What Would Be Your Offseason "philosophy" On How To Improve The Canucks?

[Ṣpiderman]

I remember when I said the Canucks wouldn't go past the second round in the playoffs this season, people called me an idiot. This team has some serious issues they need to address. Regular season success is good, but they're not playing the right way in the playoffs against defensive teams.

I was impressed by how the Sedins played this post-season even if they didn't put up a lot of points. This team looked simply exhausted throughout the entire season compared to the other teams. Watch the other teams play and then observe the Canucks. The effort and intensity simply isn't there. This team also needs a better system. I don't know why our players are always so afraid to take the puck to the net even though the lane is open. Instead, they rather force the puck to the slot and cause a turnover. All you need to do is check the open man and the Canucks are shut down.

Our team also doesn't have enough skill. Our team works hard but there's not a lot of skill on the team. Size is good but other teams have players with size and skill. Look at Kopitar. Our team, to be truthful, is just filled with a bunch of grinders who work hard.

Our defense always seem to have their shots blocked or they go wide. This has been a recurring theme for 3-4 years. It's ridiculous how many of our shots from the point can't go through.

I really like how we played last year on the PK as opposed to this year. Last year we were aggressive, but this year we've been collapsing. There was no pressure on the PK and the point players were often left open.

It really doesn't matter what player you add onto our team if our players look like they don't want to play. This team is strong enough to win a cup. Not much change is needed in my opinion. Possibly a stronger fourth line, and a better 2nd line winger along side Booth and Kesler. Grab another defenseman as well that can play top 4 minutes because if one goes down, our depth sinks. Grags wasn't the answer but we were relatively healthy on defense so it didn't really matter this season.

[Sabre4life]

Would you guys take Vanek, Roy for Kesler ?

[Ṣpiderman]

Would you guys take Vanek, Roy for Kesler ?

[Gollumpus]

Nationality shouldn't matter but I think that history proves that it does. I like my chances having a Canadian captain over a European one.

1.) If Malkin or Datsyuk wanted to come here you'd say, no? ---------------------- According BuckFoston, this would never happen anyways because Russians don't like the west coast.

2.) Last year, the Canucks had five Americans on their team (Alberts, Ballard, Higgins, Kesler and Schneider). Boston had only one American on their team (Thomas). -------------------------------- So, the Bruins were loaded with Canadians, I fail to see how this hurts my argument, especially considering the Bruins won the cup. As for Kesler, yes I'd rather have an American over a European as a captain but his diving drives me nuts and I don't think you can have a captain setting that kind of example. But I believe that because all North American hockey players grow up wanting to be Stanley Cup champions and Euorpeans grow up wanting to be World and Olympic champions, North American players, especially Canadians are more apt to go through anything to win the Stanley Cup. But there are exceptions to every rule now aren't there?

I like Henrik, but I'll take Trevor Linden any day over Henrik Sedin during their respective cup runs. Linden was a true warrior and in my opinion, that is the kind of captain you need to win the cup.

3.) The year Detroit last won the Cup (2008), they had 14 Europeans, although none were Russians (floating or otherwise). They also managed to overcome having a Swede as their captain (as well as having only one of three alternate captains being a Canadian), They lost the following year with a team which had 15 Europeans to a Pittsburg team which had only 5 Europeans (although 3 of them were Russians, of the non-floating and choking variety).

True, when Boston last won the Cup, they didn't have a lot of Europeans on the team, just half their defence (Chara, Kaberle, Seidenberg), their back-up goalie and Krecji. They also did okay working with the handicap of having a non-Canadian as their team captain (Chara).-----------------------Detroit didn't have a Russian on the 2008 team? Hmmmmm, didn't you just post above that Datsyuk is Russian and he was on that 2008 team was he not? The original argument though was having a team stacked full of Russians and not one or two, so you're getting away from the point. Hey, I wouldn't mind if the Canucks had to overcome having one of the best, if not the best defenseman of our generation, or any generation for that matter, as their team leader but that's not realistic. You'll find 20 more Henrik Sedins before you ever see another Lidstrom. And before Lidstrom was made captain, Stevie Y was captain(a Canadian by the way) and there is not many better leaders in the history of sports than what he was, and Lidstrom was abe to learn from him. Most of your points just prove that you win with Canadians, so I'm not sure why you're arguing these points when you're just proving mine to be true.

4.) Another point of note: Boston only had two alternate captains last year. Vancouver had four. Perhaps the Canucks were top heavy in alternate captains? --------------------------- Not too sure why in the hell you keep bringing up alternate captains for because if they were that important then they'd be ACTUAL captains. Sure they have their place, and that's following behind the actual leader of the team.

Look back on the history of the game and tell me what percentage of captains who won the cup were Canadians...enough said. If I were a betting man, and I am, I will take those odds all day long.

Kind regards

[Drop Em]

History is open to interpretation.

1.) What does BuckFoston know about Russians? This is meant as a serious question. I know a lot of people who are Russian emigres and they love it here on the West Coast. Granted they aren't NHL hockey players.

