Pyrene Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 It took ten months, 87 games, a goalie controversy and several trades, but the Canucks find themselves beginning this offseason in just about the exact same place they began the last one. Minus the revenue from three more playoff series, of course. The Canucks are the team that can’t score. Not in the playoffs, anyway. A year ago, they were the lowest scoring team in Stanley Cup finals history. This year, they are the lowest-scoring team in the first round. A year ago, they couldn’t get to the middle of the ice, failed to get shots off from the slot and couldn’t exploit rebounds. This year, it was the same story. So, no, Samme Pahlsson may not have been the best acquisition. Not for a team that has 16 goals in its last 13 playoff games. Not for a team that has lost eight of its last ten postseason games. Not for a team that had one forward, Henrik Sedin, who scored in its final three playoff games. Not for a team which scored just 2.2 goals a game for two months. Sure, a winger who could jell with Ryan Kesler could help. But does one even exist? They still need size up front, an issue the trade for David Booth did not fix. And, of course, a No. 1 defenceman would make everything easier. Good luck with that one. But the Canucks are also suddenly in the market for an identity. Somewhere, let’s say the end of February, they got off the highly-skilled train. To get back on is going to take some moves, and the team has to at least consider it may be easier with a new coach. There’s a reason Scotty Bowman is the only coach in the past 20 years to win a Stanley Cup coaching the same team for more than four years. Change can be a heck of a motivator. The average number of years a Cup-winning coach has been with his team is 2.35. After his sixth year in Vancouver, Alain Vigneault’s regular season record is so impressive, it’s inconceivable to ignore. But his team has horribly underwhelmed in each of its past two playoff series. It may be fair for the Canucks to respond to that by pointing to the Vezina-level goaltending from Tim Thomas and Jonathan Quick who beat them. But what did the Canucks have this year in the first round? Three players show up for the playoffs. Maybe four. Alex Edler has never been worse. The Edler-Kevin Bieksa pairing was over-matched. Booth was out of his element with the Sedins and got worked badly in the deciding game. Chris Higgins played confused, seemingly unsure if he was supposed to be focused on scoring goals or checking. He did neither well. The power play was ill-prepared and cost the Canucks Game 2. The most telling periods were the first in Game 4 and the third in Game 5. They were the two most critical 20-minute stretches in the Canucks season and in both the team was a washout. It was controlled and outplayed. This April looked a lot like last June. If Vigneault can’t get the Canucks to show up, management has to consider the idea that maybe there is someone who can. That Boston Bruins team which beat the Canucks last year? They’re not a great team. They needed seven games to beat the Montreal Canadiens. They needed seven games to beat the Tampa Lightning. And this year, they need a seventh game on Wednesday to beat the Washington Capitals. Yet, they were by far the best team in their series against the Canucks. They have an identity and in that Stanley Cup final, Claude Julien’s players were playing like they’d put their heads through steel. You don’t even have to look very far to find what the Canucks should be. Just a couple of months ago, they were the uptempo, puck possession team with three scoring lines and two good power play units. Since the trade deadline, they’ve been floating in limbo. What are they now? They are a team that scored just 2.2 goals a game since the deadline. And if the Canucks aren’t scoring goals, just what are they doing? They are not physical enough to wear opponents down. They don’t block enough shots. They don’t hit a lot. They lack grit. They back check when they feel like it. Ask Roberto Luongo about that one. They don’t have the size in their top six to out-battle even the B-grade defensive blueliners like Willie Mitchell. If you’re the St. Louis Blues, the Nashville Predators or the L.A. Kings and you hear the Canucks saying they want to win 1-0 games, you are at home doing your best Marv Albert impression in the mirror. “Yessss!” The Canucks aren’t going to out-check the Predators in a seven-game series. It’s just not the way they’re constructed with their core players. Trying to do it only levels the playing surface. jbotchford@theprovince.com © Copyright © The Province Read more: http://www.theprovin...l#ixzz1t0EDf3Jq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blömqvist Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I was just about to write up a long-winded thread about the Canucks' identity too! F it I'll just post it here lol. I agree with Botchford that we need to carve our own identity. Our team is like a confused teenager. We're not entirely too sure about ourselves. Who are we? What are we? Questions and insecurities that a cup-contending team shouldn't have. But at the same time, it's necessary to ask these questions before we can make a proper run to the Stanley Cup. Consider this: Alain Vigneault is a systems coach. When he first came here the Canucks thrived on their defensive trap system and stellar goaltending. Think of it as a Predators team. The Canucks had a great core of defenders in Mitchell, Bieksa, Ohlund, and Salo, and an MVP and Vezina calibre goalie in Luongo. The Sedins, although good players, were not considered to be "elite" players in the league and as such, many complained that we'd never win a cup under that system. At the time, the playoffs were being dominated by offensive systems such as Anaheim, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Chicago. Fast forward a couple of years, and Canucks general manager Mike Gillis crafts his team to match that offensive style. Out goes defensive stalwarts Willie Mitchell and Mattias Ohlund, and in comes smooth-skating and quick passing Christian Ehrhoff, Keith Ballard, and Dan Hamhuis. Gillis also signs several offensive-minded forwards, including Mats Sundin, Mikael Samuelsson, and the late Pavol