Jason Chen
-
Posts
188 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Jason Chen
-
-
The team already has everyone else's respect as a good team, even if they don't win a cup.
This is all about the fans' sense of entitlement. Once we drop that, then we as a fan base will get respect. It's time for us to restore ours.
That reminds me of another thing - despite all the praises this team has received, this team doesn't have the same respect a Cup-winning team does. Going into round one, if I was a #8 team, would I be more scared of the high-flying Caps and a rested Ovechkin or a struggling Flyers squad? It's a no-brainer, I'm more terrified of the Flyers because I know they've been there and know what it takes while the pressure's on the Caps to perform and I KNOW they can cave under pressure.
It's the same deal with Vancouver. Until we win a Cup, there will always be detractors. Nobody's talking about just how average the Habs team is (asides from Carey Price) because they've gone on long runs and have a trump card in the form of a Cup title from '93.
Criticism comes with the territory of being number one and failing to win important games. The Canucks are in the same boat as the Sharks and Caps.
It's tough to hear about all the whining in this city because Vancouver can be such a bandwagon hockey town and there are tons of Canucks fans who are better than that.
-
Interesting read. I am not too scared in the first round. I would not be surprised with a Canucks 4-0 sweep in the first round regardless of opponent. What would suprise me the most is if the series reached game 6. If I had to pick a team I would "fear" in the first round though, it would be Anaheim with Hiller. Hiller has the ability to steal games on the road, while the line of Ryan-Getzlaf-Perry can bully wins at home. Moreover the revitalized Selanne and underrated Visnovsky make their pp pretty lethal. However even with all that being said, still a relatively easy series win for the Nuckers.
-cheers
For the Ducks, it's all Hiller. No Hiller, no chance. Same deal with the Preds and Pekka Rinne.
-
I'm afraid that you havn't looked far for a skilled Cup winning team.
How about the Beliveau Habs and the Gretsky Oilers? Admittedly the Oilers had Semenko and McSorley, but the were still the most skilled team in the league at their time.
All due respect but you're missing two MAJOR points.
1. Parity. Never has there been as much parity in the NHL. In Beliveau and Gretzky's days, there wasn't this much talent and there wasn't as many teams. I think everyone can agree on that. In a recent interview with Pavel Bure, he said the biggest difference in this league and the days in which he played was the skill level. Paraphrasing Bure: "Guys who are now 200 lbs. can skate like the guys who were 170 lbs. back in the 90s."
2. It's a different league. Beliveau and Gretzky came from distinctly different eras. The CBA signaled a completely different era. Hockey's changed a lot over the past 20 years, from equipment to player types and attributes. It's an unfair comparison to make. It's like saying, "Gretzky would've dominated the league today" or saying "Crosby would've dominated forty years ago because he's so much stronger and bigger compared to the guys from the '70s." It's an utterly useless argument to compare players from different eras.
-
Excuse an awkward question. BUT where was the media and the politicians when Malkin rammed Willie Mitchell head first into the boards? But I forgot, Willie was only a local boy playing for an unknown West Coast team. Malkin was a 'STAR' with an important U.S. team. I feel sorry for Crosby but he should have earned enough that he could retire comfortably. perhaps qualify for university.
This situation is a poor indicator for the playoffs, as the NHL is still trying to sell hockey to ESPN who will be trying to sell the games to joe football in the US, There will be a tendancy to be generous to the teams from US cities, In a country where only one in four high schools teaches geography, who will care about being fair to an unknown team from an obscure Canadian city?
It's all politics. Brian Burke got absolutely FLAMED for his comments comparing Mike Brown and Sidney Crosby. He was right. In any situation, sports, jobs, business, current affairs, politics plays a HUGE role. Should Malkin have been suspended for that hit on Mitchell? I think so - at the very least that was a boarding, a charging, and a game misconduct.
Am I telling you to feel bad for Crosby? Not really, and it's hard to tell anyone to sympathize with a player that earns $8.7 million a year. But keep in mind two things 1) the shelf-life of a pro hockey player isn't very long and the average AHL makes roughly $55,000. It's not bad but with the punishment these guys take it's not exactly fair value so we can't fault them for wanting a lot of money. It's their right. Some players side with reason and others just want to cash in. It's not unlike any opportunist in society. 2) If Crosby retires, this is a huge blow to the NHL. If Mitchell retires, and no disrespect to the local hometown boy, but who cares? Crosby is our generation's generational player. Our parents had Gretzky and our grandparents had Orr.
