Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

gameburn2's Achievements

Abbotsford Regular

Abbotsford Regular (3/14)



  1. Stevens and Neidermayer were good, I forgot about Niedermayer. I don't recall him carrying the scoring load that Doughty and Keith have done recently in the playoffs, but I'll grant you that he and Stevens did do something akin to what Boston did with Chara. Carolina was good but not great, not Kane or Crosby great anyway. Brodeur and Thomas were probably more important to their teams than Fleury/Murray or Crawford. I suppose I was thinking more of offensive hockey, which can be a narrow standard now that I think of it. I think a lot of us saw the Carolina Cup run as an upset. If there are no upsets -- and the length of the playoffs suggests there may not be -- then your point is well taken. Some of the key Carolina players did not continue on with stellar careers the way that the players from Chicago, Pittsburgh and to some extent Boston have, so I think it's easy for a lot of us to simply overlook the Carolina achievement. Similar to Calgary's cup win, long ago: the team was on average older when it finally won. The teams like Edmnonton and Chicago (and Pittsburgh, earlier) who win when the core is very young are easier to remember, not least because they often win more than one cup.
  2. In the past, teams have won without superstars on D or in the forward positions. New Jersey and Carolina come to mind. Recently, however, LA (Doughty), Chicago (Keith and Kane) and Pittsburgh (C and M) have all had superstars. With Edmonton, Toronto, Chicago, and Pittsburgh looking pretty good this year: more superstars. Not sure we can generalize, but it is noteworthy that teams have won without the McDavid/Keith types. New Jersey and Carolina did, however, have good goalkeepers, excellent team play and considerable depth. No reason we can't have what the latter had: Demko looks promising, the depth is building and Green looks like he can be a team builder.
  3. If Kassian can turn things around, then this kid has every chance in the world of being one of the best players on this team. He might have been rushed a bit; same with McCann -- and so many of us couldn't wait to get the future team in place as soon as possible. Live and learn for all of us. I also think that being free of injury really helped him: gave him a chance to train ambitiously in the summer.
  4. You're right: not so much a tank as a natural restocking. Where good drafting is about to transform the team. And you're right about the Sedins. Without sounding too depressing, everything changed for them last year. It was shocking how fast it happened. I remember Alf saying at one point that it was the first time there was decline in the off-season. Before that it was normal wearing-down over the course of a long season, the kind we all suffer lol. Have we bottomed out? I think the UFAs were brought in to prevent this year being even worse, I suspect. Insurance maybe.
  5. Lol. I won't even let myself multiply that over a full season. A point a game would be a very good sign, especially if the vast majority of the points are assists.
  6. Lind has the vision of a centre/playmaker. Daniel Sedin? He probably needs time in Utica, eventually. But I think he has a bright future. He goes back to Junior now, right?
  7. A couple of players from the most recent draft are playing in this training camp. Not ours though, so... not so much worried as noticing things. So far, the only recent Canuck draft pick to make an impact -- a big impact -- is Horvat, who was the previous regime's pick. Boeser looks like a terrific pick for the latter half of the first round... Tryamkin was, I guess, a steal for the later rounds and Demko looks stronger than Anders Nilsson by a country mile.. so we're not bad. But Virt, Juolevi, McCann are not world beaters yet. (Although I think Virt makes the team and looks good this year.) Pettersson is not playing in this year's training camp... should he? I'm not sure... but it would be nice to see him in action... even for just a few powerplays.
  8. Really? I didn't check on the dates prior to posting... I remember thinking we passed on him though... was that the Boeser year? Nvmd... i'll check. Thanks.
  9. Dahlin would be amazing. We passed on both Chabot and Sergachev to get Juolevi. Although we did pick Tryamkin, which has to be considered good, regardless of whether he ever comes back here. We need more D: look for brains and skating ability.
  10. When it comes to D, I agree completely. There are just too many Olympic quality D taken in later rounds to say that you make or break your chances on the first round. I think that in the past (prior to Benning in particular) there was a tendency to choose many more forwards than D. I could imagine a team deciding on 3 forwards, 3 D, and a goalie, maybe, every draft. Doesn't work that way i imagine. But D are so important -- and the position is so open to change (Orr, Burns, Robinson, Karlsson, Pronger... all D!) that you need a range of them and plenty. From the look of the last 10 or even 20 drafts, I think the high-end forwards -- generationals and just below that -- are pretty obvious choices. The D? How good is Sergachev? We passed on him for Juolevi (not my choice lol) but how good is he? Better than any of Team Canada's D of Sochi? Some of whom were not first rounders?
  11. Yes, the D just could not hold the line or defend well at all. Not bad with the puck, but hopeless defending. And you have to draft high-end D; just look at how their respective teams acquired: Doughty, Keith, Karlsson. Bad luck with Tryamkin, but he may come back some day. While not wanting to generalize too much, it does seem like the best D are coming out of Canada and Sweden. Some good players from Finland too, but in general, Canada and Sweden seem to produce the majority.
  12. You're right: the mix is promising. We've had a bit of bad luck in the Draft, statistically this should even out. But it might not lol. I really think it is both a practical and a philosophical problem for this team -- and the rest of the league -- to decide what kind of players to fill a team with, after the obvious McDavid, Matthews and Sedin choices. Puck control guys who can also score?; or cheap plugs who are also probably younger/have better contracts? This mix you have noted look more like hockey players than guys who do little more than give the stars an occasional rest and at best prevent goals going into their own net. I think the Canucks will be favoring a skill team, skill throughout the line-up.
  13. I've heard ppl mention that Lind is a "power forward" in the making. I'm not sure that's his niche. More of a Makarov play-maker. Use his size to protect the puck, not whack ppl. He took some silly cross-checking penalty at the end of the Young Guns game. You are so right: no way he can be doing that kind of thing at the NHL. Someone will kill him. I thought Tkachuk went too far at times last year, as a rookie playing an abrasive game. Not sure this will work for many rookies. He did look slow at times -- especially back-checking and returning at the end of a shift-change. Better when his team has the puck. You may be right: have a sip of coffee, see how big and fast the rest of the NHL is, and be humbled enough to improve his game over the next year. I got the impression from the Ryan Johnson interview that this is what happened to Juolevi last year. He looks like a different player this year. Paired with a bigger more defensive D, he might make the team this Fall.
  14. Sounds about right. Is he likely to be given decent ice time in this year's pre-season? He can already do things with the puck a lot of our right wingers cannot do. I know he's very young -- and his defensive game is not being talked about as a positive -- but clearly he has that ability to make plays. And we need that very badly. On the pp in the young guns game he looked like a center his vision was so good.
  15. I agree. Will be interesting to see if he understands what he has to do to be successful: better in the cycle game, stop head-hunting. Control the puck and make plays. I think he can do it. Being in shape is huge for him. Will make him more agile, even faster, and more than anything: tell his coach and fellow Canucks that he is committed to becoming a hockey player. A very good sign.
  • Create New...