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

JamesB

Members
  • Posts

    4,523
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

JamesB last won the day on October 25 2023

JamesB had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

10,451 profile views

JamesB's Achievements

Canucks Second-Line

Canucks Second-Line (9/14)

6.2k

Reputation

  1. 1. I have checked out a number of Canuck discussion alternatives. As far as I can tell CFF is by far the best. 2. As for allowing only positive comments, as far as I can see that is incorrect. I have posted both positive and negative comments and have read a lot of positive and negative comments. There is nothing I can see that looks like censorship. If anything, I would say that the rules at CFF are a bit looser than at CDC, although they are similar. Of course mods might disagree with individual posters, as they always have, but that is not the same as censorship. 3. It is too bad Vintage has not moved over to CFF as it was nice to get Canuck information the moment something happened (and sometimes before). Did Vintage work for the Canucks in some capacity? 4. But I think @-SN- and others have done a great job with CFF and I am grateful to them for getting it going.
  2. Dominant performance by the Canucks. Have to give credit to the JR/Alvin organization. They inherited one of the weakest prospect pipelines in the NHL and did not even have a full set of draft picks and somehow have built up a solid pipeline with quite a few guys who have the potential to be useful NHL players. The Canucks have added in guys like Bains, McWard, Hirose, Tolopilo, Bloom and others without needing to draft them. And let's keep in mind that 4 of the top 5 prospects are not even here (Willander, Lekker, Silovs, and DPetey). And, developmentally, the Canucks made a lot of progress last year with guys they inherited who were underpeforming, like Woo and Klim. JR's approach in Van reminds me of what he did in Pittsburgh -- build a lot of good value - low-cost depth around a few elite players. OK, maybe I am overracting to the first game of a young stars tournament but this is a great start to the season.
  3. McWard and Brzustewica have both looked very good. The first line of Sasson, McDonough, and Klim were dominant in the first period and have been very good overall.
  4. Zlodeyev also stood out for me. This is what David Quadrelli (Managing Editor of Canucks Army) wrote: "I read on Twitter just now that his KHL contract was terminated... Faber is going to look into it (he has all the prospect connections)" I would like to Zlodeyev in Abby this year. The problem is that the Canucks are running out of contract space. They have used 46 out of 50 contract spots. Teams have to keep at least a couple of spots open for opportunities/emergencies that might come up in the season and I could see the Canucks maybe signing one of the invitees from the young stars.
  5. The days of the designated fighter are gone. What you need are a bunch of guys who can stand up for teammates when needed and who contribute to overall team toughness. Despite losing Schenn, the Canucks are better on this dimension than last year. As mentioned by @ilduce39, Joshua, Miller, (a healthy) Pearson, Soucy, Cole and Myers all contribute. Matt Irwin (if he makes the team) is no pushover and neither is Podkolzin. And Hogs plays with an edge. Would I like more size and toughness on the team? Sure. But the Canucks are not in bad shape on this dimension.
  6. From what I have read (and from what I remember) this is the earliest start the Canucks have had for many years, and it is first time for many years that pretty much the entire team is skating in Vancouver significantly before camp opens (a full two weeks before). So it is different this time.
  7. This is a good idea. But I noticed other glitches (at least I think they are glitches) on NHL.com websites so I am betting CDC will be okay.I certainly hope so. Even when there is no genuine hockey news and it is late at night someone on CDC will post something interesting, or funny, or crazy, or something.