In regards to generosity, why do you think Atlanta has a team? It's politics. Atlanta is the one of the US' biggest TV markets. Having Atlanta, LA, NY, and Florida makes that much more appetizing for ESPN or Versus to cut a TV deal. They're numbers guys. Gary Bettman and the NHL isn't any different.
-
Another thing, I was going to talk about the number of teams that have won the Cup based on skill alone. (I'll save it for another day - it's worth a post of its own). Hard to really think of one. The Wings, during their glory days, had a supreme Grind Line. The Flyers, Hawks, Penguins, and Wings all have really strong supporting casts. I have yet to see any Ian Laperrieres, Dave Bollands, Max Talbots, or Danny Clearys on this team. Granted, no player is the same, but could you really see Tanner Glass, as good as he has been all year, score the Cup winner like Talbot?
-
Desperation and intensity is certainly a big issue with this club and has been for the past two years. For some reason, when the going gets tough, this team just fades. It's not any singular player or coach's fault, but any fan who watches enough games can see that this team goes through lulls where they just can't do anything right. It's visibly different from Crosby's "I will destroy you" look and Mike Richards' "I'm not quitting" attitude.
You're absolutely right about Vigneault's double-shifting tendencies - I have a feeling by the time Kesler was about to go against Chara he was already gassed from the previous five games.
Is Vigneault a good coach? Certainly, and his track record proves it. But sometimes I wonder.
-
1. Lupul hasn't been successful since the post-lockout season. There's a reason he did not crack Anaheim's top-6 this season and honestly, TO just acquired a more injury-prone version of Stempniak. All that and his upside is worse than Versteeg's.
I have to disagree. If you excuse that horrendous Oilers season, Lupul was a 50-point player before his return to Anaheim where he suffered a back injury and an infection and lost 25 lbs. I think he's a much better player than Stempniak, who thrived in Phoenix in part because Tippett is a better coach and has a better system. Hard to say if Lupul or Versteeg has the higher upside five years down the road, but it certainly looks like Versteeg has the upper hand, if only because he's healthier.
2. Gardiner's a question mark, of course. All prospects who aren't a "can't miss" are. Negatively, i've heard he's got no vision in the offensive zone, but he's got a nice pass out of the zone. So TO should keep their expectations tempered. There's a reason why Fowler skipped well over him in the depth chart. He's likely not a future star, by any stretch.Prospects are hit or miss. Even the "can't miss" ones, miss. Like Alex Daigle and Pavel Brendl. I was watching the Minnesota-Wisconsin game last night and Gardiner certainly needs some work. I can see why people describe him as fluid, because for a tall guy he's got a very smooth stride, but his reaction time just isn't there. The one goal he scored, off a long rebound with a completely out of position goalie, took him about two seconds to coral the puck and shoot it. That's just way too long. He certainly needs to react faster and read the play better. Fowler was an interesting case because he blew everyone away at camp. That's not mentioning that the Ducks blueline was so thin to start. Had Fowler been a Leaf I don't think he would've cracked the lineup as easily - going into the season the Leafs' defense was supposed to be one of their strong points. Hard to say if Gardiner's going to be a star, odds are he won't, but it always seems like any prospect in Toronto is doomed to fail. Same goes for Kadri, who will never live up to the hype.
3. Positively, Beauchemin gets out of TO, where the expectations were far too high for him. Hard to believe that he was utilized on the power play for large stretches, but there he was. He played his best hockey in Anaheim alright... When he was beside Scott Niedermayer. But beside Dion Phaneuf? Not quite as great. In Anaheim he remains overpaid, but Anaheim can still use him for a significant playoff push.
Nobody looks good besides Phaneuf. You either look terrible because he's piling on the points (which he hasn't done since Calgary) or because you're trying to cover his butt on 2-on-1s. Niedermayer was certainly a big reason why he was so good, but Beauchemin was one of the few really consistent Ducks.
