boeser's finish. My mistake in posting what I did was using the word "depth" which does usually imply more than just NHL-ready players. What I should have said is "like Montreal and Boston of that era (1971?) we have many more NHL-ready players than a lot of teams have."