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

Interesting Analysis From The Edmonton Journal


Curmudgeon

Recommended Posts

Thanks for posting the article. In terms of D.....I don't think we'll be in the running for Suter as he will likely get 6+ in another market (ex. Detroit can throw allot of money at him). So who's out there or more importantly what spots are left on our blueline?

Hamhuis, Bieksa, Tanev (because his value for his salary is high), Edler (unless he gets moved but his trade value is probably at an alltime low now), and Ballard (unless you can somehow move that contract) are probably coming back.........so that really leaves us with one spot we can go after for UFA..

Suter (will likely fetch 6+ from another team)

Garrison in my mind is going to fetch more than he's worth in the open market

Wideman (although is offensively sound was on the ice for 8/13 Bruins goals)

Matt Carle

Bryan Allen (Carolina loves him as he and Gleason are the shutdown pair)

Barrett Jackman (alwyas been defensively reliable, but is injury prone)

Shultz (no NHL experience, but many say he's NHL ready)

Realistically, in my opinion I feel that it's ideal if we can get a guy like a dependable stay at home guy who brings some grit like Bryan Allen or B. JAckman to play with Edler. In addition, I would do everything to try to sign Shultz (not sure if he's ready but he's a prospect that wouldn't cost us any assets). Then have Shultz, Tanev, Ballard fight for the last pairing. As extras, I would bring back Rome or Salo (if he's willing to play for cheap). That would put us 8 deep and effectively move Alberts and MAG out of the lineup.

and who;s spot is there to fill?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it's clear we need a true #1 D man but how the heck do we get one? I mean Preds won't let Weber go and if they did trade him it'll be to the East. So if Weber won't sign longer than a year and the Preds are open to trading him... Edler, Schroeder and our 2012 1st for Weber, they get back a young top pairing D man++ we get an elite #1. I'd offer Kesler but I think they'd want Edler back if they lost Suter to UFA and Weber was going to leave as a UFA, getting a top pairing D man like Edler would help them more so than Kesler.

Sedin Sedin Burrows

Booth Kesler (OPEN)

Higgins Pahlsson Hansen

Malhotra Lappy Kassian

Ballard Weber

Hamhuis Bieksa

(OPEN) Tanev/Salo

Luongo/Scheinder

Lack

would like a big gritty tough guy on Sedins wing and Burrows on the 2nd line, it would balance things out more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive always maintained having a true number 1 guy that's gonna play 28+ minutes a night in the playoffs is the way to go over a more balanced less top end talented group. Its too bad number 1 defensemen are impossible to get unless you draft em. To be frank if you truly look at our defense with an unbiased eye...its a pretty vanilla group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gillis preaches an offensive hockey style, but the team can't score. For the number of goals the team gave up, it should have been enough to win the series with a decent offense.

Still, Bieksa and Edler are high risk players, except they played below their usual levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree with this however we'll need to thin down the money we already have spent on D man. If you look at the other teams with high payed guys on the back end, the supporting cast is usually average guys or prospects. If everyone on CDC is dead set on a webber then we'll need to get rid of either Bieksa, Hamuis, or edler who is due for a big pay raise and I'm not so sure he's worth it.

By the numbers our biggest problem has been scoring goals. I feel we need a game changing forward who can turn the tide with energy all on his own. Someone to play with Kesler.

So i'll bend on the d man if we can free up enough cash to add a big powerforward who can score..... I propose... Deal edler, ballard ( though id rather have him than hamhuis), luongo, don't qualify raymond. Try and aquire webber and Nash. I know it looks funny but we have to free up 15 million to get those two. Signing Schneids, moving lu, saying bye to raymond, and moving two of our five million dollor D men that just arent getting the job done.....then with the new CBA we can afford both easily.

Now the lines look like this

Sedin Sedin Burrows

Nash kesler booth

Higgins Pahlsson Hansen

Kassian Lappierre malholtra

Webber bieksa

ballard salo

tanev connauton/rome/alberts

Schneider

Auld or whoever....

This to me is a far better line up on the ice that lost in the first round in 2012*** Not only that...but we now have set lines and pairings....should be no need to juggle lines every game. It will give everyone time for find consistancy in thier roles. For once!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, the teams' corsi could've been a lot better.

Last season our corsi was significantly better than in this one. It led to a finals berth.

LA didn't generate a lot of offense, but their corsi was fairly good. What helped, of course, was the addition of Richards and Carter.

And like it or not, Ehrhoff wasn't replaced. Salo was so-so all year and our defense was noticably slower all year. You don't have to be a genius to figure out where potential problems could arise.

Let us pray that Gillis' plan to improve this team even further works. Cheers.

TOML

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BuckFoston

Gillis preaches an offensive hockey style, but the team can't score. For the number of goals the team gave up, it should have been enough to win the series with a decent offense.

Still, Bieksa and Edler are high risk players, except they played below their usual levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No thanks, I like Bieksa but if we had to get rid of a big chunk of cash on D I would rather keep Hamhuis. He is decent offensively and excellent defensively. Not to mention his salary is lower than Bieksa's. He is by far our most consistent defenseman, and one of the most underrated players in the league. I don't know how you can see he doesn't do anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ppl talk about Yzerman as a great leader but those of us who are old enough remember that Yzerman did not win anything until Lidstrom arrived in Detroit. As a matter of fact he was almost dealt out of Detroit and at the last minute Mike Ilitch stepped in and vetoed the trade.

Every team needs a #1 Dman. Canucks have a glaring hole at that position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BuckFoston

Other than Nashville do any of teams left have a elite defenseman? Drew Doughty certainly doesn't qualify he isn't even the best on his team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, this writer is full of it. Canucks Army blog writes about the same sort of advanced metrics, and often talks about how their counting measures are similar to Canucks management.

They have the the Kings out chancing the Canucks 95-80 overall (not 101-72).

At even strength, Kings outchanced Canucks 70-62. On PP, Kings outchanced the Canucks 20-15.

Basically the Kings destroyed the Canucks overall, at even strength and on special teams. Canucks were no match for them.

Here's a writeup detailing each players 'chances for' and 'chances against' over this series - it's adjusted for ice time and quality of competition: http://canucksarmy.c...totals-playoffs

It states:

- Edler was the best 2 way defenseman at even strength (EV), 27 chances for and only 19 against (+8 differential). So he is our 'Weber' despite making costly turnovers.

- Ballard, despite playing against plugs and getting little ice time, got eaten up and had a -5 chance differential

-Tanev, played against tougher competition than Ballard - but still got little time, had a -3 chance differential.

-Bieksa was better than Hamhuis, and both these guys were better than Salo

Basically, Edler was by far the best at EV. Hamhuis and Bieksa were really good, always played against toughest competion. Salo and Ballard struggled the most, were by far the 2 worst defensemen.

Forwards: Canucks 4th line stinks for the 2nd straight yr - Malhotra, Weise, Pahlsson had troubles. Kassian somehow managed a + differential. Burrows/Kesler came up with + differential, Booth was even. D. Sedin and Higgins struggled at even strength - mightily. Raymond was a huge liability, but we all know that. And Ebbett/Rome were rockstars, despite playing few games.

Makes you wonder why a) Rome didn't play over Ballard b ) Ebbett wasn't in lineup on reg basis c) Lappy didn't center 3rd line d) Raymond/Weiss weren't benched

Coaching decisions gone severely wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...