4. I said this trade would backfire for the Hawks and so far Frolik still remains a non-factor while Chicago is still losing. Frolik just isn't that good a player and i have doubts that Chicago will even retain him this summer. Skille isn't panning out quickly either, but Dale Tallon has a knack for drafting high quality talent. Whether he pans out in sadsack Florida, however, is unreliant on talent, honestly. NOBODY can pan out there.Chicago is losing because even with Frolik they still don't have the kind of depth they had last year and their goaltending isn't very good. I do believe Frolik will stay in Chicago because there's no use acquiring him if you're not thinking long term. If the Hawks are looking for a playoff push I would've looked at some other more experienced depth players and UFAs, like a Dvorak or even Stillman (cap restrictions aside). Three games isn't a big sample size so I'm willing to give Frolik the benefit of the doubt so far, and Quenneville's been away from the team. Tallon has drafted extremely well in Florida, but that organization's been known to draft some good players. No one pans out in Florida because the fans don't care - as a hockey player you reach a certain point and you question why you're even considering playing hard at all, like Horton and Bouwmeester.
5. Fisher's motives for moving to Nashville are plain. I expect him to ride off into the sunset. Nashville's a dud again this post-season, no matter who they face. They look to lose Weber in the off-season and there is no future offensive superstar on the radar. Meanwhile, Ottawa is starting from scratch. But what of Jason Spezza? If he's moved, i'd expect it to happen in the summer. His contract is just too massive. But wow... If he went to the Kings before the deadline? Yeesh...I'm hopeful Weber stays in Nashville, and while contract talks have stalled I'd be surprised if he takes the Kovalchuk route. I think this is the best Preds team we've seen in quite some time. The much criticized Lombardi and Fisher make a good 2a and 2b centre while I think they have something special in Colin Wilson and Cal O'Reilly. Defense is unquestionably deep because of the way they draft. The only thing that's eluded them is playoff success and if they get home-ice advantage they will win. This is the year. Spezza's an interesting case because he's by far the most talented player on the Sens. I'd give him a new coach and gameplan before I give up on him. Him and Karlsson are the two players I'd be most reluctant to deal based on skill and Alfredsson for sentimental reasons.
6. Anderson is a UFA. Elliott is an RFA. So Ottawa essentially dumps cap space for the summer while Colorado gets a backup locked up for next season without even trying. Done. I expect both teams to perhaps push hard for Vokoun, Bryzgalov and possibly even Howard, who Detroit has yet to lock up. (Because Howard will be the goat if they lose early in the playoffs.)
-
Boston vs Philly is going to be a barn burning conference finals, barring a ridiculous meltdown in the previous couple rounds. Boston definitely won in the short term, but it will be interesting to see how they maneuver the cap moving forwards. Can Philly beat Boston without a top tier goalie? Can Boston beat Philly's deep defense without more legitimate scoring threats?
-cheers
Boston-Philadelphia and Vancouver-Detroit would give the league one it's highest ratings ever. Count it. Philadelphia will hold when Boucher or Bobrovsky gets hot - they made the finals with Boucher and Leighton, which I think is a slightly weaker tandem. I don't think Boston's offense can beat the Flyers' defense - only Milan Lucic has the ability to go one-on-one against Pronger.
-
I would be pretty surprised if T-bay made a big splash. They have a very good thing going. Shaking up their chemistry at the deadline could do more harm than good. Landing Roloson was their big splash of the season. I doubt any of the top teams will be making splashes. I look at teams like LA or SJ who are on the cusp, and 'expected' a playoff spot at the beginning of the season.
-cheers
Any winning team has good chemistry but they definitely are a team that can stand to add an extra body or two. Their depth is weak and the team is buoyed mainly by Stamkos and St. Louis, not unlike the Sharks with their one line, and look what happened to them. Roloson was a good pickup only because he's been lights out since being claimed and wasn't a "big splash" when news first broke. I wouldn't count LA out for a big move but they did already add Marco Sturm earlier in the season - they've got some good depth but some underwhelming performances. SJ will have trouble adding anybody significant and I don't think they'll be making any big moves, unless it involves them giving up on M-E Vlasic.
-
It's possible he could be out for a month, but probably just as possible he could be out for the rest of the season. The reason I say this, is that in the case of this particular ailment, surgery is usually delayed for up to a month to see if the pain goes away by itself. The surgery is performed sooner rather than later if the patient is in extreme pain with his back and/or legs, or is experiencing other... unpleasant... irregularities. If that is the case, for which there really is no way to know, then recovery time may be longer. Since bed rest is the only way to recover after such a surgery, it's possible that he (Edler) might undergo some light physio. Other than that, it would probably take him a couple weeks to get back into game shape. So, I guess, my prediction is 6-8 weeks, but that's making some major assumptions.