At the moment there's not a whole lot of them playing in the NHL so the sample size is small. Of west coast teams, LA currently has two Russians who will be RFA's in two years time. If they bolt for the east coast then maybe Buck is right. Until then, I don't see anything to support his claims. Of the 24 Russian skaters, there's only a few who have been in the NHL for any amount of time (eg. Ovechkin, Gonchar, Kovalchuk). All the rest are still with their original teams and maybe are still on their "EL" contracts.

Nabokov played ten seasons with the Sharks and Bryzgalov had six years with the Ducks. Each could have left town earlier than they did.

2.) I have to admit that I was having a bit of fun with you on this point (well, my entire post was poking fun if truth be told). Folks are commenting on the need for more Canadians on this team, and I pointed out the Canucks lost with a 5 to 1 ratio in Americans. Fine, you didn't get it. No worries.

So, do you believe the Canucks should trade their Americans in favour of Canadian players solely because they are American? And can the Canucks keep Schneider as their token American? It worked for Boston to have an American goalie...

3.) Good catch on the Detroit Russian thing. My only defense is it was 5 o'clock in the morning and I woke up way too early. My brain was answering one way and fingers were typing something else. It happens.

You are deflecting the point I made here, that Detroit won with a Swedish captain, on a team which had two thirds of the players also from Europe. It does not support the Canadian captain first policy you and others are supporting.

And the reason Lidstrom is a great captain is because he learned from Yzerman? Okay, so then the reason Sedin is a "poor" captain is because he learned from Luongo, who learned from Naslund, who learned from Messier, who learned from Linden? Is Brown a good captain? He learned from Nordstrom. Shane Doan learned from Numminen.

As to Russians, there's never been an NHL team stacked full of Russians. Why? Well, in some season's there's barely been enough of them to make a team (there's currently only 30, including 6 goalies). The closest there's been to a team stacked with Russians may have been Detroit in the late 90's, where they had about a half a dozen of them on the team. They won a couple of of Cups in those years, but that would be because Detroit had a Canadian captain, right?

4.) My point here was additional fun poking, but you missed it. No worries.

Over the history of the NHL, the majority of the players have been Canadian, which makes it a safe bet that the majority of the captains would also be Canadian. This should not come as a great revelation to anyone. However, in the past six years the odds are not with you.

Currently there's 16 Canadian captains and another 5 who are American and one team is without a captain (Florida). The rest are Russ (1), Cze (1), Swe (3), Fin (1), Svk (1), and Che (1) for a total of eight out of thirty.

Since the lockout season, there have been six SC finals. Of the twelve teams which have participated in the finals, five of them had a European captain. In those finals, two were won by a team with a European captain (that's 1/3 for those keeping score at home). Of the six losing teams, three of them have had a European captain. Last year, both teams had a European captain. Them's pretty good numbers for a group which makes up less than a third of the sample size of 30 teams.

regards,

G.

[Gollumpus]

Just so we're clear here, I'm not attacking you. I am disagreeing with you in regard to your Canadian first position. You seem to be taking all of this a bit on the personal side.

Actually, history isn't open to interpretation. History is fact and the facts are that the Stanley Cup winners throughout history have proven that having a Canadian captain is the way to go. You can say the game has changed but one thing that hasn't changed is the heart and passion that Canadian players show towards winning the cup.

[Gollumpus]

Pt. 2

Thank you for proving my original argument. You're not going to win with a team stacked full of Russians. This is all I was trying to say when you responded to my first post. By you saying that there's barely enough Russians to even make up a team just proves that they're not good enough to play in the top league in the world, on a smaller ice surface and endure the rigors of the Stanley Cup playoffs. I also appreciate that your coming around on the value of Stevie Y and the Canadian captain thing.

[realnucksfan2010]

Our team needs more drive, Our cup run was great we showed all kinds of drive we just ran out of gas!

This last season I don't even have the words for what that was, we had no drive at all, the only reason why we got the pres trophy again is beacuse our division is brutal.

We can go get Webber or some other big name player, but if this team can't get themselves motivated to play then I am afraid the result next year will be the same!

[erkayloomeh]

To purge the team of our weakest links.

Raymond has to go for whatever we can get for him. I think he has more value if he returns to form but we dont want to wait for that now do we?? Get what you can for him and move on. Put it this way. If he cant score but his value is his backchecking then im sure we can replace him with alot of guys who cant score but can backcheck.....it can be taught.

Ballard. Hes a different case because hes a good player but is just paid to much if he isnt a top four. He needs to go to free up cap space

I want Bryan allen on this team. this is a no brainer as far as im concerned. He will be a big upgrade over alberts or Rome and is alot tougher.

I also want one player on our fourth line who can fight. Not like weiss but someone who is actually a little scary.

