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

Grape

Members
  • Posts

    3,233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Grape

  1. I've never seen a team defend as poorly as the Jets and yet have 0 GA halfway through the third. Almost every player on our team has had a good chance.
  2. Wish the Sedins could've practiced this with how long they spent behind the net.
  3. The Jets have not been good defensively at all. A lot of chances to be had.
  4. Man when Marky starts off cold you can tell... Gotta pull him earlier in these situations
  5. Agreed, we out shot and outchanced them. Not great luck so far, and Marky hasn't been the savior he usually is.
  6. They're converting their opportunities, we're not. It's as simple as that. They've been just as leaky defensively as we have.
  7. Not sure we'd be even average without Hughes and Miller too. It goes both ways. The four of them combined have lifted the Canucks out of an abyss. All four of them are just as important as each other IMO. Horvat, Boeser, and maybe Edler are close behind.
  8. Disgusted at how Calgary is -9 in goal differential and at the top of the Pacific. Only in Hockey. 

    1. Where's Wellwood

      Where's Wellwood

      They've played two more games than us and have one more win and one more OTL. Our goal differential is 17 goals better. So either, we've won by a lot more games than them, they've lost by a lot more games than us, or both.

    2. Gaudette Celly

      Gaudette Celly

      Either they'll improve it or they'll come back down to where they belong.

  9. I agree, but it’s also depends on where you’re building the muscle. I don’t see him getting quicker if he’s trying to build certain areas of upper body strength. I think that’s a deviation from what’s made him elite so far.
  10. Speaking of his physical game, I'd rather QH stay the way he is now rather than gain weight. I think an extra 10 pounds of muscle will actually hinder his offensive game more than improve his defensive game. His defensive game is the way it is: being 180 pounds instead of 170 won't really effect whether he's able to deal with Draisaitl/McDavid or Pacioretty/Stone better, especially because much of his defensive game based on being quick. Being 180 pounds though will affect his speed, which can hinder QH both offensively and defensively. I'd be careful if I were him.
  11. Agreed. He’s arguably been our most impactful forward. He doesn’t get the credit because he isn’t one of the “young guys.” In reality he’s barely older than Horvat, which is good, because it makes it more likely that he can sustain his level of play for us for the next 5 years at least.
  12. Chuckled at the joke but also somewhat understand the response. I think ktcy2 is being a little too outraged here; it's not a comedy forum but it's a forum nonetheless and people will make will crack jokes, doesn't make them inherently racist if they're just having fun with it. That being said, "it was a joke," or "get a sense of humour" is an overused and sometimes very ignorant defense to making a racial/sexual remark; there's also probably a double standard that it's okay to make fun of certain races but not others. I have nothing to do today so I'm out here commenting on an argument LOL
  13. Love the use of goal differential as a better judgement of ability; I believe that GD is generally a better judgement of ability than points. With that being said, our goal differential has involved quite a bit of puck luck this year so far (there are metrics for this too), and so while I believe it to be accurate to say we’ve been much better than those teams this year so far, we haven’t been 24 goals better. I see it this way, point totals in the standings involve game luck (you could blowout your opponents in wins but lose a lot of close games). The Canucks have had bad game luck. However, to mitigate game luck as a factor, you look at Goal Differential. GD involves the aforementioned puck luck. The Canucks have had good puck luck. To mitigate puck luck as a factor you look at a bunch of advanced stats. Since we’ve had bad “game luck” and good “puck luck,” I believe our current record of just above .500 is indicative of how good we are. Bc of this I would put us in the 4th out of your 8 categories. Just my 2 cents
  14. Man relax. We’re all just posters with different opinions. You’re getting way too defensive and arrogant with you’re posts (not just this one). You make a generalization about NHL players that has nothing to do with my aforementioned points. Yes, most peak around 25 but you act like that applies for everybody. You also act as if what you get back from a trade has nothing to do with how good the player is; if you’re trading away a top 25 scorer you’re going to get high value. I also said the exact opposite of personally wanting to trade Boeser so not sure what your issue is here. I respect your opinion but you’re going backwards with this argument instead of forward by rebutting mine. By that I mean that I can literally just copy and paste my exact previous post to counter your argument, but I’m too lazy to do so.
  15. I don't want to give up Brock for emotional reasons as I love him as a player and person, but I wouldn't be mad if we got a lot value for him. If I had to bet on someone potentially declining in the following years, it would be Brock. His physical tools seem like they've diminished since his rookie year and may further do so of no fault of his own (injuries). And yet, he's maintaining a PPG pace as you said as a 22 year old. As a result, his value is EXTREMELY high, but as diehard fans who watch him every night, you can sort of tell that he's not necessarily the same player, and you can have a hint of doubt that he may not ever get his rookie year physical tools back. That makes him a player who you can potentially trade now, and look back and say: "wow we didn't expect that trade to turn out so well." Again, not advertising it for my own sentimental reasons and none of the above is definitive of course, but if we were to explore trades I wouldn't be mad either.
  16. Hate on it all you want, what is said in the OP is mostly true. We’ve been relatively lucky to string along wins for the past 10 games, just like we were unlucky that we didn’t have a better record to start the season playing as well as we did. Overall, our record is almost exactly indicative of our performance this season as things have balanced out. However, It’s no question that if we keep playing defensively the way we have that this is not sustainable. One would be delusional to think this type of defensive play is sustainable.
  17. I watch 100% of our games 100% of the time on reddit.
  18. I only watched the 2nd and 3rd, so I probably only saw the good parts. That being said, we did look fine offensively. Hockey is a stupid game sometimes with so much luck and bounces involved. We deserved the win as much as the Sharks and it just didn't happen.
  19. Except that didn't happen and I'm not sure why you're being passive aggressive about it. The Sharks were pressing in the zone very well and we were just trying to get out of it into clean possession. If the guys stood on the perimeter passing for 40 seconds like the Sedins used to do sometimes, then yes, that would be the problem. They took what they could out of that powerplay and got 3 really good chances. I think you're the one that's not seeing clearly
  20. We shot it plenty of times. You can't just shoot aimlessly when there's no lane, especially on the powerplay. You're just giving the puck away if you do that. That was a good PP. Just didn't convert.
  21. He's getting a little older and injuries have taken a toll I think. Just not as effective as he used to be.
×
×
  • Create New...