Surgery's done and the general belief is that he'll be game-ready in 8-12 weeks, depending on how everything goes. It's a long time but at least it means Edler's surgery is not season-ending.
-
The worst part is that Snow and Wang remain convinced that Nabokov will somehow be persuaded by the city, fans, and team to join them. This is all a farce. The Islanders have repeatedly overrated how well their organization is run. They need to take off those rose-coloured glasses and realize that top players don't want to play for a losing team in a decrepit rink. Even if it is in New York, but that's why you have the Rangers.
-
This is an intentional losing streak, that AV has formulated to lull the oppsition to sleep for the Playoff's, when we lace up and hit them with the element of surprise, one by one on a march to carry the Cup. Brilliant !
Just like Rex Ryan's foot fetish video?
-
That's a bit unfair. Backup goalies shouldn't really in consideration. Although in fact, Mason has been really horrible for Atlanta this year, so based on your own point Pavelec ekes out everyone else (literally Mason's stats are scary at like .892 and 3.78 GAA D:)
Well, his less wins probably is a result of playing way less games. In actuality, the two top pairs of both teams are a lot closer tan you think. I've created a little list:
Lydman and Visnovsky
total blocked shots: 172
total hits: 119
combined +/- = 31
excess giveaways: 38
Enstrom and Byfuglien
total blocked shots: 141
total Hits: 96
combined +/- = 9
Excess giveaways: 13
So, in nearly every single category except giveaways the Ducks' D is in the lead. I don't buy the argument that Hiller has a weaker D.
Also, the fact that the Atlanta D is much more higher scoring whilst having worse +/- probably indicates the Thrashers are overmatched 5 on 5, which is not good for Pavelec's win potential. Again, proving he's playing in a harder situation.
I guess I will have to disagree with the italicized sentence. I think that team achievements are team achievements. So, if a guy manages to score 50 goals on a team without any decent centre, he has had a more valuable season than a guy who scores 60 playing with Sidney Crosby. I guess that's my outlook. Your argument about not making the playoffs is also wrong, in my mind. Why stop there? Why not just give the Vezina to the goalie who wins the cup? After all, that is the ultimate goal and he has had the most success. What's to stop me from disqualifying all forwards who don't play in the Stanley Cup Final? Your argument can be taken to some absurd levels, which makes it considerably weaker. When Ottawa beat New Jersey in 2007, did that mean Emery had outplayed or is/was better than Brodeur? Of course not, anyone who watched that series can attest. We'll have to just agree to disagree.
Okay, but that's somewhat a moot point; when I was referring to being an 'offensive juggernaut' I meant a nearly point-per game season; something that Mike Green has achieved twice in his career. Byfuglien and Lidstrom are also on pace to do that this year. Chara had 50 points the year he won; it's very unlikely that sort of production would lead the league. Heck, Edler is on pace for 50 points this season and no one is going around screaming "OMG EDLER IS DA OFFENSIVE BOMB".
You make some great points here; I am beginning to understand some of your reasoning. I do have a candidate who fits my criteria, for best 'unheralded' Norris candidate: Stephane Robidas. I won't bother describing his stats but he's had some interesting numbers playing for a Dallas club which isn't exactly known for having good defenseman, nor for playing a defensive style (Remember Crawford?).
Well I certainly think my question poses an interesting challenge. I do think Mark Streit had a great season two years ago where he was a +6 on a horrible Isles team, and he had more than 50 points. (I just checked, he was +5 with 56 points! He led the team in scoring. He also had 100+ blocked shots AND hits. He had 17 excess takeaways, which isn't all that bad considering he played 25 minutes a game on that horrible team.)
No one every talked about him, and the fact he makes only 4.1 m would attest to the genius of that signing. It's too bad we couldn't have acquired him; for that money he would be a great addition to our team.
I'd just like to mention that I do like your blog posts; having a good debate is always fun for me. Hope to see more from you Jason. Cheers.
Hiller has 22 wins in 39 starts, Pavelec has 15 in 30. And I think the Ducks are in a tougher conference with a significantly weaker defense. Anaheim: Visnovsky, Lydman, Fowler, Lilja, Mara, Mikkelson, Sutton, Sbisa, Brookbank. Atlanta: Byfuglien, Bosogian, Enstrom, Oduya, Sopel, Hainsey. The Thrashers have a much better defined top six with two players garnering Norris talks, two dependables in Oduya and Sopel (I thought I'd never say that for Sopel, but he was great with Chicago), a potential franchise player in Bogosian, and an overpaid yet still playable Hainsey. The Ducks have a great PP QB in Visnovsky, two journeymen vets in Lydman and Lilja, a blue chipper in Fowler, and a mish-mash of no. 6 and 7 defenseman. I would take the Thrashers' defense in a heartbeat over Anaheim's.