  8. In various posts over the past several months I have expressed the opinion that I think Myers should be traded as soon he becomes "tradeable" due to paying his bonus on Sept. 15 and I have said that I think that is what the Canucks will do. At this stage, I am revising my opinion. There are three reasons. 1. I thought the Canucks needed cap space to upgrade the 3C position. But the Canucks managed to sign Suter and Bluegar on cheap contracts that fit under the cap without needing to get rid of any significant contracts. 2. It has become clear that Poolman will start the season on LTIR. That was always expected but there was some uncertainty. 3. With Poolman on LTIR, the Canucks can be cap compliant even if Mikheyev and Pearson (and Myers) are on the active roster to start the season, although they would need to have a 22-man roster to do it. But with Abby so close, I do not see a significant problem with going with just 22 guys instead of 23. 4. There is some chance that Mikheyev will not be ready to start the season. If so, he could go on LTIR, eliminating any cap concerns to start the season. When he comes back, assuming everyone is still healthy (which is unlikely) the Canucks can then go to a 22-man roster. 5. While 6M is too high a cap hit for a third pairing D, it is likely that Myers would be a good 3rd pairing RD. His numbers were poor last year, especially on the PK. But with other guys being "first over the boards" on the PK and taking the tougher deployments at 5-on-5, Myers numbers would almost certainly improve. And if Foote and Gonchar can get through to him and make him play a smarter and more conservative game (fewer bad pinches, fewer bad penalties, etc.) he could be quite valuable. There is no-one out there who the Canucks could easily acquire who would be an obvious improvement. And his attitude seems very good right now. I would give him a shot. I would like to see him paired with Wolanin on the 3rd pairing.
  9. Have to agree that the D+! years for Petey and Lekker could not have been more different. Petey's development took off like a rocket while Lekker struggled. However, I would not say Lekker's season was "terrible". It was partially redeemed by his excellent showing in the playoffs. If he had missed the entire regular season and only started in the playoffs we would all be excited about his development. The other point is that Petey was one of the oldest guys in his draft year (mid-Nov. birthday) and Lekker was one of the youngest in his (late July birthday). It would actually make more sense to compare Lekker's D+2 year with Petey's D+1 year. Of course, no one is expecting Lekker's D+2 year in the SHL to match Petey's, but I am still expecting good things.
  10. Just to pile on, one of Myers' biggest flaws is taking penalties. It is strange that taking and drawing penalties get so little attention given that we all understand how important the PP and PK are. Anyway, last year Myers took 27 minor penalties and drew 6 for a horrendous net of -21, by far the worst on the team. The next most prolific taker of minor penalties was Miller, who took 20 minor penalties. But he drew 24 so Miller ends up positive on this dimension. The worst net number after Myers was Schenn, who took 18 and drew 8, for a net of -10, and he provided a lot more hits and a lot more toughness in return for that differential. On the other side of the coin, Petey took 7 minor penalties and drew 39 for a phenomenal +32, which led the NHL. In advanced stats, when you look at what counts for winning and losing, net penalties plays a surprisingly big role.(Faceoff wins, on the other hand, are not as important as most people seem to think, although obviously it is nice to win faceoffs). Myers was also surprisingly bad on the PK, despite the fact that the Canuck PK coach (Yeo) kept sending him "first over the boards" on the PK, he had a very poor expected goals against per 60. (Admittedly, the Canucks did not have a lot good options last year and the PK defence should be much better this year.)
  11. JamesB