Demitra. Add to the mix the offensive emergence of Ryan Kesler and Alex Burrows and back to back Art Ross winners in Henrik and Daniel Sedin and Vancouver hockey suddenly became exciting again -- reminiscent of the West Coast Express era, but with an actual goaltender. This core group of players, still coached under Alain Vigneault, came 60 minutes away from the franchise's first ever Stanley Cup. The team they lost to, ironically enough, was a team that the Canucks spent years fine-tuning to be exactly the opposite of: The Boston Bruins. The big bad Bruins, run by a defensive trap system coached under Claude Julien, physically dissected the Canucks and shut down their top players with great defense and even greater goaltending. The series ended in a game seven shutout, and the Canucks left wondering how they could get so close, yet be so far at the same time. The offseason and subsequent trade deadline moves by Canucks GM Mike Gillis tried to address those questions of why the team lost in the finals to the Bruins. Gillis let go of offensive players in favour of big and physical players with a mean streak. The Canucks, to his belief, were better suited for the playoffs. The Canucks, moulded by Gillis which influences Vigneault's coaching style, are a hybrid of both high-end skill and transition game, and physicality, defence, and goaltending. However, the landscape of the Stanley Cup playoffs changed as the first round comes to an end. The offensive powerhouses in Pittsburgh, Vancouver, San Jose, Detroit, and Chicago were all ousted in the first round to defensive teams, with the exception of Philadelphia. Playoff games are tighter, rougher, and have more at stake. Accordingly so, the referees are reluctant to call penalties and decide games, and as such the penalties that would've been called in the regular season do not get called in the playoffs (add to that the consistency of the inconsistency of supplemental discipline, but that's another story altogether). It seems, as anyone can conclude, that the playoffs are currently favouring physical defensive teams. The physicality wears down opponents, and the clutching, grabbing, and slashing that slows down offensive stars aren't being penalized. The landscape of the playoffs is changing, and with an early exit, should the Canucks change with it? The Canucks have all the pieces to carve their own identity. Even moreso, they can trade away a few assets or make a change in management if they feel the need to. What their identity is, or will become, remains to be seen. Will the Canucks revert back to a defensive system that is favoured by current head coach Alain Vigneault? Will the Canucks fire their most winningest head coach? Will the Canucks fire their innovative mastermind Mike Gillis? Will the Canucks change a few pieces of their core? What will the Canucks do with their goaltending situation? When will the Canucks finally figure out who they are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Carell Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 It seems to me that the 'skilled team' is moot nowadays. Look at the western conference teams in the 2nd round of the playoffs this year: St Louis, Phoenix, Nashville, LA. ALL Defence-first teams. Now look at the teams who are not in the 2nd round: Vancouver, Detroit, Chicago, San Jose. All teams which pride themselves on their ability to score goals. Also, the Canucks, who were the most skilled and offensively proficient team in the league last year, were unable to score against a defensive-minded Boston team, who on paper seemed significantly inferior to the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brahma Bull Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 It seems to me that the 'skilled team' is moot nowadays. Look at the western conference teams in the 2nd round of the playoffs this year: St Louis, Phoenix, Nashville, LA. ALL Defence-first teams. Now look at the teams who are not in the 2nd round: Vancouver, Detroit, Chicago, San Jose. All teams which pride themselves on their ability to score goals. Also, the Canucks, who were the most skilled and offensively proficient team in the league last year, were unable to score against a defensive-minded Boston team, who on paper seemed significantly inferior to the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The Canucks need to drop the "Detroit model" and create their own identity. This team needs to be a hybrid that could play run n gun and play phyiscal. The Twins are screaming for protection, Keith Kassian is a good start at changing this iddenity, I hope theres a few more deals this summer to bring in more size and muscle in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrene Posted April 24, 2012 Author Share Posted April 24, 2012 I was just about to write up a long-winded thread about the Canucks' identity too! I agree with Botchford that we need to carve our own identity. Our team is like a confused teenager. We're not entirely too sure about ourselves. Who are we? What are we? Questions and insecurities that a cup-contending team shouldn't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The core's been intact for years. The coach has been here for years. And yet the team doesn't have an identity? Please. If anything, the team might stand to become a bit more dynamic. Cheers. TOML "Jason Botchford is Vancouver's worst person ever." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 "Identity" does not score goals... actually, "identity" does absolutely nothing. It is simply an abstract concept that doesn't really mean sh!t when it comes to hockey. Useless advice really. Not surprising that is the best the Province can come up with. Derp. Derp. One over-rated, rookie hero-boy worshipped by halfwits gets traded and all of a sudden the Canucks are not a skilled team. Really dumb stuff, really. As for the actual input regarding the team.... "Sure, a winger who could jell (sic) with Ryan Kesler could help. But does one even exist?... And, of course, a No. 1 defenceman would make everything easier. Good luck with that one." The usual useless commentary. These Province guys are so much smarter than Canucks management. "In the market for an identity" - that's incisive stuff... The Canucks have no shortage of identity. Identity comes from an authentic sense of oneself, not something you go shopping for... Botchford and Gallagher may be experiencing identity crises now that their Saviour has been traded - perhaps they need to go to the market, in other words, outside themselves, to try to search for one. They should try a Sabres jersey on for size. I hear you can buy one of those... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philipp0130 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I heard somewhere that after the deadline our scoring dropped lower.Which was when coho left, he was also our only sniper . if we wanted a checking line i would have concentrated on making the 4th line better and not have changes everynight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philipp0130 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I heard somewhere that after the deadline our scoring dropped .Which was when coho left, he was also our only sniper . if we wanted a checking line i would have concentrated on making the 4th line better and not have changes everynight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Bieksa's Fault Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Interestingly enough, that was also when the Sedins stopped producing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Bieksa's Fault Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 I heard somewhere that after the deadline our scoring dropped lower.Which was when coho left, he was also our only sniper . if we wanted a checking line i would have concentrated on making the 4th line better and not have changes everynight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
605skunk Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 probably because they knew that they lost a true offensive player/teammate... you know how the twins do when they play underpressure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blömqvist Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Offseason will be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 Exactly, the problem is we're still playing like an offensive, skilled team with our defence jumping up in the rush. Sadly, our forwards are no longer skilled enough (like Samuelsson and Hodgson were) to utilize our defencemen because guys like Kassian, Booth and even Higgins are straight-like players who don't use the drop pass as much as the more skilled, previous playmakers which has lead to defensive collapses all season long. We need to play solid defence first - no more of this pinching rubbish and jumping up in the rush unless the defencemen are out there with the Sedins. Defence wins championships, we have a great goaltender and a future #1 defenceman in Alex Edler with some nice pieces on the blueline in Hamhuis and Tanev so let's build around them with some big, physical defencemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckCup1316 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 They do have an identity, regular season champs and playoff chumps lol. I dont think that Gillis was tryng to change the identity just wanted the team to be able to win low scoring games. The offense dried up when the refs stopped calling penalties accross the league. So M.G. was thinking that if he kept the team as an offensive juggernaut that will kill you on the powerplay. It would struggle while the powerplays were becoming extinct. Our team was best at powerplays in the league again untill we starting averaging 1 powerplay every 2 games. Its the league that changed its identity mid stream and left teams like Canucks, Penguins, Red Wings, Sharks and Blackhawks out of the loop. All I know is that I much prefer the highly skilled game we played verses the defensive one. Even when we won almost all of the last 10 games this season the games were a yawn fest. I took pride that our team wasnt only at the top of the standings but was the most enjoyable team to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfall Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 I find it weird how Gillis keeps saying he loves the offensive style of game but AV's natural instincts are as a defensive coach and most pure offensive players have been unsuccessful with him. MG should just supply the team with as much offensive talent as he can find and if AV doesn't wanna use them, cut him. I've also said before that the Canucks don't have an identity or a competitive advantage. I see them as a team that spends a lot of energy for low value results that uses good goaltending to keep games close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyzer Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 We have no sniper and our PP dried up. We used to be able to punish every penalty with a goal, but not so much anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksicle Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 you cant piss in the ocean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 It's a copycat league and Gillis couldn't help but be part of that. At first he was preaching that he didn't want to change his blueprint based on one team and one series (Boston, SCF) but he went ahead and made those kind of changes in acquiring Booth, Pahlsson and Kassian. I don't blame him for getting Booth, though. Not only does Booth bring needed size to the lineup but he also brings speed, which is a necessary component of Gillis' blueprint, and he's a goal scorer. In a nutshell, I agree with the basic idea of Botchford's article. The team needs an identity and they need to stick with it. When they lose, they appear as if they have no direction, nothing to cling to when the going gets tough. That's partly on the coach to establish that. AV just seems like the kind of guy that has his system but generally lets the guys take ownership and do their thing. So, at the end of the day I do believe Gillis still has the right mix of players in place. Perhaps another top 4 defenseman or top 6 forward is needed but he's basically got the group in place that can go all the way. It's the coach that needs to go and someone new needs to come in with a fresh voice, someone who can come in and keep the guys focused on the goal from start to finish and keep them accountable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.