The Vezinas, Harts, Jack Adams, etc. are based on regular season play, which, in a way, makes the case for the Conn Smythe as the most important individual trophy. Some goalies are great during the season but absolutely look lost in the playoffs, like Evgeni Nabokov, a Vezina finalist but not a playoff winner. The reason I would never consider giving a MVP to a losing/non-playoff team is because if he really is THAT good, his team should be in the playoffs. Pretty simple. A player who scores 50 with a decent centre is far superior than a Petr Sykora-type who scores 60 with Crosby, but in that scenario that MVP obviously goes to Crosby, and if you score 50 goals and you can't make the playoffs, then I wonder about what kind of player you may be (an Ovechkin? a Kovalchuk? In other words, not a winner). I think my biggest case in point is Kovalchuk, actually. Without him in the lineup Atlanta is considerably weaker, and he is one of the most talented players in the league, but never in a million years would he get my MVP vote. And more often than not, teams that deserve to be in the finals (Pittsburgh, Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago the past 2-3 years) don't necessarily rely just on their goaltending. Teams that really don't deserve to be there, the Ducks with Babcock, Edmonton and Carolina in 2006, have done it with amazing goaltending. It should be no surprise then, that in those years the Conn Smythe were given to goalies (although Brind'Amour should've won it over Ward, but that's another argument. Zetterberg, Malkin, Toews were the MVPs all other years. The only exception I would make for goalies is Patrick Roy, because he is the best goalie in NHL history.
Green is in a class of his own. Like I said, if you're a defenseman that regularly plays against top opposition and top PK, as Girardi does, and still put up a decent number of points (only 24 totaled over 40 points last year, that's less than 1 per team) you're great in my books. Nobody has had the same offensive output Green has since... well, I think the 80s. He's putting far superior numbers than all of his generational peers. Edler is not an offensive juggernaut, but he is a threat. Much like how Salo doesn't put up 50, 60, or 70 points, his offensive game does change the dynamic of the game and special teams.
Robidas is good, but he's up and down a lot. I frankly think he's overrated because Crawford (an offensive wizard, a defensive cement head) can't put anyone else in other situations. He's got Daley, Niskanen, and Grossman down the road but Robidas' his best option. I was a little shocked Robidas got invited to the Canada camp in 2009.
I'm glad you brought up Mark Streit. He is FANTASTIC. I couldn't believe it when the Habs let him go and he chose to go to Long Island (obviously not a winning team, but perhaps the pull of living in NY was too much). He's one of the most underrated players in the league. His defensive game isn't polished enough to be Norris material, but he's great offensively and defensively he does his job.
(I think his BS stats were inflated in NY because like Robidas in Dallas, the Isles didn't have anyone else. In neither year Streit did crack the top 30 in league blocked shots. This is a little different from Girardi, whose given the opportunity based on his playing style/skill AS WELL AS need (weak depth - brackets within brackets - I've reached a new low) and has excelled. Girardi was 6th in the league last year and will probably finish 1st this year).
I was wondering what was going on in Montreal's front office in 2008 when Streit put up 62 points and still let him go. I think what worked against him were 3 things: 1) people think Streit's numbers were a byproduct of Kovalev's play, when really I think it's the opposite, 2) that team also had Komisarek, Markov, and Hamrlik (overrated), three players who garner much more attention than Streit because they're not Swiss and have become big names by then, 3) Montreal's had enough experience with offensive defensemen like MA Bergeron, Brisebois, and perhaps they thought Streit was just another one of those. I'm not sure what happened, but that 2008 squad has no resemblance to their squad today anyway. Only 2 players from the 2008 squad that were top ten in team scoring remain (Plekanec, Kostitsyn).
And, most importantly, thanks for reading.
-
Props to you for bringing up a few interesting/off-the-board candidates, but I can't say I agree with you on most of your picks. Couture and Kesler are very reasonable choices for the Calder and Selke respectively, but I highly doubt we'll see Dan Girardi picking up the Norris at the end of the year (he has been VERY solid though).