    Captaincy

    I would also go with 3 A's. But I see no rush to name a captain. If someone emerges as the obvious choice, great. Otherwise 3 A's is probably better. None of the three top candidates is a natural fit. Petey is on the shy side, does not like interacting with the media and, by all accounts, doesn't really like telling the other guys on the team what to do. With Hughes, I could see the job getting him down. He is a great player but he is not the most upbeat guy in the world to start with. And, as others have said, Miller is too volatile and he has had occasional minor run-ins with other players on the team. And what happens when the media turns on Miller because he is not living up to his contract (which will happen sooner or later). By sharing the load, I think it helps all 3 guys and is good for team. A guy I see as captain down the road is Willander. He seems to have the skills to be a great player and the personality to be a good captain.
  12. I have pretty much the same read as @kloubek. One way of thinking of disappointment is poor performance relative to reasonable expectations. So -- a player I thought might do well but turned out, well, disappointing. I would put OJ and Virtanen and OEL in that category. I did not like either of the picks and I did not like the OEL trade but I thought that all three guys would at least be ok -- bad decisions by Benning, but not disastrous decisions, which is what they turned out the be. The other type of disappointment is the disappointment the moment the move was announced. I remember the moment I learned about the Messier signing. Paying a huge amount of money as a "shortcut" to success never works and signing a guy with a big ego and strong sense of entitlement in his late prime to a huge contract is asking for trouble, which is what the Canucks got. Messier gets my vote overall. Another move where I said "Oh, no" the moment it was announced was the Erkisson move. Of course, everyone knew that Benning was going to throw away a lot of money on at the opening of free agency. To me, the most disappointing "moves" have been the sequence of owners. The combination of Aquilini as owner and Benning as GM was, in my view, the worst one-two combination in the NHL. The question now is whether a good President and GM can overcome a bad owner. I am actually hopeful. And it is a good sign that no move made by JR and PA is even close to consideration for the "worst move" list.
  13. Exactly the same thoughts went through my mind when I heard about the move. I like the signing, but there must be a plan in place to create cap space and it is pretty certain that part of that plan is that Poolman stays on LTIR. The simplest solution for the rest is that Pearson starts the season on LTIR. Otherwise I think moving Myers is the next most likely option. That is why we have not heard about it yet --because we have wait until his bonus is paid on Sept. 15. The third option is to trade a winger. But that won't be easy as the Canucks will need to retain salary or include a draft pick of other asset to make it work.
  14. Sorry for being "that guy", but I am going to say that Hirose is officially "over-hyped". Yes, he looked "cool" on the ice and he made a couple of very nice plays with the Canucks that made highlight reels. But, according to underlying stats, his overall performance was not particularly good. Using Evolving Hockey's GAR (goals above replacement) stat, he was behind Wolanin, McWard, Rathbone, Brisebois, and Juulsen (and Matt Irwin, although Irwin was on a different team), The sample size was small enough that xGAR is probably a better stat to use than GAR, but it is the same story. And his number was negative -- below the level of an expected "replacement-level" player. He is a smart player who handles the puck well (passing and stickhandling) and has good mobility. Those things make him a good puck-carrier. But he light (170 lbs) and lacks the physical strength you would like on a 3rd pairing D. And he is not a particularly fast skater (unlike Hughes, who has good speed to go along with great mobility). Adding things up, Wolanin, Brisebois, and Irwin are more reliable defensively and more able to hold their own in puck battles and in battles for position. I am still happy that the Canucks signed Hirose. He said he needed work on adding strength this summer and that could make a difference. But I think he will need to show strong performance in a long sample in Abby before he is ready for the NHL But is great that the Canucks have a lot of guys who are legitimate contenders to be good NHL defenders now or in the near future. Nice to have competent management after the disaster of the Benning years.
  15. As this has turned into a Silovs thread, I will join in. The thing that is really impressive about Silovs is his rate of improvement. Two years ago he was barely on the radar screen as a 6th round pick with so-so results up to the point, including 10 games for Abby in 2021-22 posting an underwhelming save percentage of 88.8%. But in the IIHF world championships at the end of the 2021-22 season he earned the #1 job for Latvia and played very well. That moved him onto the radar screen for a lot of people. In 2022-23 (last year) he played mainly in Abby. He was ok at the start but just kept improving and handled a call-up to Vancouver well, posing a 90.8 save percentage in 5 games. He was named Abby's MVP for year. And then he went to the IIHF World Championships again were he was fantastic, leading Latvia to their first ever medal and being named tournament MVP. His progress have been outstanding. There is always uncertainty but if his late season performance in Abby and his IIHF performance are anything to go by, he is at least at the quality of an NHL backup right now. Of course, it makes more sense for him to play as the #1 in Abby rather than be a backup in Vancouver. and there is always uncertainty about goalies but right now the Canucks are fortunate to have him.
×
×
  • Create New...