We will never see Girardi win the Norris. Same goes for Edler. If either even get a third place vote I'd be ecstatic. It's rather unfortunate that the award has almost been deteriorated to "defenseman with the most points" award but that's the way she goes. I'm still appalled how many people think Byfuglien deserves consideration, even though it's quite clear he's not even the best defensively on his team.
My picks have been unconventional and somewhat controversial (intended... to spark some conversation) but hopefully I've shown enough that the logic seems sound (if you've managed to plow throw all those words).
Cheers.
-
How the hell did you come up with these nominations.
First, Crosby will win the Hart. Its not even a question.
For the Norris. GIRARDI? EDLER? Yah they are good players, but nowhere near Norris quality. Ever heard of a guy named LIDSTROM? And Byfuglien definitely deserves Norris contention as well. Even Enstrom. Over all the players you mentioned.
At least the Calder nominations are alright.
For the Jack Adams, Trotz should really win it. He is the only coach who is able to do so much with such little talent consistently. Guy Boucher is up there as well.
Crosby will win the Hart if he doesn't miss an extended period of time. I already said he's the best player in the league. That concussion, if long-term, hurts his chances.
I've already covered the Norris and Byfuglien is an afterthought for that category - he shouldn't be a serious contender. Has his play and production been any different from Mike Green's, who is already unworthy of those two nominations he's garnered in his career?
I've already covered Trotz in the comment above. Others to consider: Craig Ramsay, Claude Julien, Mike Babcock, Marc Crawford, Dave Tippett, to varying degrees. Just so I have my bases covered.
-
That's a great point, that Anaheim's SA/G (34.2) is second worst in the league, although it's negligible because Boston isn't far behind with 33.8 SA/G, which is fourth worst. Both Hiller and Thomas have been fantastic, but I think Hiller has done more with less. He's kept the Ducks competitive and has been forced to play much more than Thomas because McElhinney has been much, much worse than Hiller or Rask. He's logged the second-most minutes and appeared in the most games. The Vezina should be awarded to the goalie most valuable to his team and that's Hiller. Stick Rask in net and the Bruins would still be pretty good. The same can't be said about Anaheim with McElhinney.
Byfuglien and Enstrom equal to Anaheim's top pairing (pick your two of Fowler, Visnovsky, Lydman)? I don't think so. Atlanta's pair has combined for 81 points while Fowler and Visnovsky have combined for 60 and -5 combined. I should clarify that "(Byfuglien and Enstrom)" means that Pavelec is helped out by the highest scoring defensive duo in the league this year, something Hiller cannot say. The Thrashers aren't a great defensive team but they have arguably two of the best 'pickpocket' players in the league in Burmistrov and Little. What really hurts Pavelec is his wins (15, 18th) and given that he and Hiller have very similar GAA/SV% numbers, I'm going with Hiller.
LA is not playing well, but they are a good team. They've got great pieces and have been in a little bit of a slump. Quick has been good but he's not outplaying Hiller, Thomas, Luongo, Fleury, Lundqvist, or even Ward... There's plenty of better candidates (some I haven't mentioned) to choose from.
I love that you brought up Trotz because I've been saying he's one of the best coaches in the league. I've said that repeatedly. Trotz regularly turns chicken sh*t into chicken salad but I think he's had better years in the past. He's got some good, young talent this year (Cal O'Reilly, Cody Franson, Colin Wilson) and the only way he will ever be considered by the media is if they unseat the Red Wings (unlikely). However, I feel that the three guys I've named are more worthy. Boucher has turned TB around and they're no longer a joke. The Flyers made the playoffs last year as an 8th seed in a shootout but Laviolette has them sitting first in the East. AV has distanced the Canucks even further from their competition. They've done outstanding jobs so far. You could also make the case for John Tortorella, who like Trotz has turned into a rather average roster into a pretty good team.
When I picked the Selke/Norris winners, team PK was considered, but not the defining factor. If that had been the case it would've been easy to pick Letang for the Norris and Talbot/Adams for the Selke. PK is more a reflection of team play, I totally agree, but that doesn't mean PK should be thrown out the window. It should be, at the very least, taken into consideration. I will never pick a Selke/Norris player on a team with a pitiful PK, just as it's stupid to pick a MVP from a losing/non-playoff team.
I knew I was going to take some heat for Girardi but here's my logic explained further. Hopefully it makes sense.
First, Big Z. He's a great player. One of the best defenceman in the league. The season Chara won the Norris was 2008-09 and he WAS an offensive juggernaut. His second consecutive 50-point season and 11 powerplay goals, a career high. Has he been as vital to Boston's defence as Girardi has been to his? I don't think so. (More later).
Second, Lidstrom. I'm going to ignore the "retirement prize" argument because we're not throwing awards away. Is Lidstrom still good? Yes, in a pick-up game I'd probably pick him over everyone. But he does give away the puck. He has 17 recorded giveaways. He's not flawless, and comparing this season to year's past, he just hasn't been as good. Sometimes I think his reputation, not unwarranted, precedes him, but I think other players have been better this year. Case in point, Datsyuk winning the Selke last year, when I think, quite convincingly, Kesler was the superior two-way player.
Third, Bieksa. We're going to have to agree to disagree because I do think Edler's a more well-rounded defenceman. Bieksa's been great but he struggled early in the season while Edler's been his usual, quiet, dependable self.
On Girardi... Tortorella's teams thrive on playing the body and blocking shots. It's a big reason why they have such a stingy defence and a good PK. And the best player on their team at doing that is Girardi. The Rangers rely on him and Staal (wasn't considered because I think Girardi's been better, both offensively and defensively) more so than the B's on Chara and the Wings on Lidstrom. The B's have 4 players who average more than 2 minutes per game on the PK: Chara, Ference, Stuart, and Boychuk. The Wings have 2 with more than 3 minutes (Lidstrom, Stuart) and 2 with more than 2 minutes (Kronwall, Salei). The Rangers have 2 with more than 3 minutes (Girardi, Staal) but everyone else plays half that, with Rozsival (traded, so now Sauer) and Eminger rounding out the top 4. Because the Rangers' second unit PK is so weak (Eminger and Sauer... seriously?), Tortorella has had to rely much more heavily on his top pair than Babcock or Julien. Giradi's blocked shots and hits make up a higher % of the Rangers' total output than anyone else for their respective teams (as the chart clearly shows). Overrated by the defence beside him (laughable, other than Staal) and the goalie behind him? The Rangers do have Lundqvist, but Thomas and Howard have been good as well. It's not like Lundqvist is significantly better than either.
"Why not choose a defenseman who manages to be great defensively on an defensively challenged team? That would indicate a better talent."
Because there's no one worthy of picking from Atlanta, Edmonton, Tampa Bay, Colorado, or the Islanders. A defensively challenged team has nobody that has been great defensively. I would rather much rather pick the defensive MVP on a good defensive team, one that obviously doesn't work by committee, but rather an alpha dog top pair/player. And picking a defenseman who manages to be great defensively on a defensively challenged team may be an indication of TALENT (still very unlikely), but not PRODUCTION.
-
You can't please everybody. It's their choice whether they come out or not. Although such a gesture may exist with other teams in the league, I find it outrageous that you would be offended by something like this.
It is absolutely their choice. There are no league or team sanctioned consequences for not coming out. All I'm saying is that they should because it goes a long way. The most memorable athletes are the ones that connect most with fans, even if it is negative (Ron Artest at Auburn Hills, anyone?). I'm not offended, but certainly perplexed and annoyed.
-
I'm not so sure how far back players have come out for a twirl, but I have seen Joe Sakic doing it when he played against Vancouver in the mid to late 90s. At GM Place.
Habs players get rousing ovations when they come out for their twirls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR52egOoFC8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqHuTn3ECKE
In the second clip PK Subban even flips his stick to a kid. You're telling me it doesn't make a difference? I beg to differ.
Showing up for charity events is one thing, and the Canucks earn top, top marks for that, but that's away from the game. If you lose a shutout, don't moan and groan and get all moody. Thank the fans a little for cheering you on for 60 minutes.
-
The 3-stars is hardly rooted in tradition.
Honestly...i really like your blogs...but you sound a bit petulant and reeking of self-entitlement.
I go to the games for the games...not for a 3 star dog and pony show.
People really need to get off of this non-issue, including you.
The 3-star selection, although it has gone through numerous transformations, were first introduced in 1936, on HNIC, no less. It has been around for over 70 years, so yes, I do think it's a tradition.
In the grand scheme of things, yes, winning some games trumps this relatively small issue, but it's these little things that bug me. Call me obsessive (I just might be), but I think it's always these little things that tell us a lot about a player.
-
Is this rant really necessary? Aren't you happy about the success this year?
After a tough loss, do the fans really care about the 3 stars?
Especially this year where it's Stanley Cup or Bust.
I'd take a win over seeing them coming back on the ice.
And your Prima-Donna comment???
Get your priorities straight.
Prima-donnas don't spend as many hour at the children's hospital as the Canucks do.
They have given so much to this community so let's cut them a break as they try their best this year.
You've completely missed the point. I'm absolutely happy with the wins and being at the top of the league. My previous post lauded this squad and named it the best ever in franchise history.
After a tough loss, believe it or not, there are fans who do care about the three stars. You may not care, but there are those who do. Even if there's only one, the players should at least acknowledge them. It goes a long way. I know from personal experience. It's these small differences that separate the great from the good. I don't think Steve Yzerman has ever not come out. Same goes for Lemieux or Gretzky.
Read between the lines - Luongo didn't come out because he was so upset he lost his shutout bid. Maybe management didn't bother telling him to come out but he should've known. Ballard was horrified - he knew the tradition and the consequences. It's not about who wins or who loses, it's about having respect for the game and the fans. Like MacIntyre said, if no one cares, then why bother with the award? Why bother with the damn Molson Cup? Obviously it's not the Vezina or Jennings, but it means SOMETHING, no?
The same criticism goes for the Pens during the Winter Classic. No handshake. Sure, it's just another regular season game but it had become tradition by then.
The Canucks do great work with the Children's Hospital. People who work for the organization are fantastic - on occasion I've met quite a number of them. Just because they're playing their best doesn't mean I'm going to give them a break. Same rule applies even if they're the NJ Devils. I don't care how well you play, show some appreciation. Is it hard being a professional athlete? Absolutely. Are they worth millions? I think so, it's hard to completely justify them not to. But just because they don't want/like to do something doesn't mean they don't have to. They're professionals. I think they should know better. Hockey players are known as one of the most classy athletes in the world. Right now it just looks like they don't care.
-
Getzlaf played for the Hitmen, not the Rebels.
Good catch. I don't know what I was thinking there.
-
Lol @ whoever thinks Samuelsson can stick handle. The guy ranks so far down the Canuck's depth chart in terms of "hands". I would take Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Tambellini, and Raymond over him in terms of stick handling. I also agree completely about his missed shots. I have never seen a guy miss so many wrist shots in my life. They either sail 4 feet wide or 10 feet high. I think he has lost several steps over the last couple seasons, and really just benefited from some hot line mates last season. His second half hot streak was an exception, not the rule.
Question, if you could go back to the 2003 draft and "re-pick" our 23rd selection, do we take Mike Richards or Ryan Kesler?
-cheers
Kesler for me as well. His offensive game is much better than Richards' this season. Like I said, there's no way Richards is anything but a Flyer.
-
Samuelsson a bad stickhandler? He's probably the best on the team. Get your facts straight and take off your glasses.
Best? No way. Both Sedins, Kesler, Burrows, Ehrhoff, Tambellini, maybe even Raymond, are better than Samuelsson at handling the puck.
Watch Samuelsson closely. He gives away an awful lot of pucks and his passes are never tape to tape, even if his teammate is 5 ft. in front of him.
-
being sat for 3 games shouldnt kill ANY rookies season... if it does, then the problem stems a little deeper than his (subbans) trash talk...
Subban's looked better since but he certainly wasn't very good against Detroit or Toronto. He's going to make mistakes and if Martin benches him again for the same reasons as he did last time then I question the Habs' handling of Subban. That Flyers game, a team he has had a history with, gave him a little more jump.
Public Enemy Number One
in Bleeding Blue and Green
A blog by Jason Chen in General
Posted
I agree, this year's playoffs is going to hard to predict (more on that in the future playoff post) but for various reasons (Kesler's emergence, blueline depth, rested Luongo).
However, going back to 2004, when the Canucks started to string together division banners, the team has never made it past the semifinals. Divison banner years in 2004, 2007, 2009, 2010, have resulted in two upsets and in the two losses against higher seeds (#2 Ducks in 2007, #2 Hawks in 2010), the Canucks have only one three games combined (combined score 14-7, I think). And in that 2007 first-round series against Dallas, we got really lucky because we should've lost and had no business of being in the second round against the Ducks either. There's also the manner in which we've lost as well, and the last two years have been ugly (5-1, 7-5). It certainly has looked like we don't belong.
I think the same can be said about the Sharks and Capitals. They just don't look like they belong despite being regular season monsters.