I would also like to see some veteren leadership here with someone who has won a cup

[Sedinery22]

Wow child, take your meds. By the way you sound I've been watching hockey longer than you have been alive. You can take your little statistics and shove it. I don't care about Edler or what turnovers he caused. What I do know for a fact though is almost every game Bieksa played I heard "Turnover by Bieksa/Bieksa gave away the puck". My post had nothing to do with Edler. And most people here agreed that this season he did not play like a top 2 d-man at all. I also don't care what you voted for. Idiot? say that to me in person and I'd slap the snot out of you. Damn noob.

[Drop Em]

Just so we're clear here, I'm not attacking you. I am disagreeing with you in regard to your Canadian first position. You seem to be taking all of this a bit on the personal side.

History is open to interpretation, and always has been. You are speaking from a very simplistic view of History, the names, dates and places approach. It does nothing to explain how and why those names, dates and places have significance and what is the interpretation of these, which changes as time moves on. You are using the total sample size to support your argument for the simple reason that it supports your argument. And of course you would do this as it supports your position, but it isn't anything that would stand up to scrutiny.

More than half of your sample (the history of the NHL) in this case would be nothing more than a footnote because there was no participation by Europeans in NHL hockey until relatively recent times, and they haven't been here in significant numbers until very recent times. To suggest that all Europeans who play in the NHL don't have an equal amount of heart to win the Cup shows an extraordinary bias against them. To tar all Europeans with the same brush as obvious under-achievers is absolutely unfair. Is Chara a good captain because he showed enough heart to win the Cup? Did Boston win because they had more Canadians? Or are Chara and the Bruins lucky because the Canucks showed up to the finals with a team of walking wounded?

Are Canadian players passionate about winning the Cup? Of course. What makes you think that a European player, who has been in this league for any amount of time doesn't feel the same kind of passion for winning the Cup? Did Chara say, "Yeah, this is nice but it's no IIHF championship!"

Yeah, and I took your comments as such. I was addressing BF's position.

Don't agree on this point. You are supporting the idea of a Canadian as team captain, yes? If we take your position, Boston won despite the handicap of having a European captain. Maybe they needed all those Canadians to make up for Chara's non-Canadian status?

So, if the Canucks keep Henrik and get rid of some their other Europeans then they will win the Cup, right?

You must be a lot of fun at parties.

Having Lidstrom as captain does nothing for your argument, despite your assertion to the contrary.

As I interpret what you have written, it is okay to be a European captain if you win the Cup (and be a good player). However, since Henrik is only a good player and has not (as yet) won the Cup then he is a crappy captain? Is Chara any less of a captain this year because Boston failed to win the Cup?

That one captain's poise might rub off on to his successor is no surprise. Why do you seem to believe that a Canadian cannot gain anything from a European, such as with my examples of Doan and Brown. The continuation to the absurd was to bring home my feelings in this regard. If we follow the chain of Canuck captains, is Henrik a bad captain because of Luongo, or because of Naslund? Or is Henrik bad merely on his own merit? Was Naslund a bad captain? If so, was it Messier's fault?

End pt.1

regards,

G.

[Tm085]

Get bigger and tougher. we have the skill, we just don't have the size. Look at LA they have both, seems to be working for them.

[Ṣpiderman]

Get bigger and tougher. we have the skill, we just don't have the size. Look at LA they have both, seems to be working for them.

[canucksnihilist]

1st line, keep burrows there

2nd line: replace Raymond with actual real bona fide top 6, not a retread who might find his game like we do every year.

3rd line: get one kid in there... Jensen or Schroeder. Give a kid 9 games at least!

4th line: keep the tough guys we had, hope they stay healthy. Volp, etc.

D: keep ham and biek together. Really give Tanev a shot with edler... Weber as FA is next year and depends what u are smoking!!!

[Drop Em]

Pt. 2

Well, the Russians don't seem to have a problem winning quite often with a team stacked full of Russians.

To suggest that they, or players from any other nation are not playing in the NHL because they aren't good enough is another example of bias on your part. Believe it or not, not everyone feels that the NHL is the top league in the world. Shocking, isn't it? Further, they might suggest that North American players can't play on the larger ice surfaces. In any event, a lot of players see no need to come over here because they can get a good enough pay-day staying at home.

So this is stuff is really *impotant* to you, isn't it? Meh, water. Duck's back.

Going back to my previous comments about History, the majority of your sample size would not have a lot of relevance, which is why I selected a sample which supports my position. It shows a trend which may continue, or it may not.

I could point out that no Canadian has ever been captain of a Russian team to win the world championship, so would this mean that Canadians can't keep up with the grind of European hockey?

You just may say, "Who cares?", which is a valid response, I suppose.

What you do not understand here is the significance of the numbers I provided. I will try to make it a bit clearer.

- There are thirty teams.

- Eight of them, which is less than a third, have European captains.

- In the last six years, five of the twelve teams which went to the finals had a Europeans captain. This is almost half, which suggests a larger participation on their part rather than the "Canadian captains are the way to go" teams as you suggest.

- In the last six years, two of the Cups went to teams which had European captains. Yes, this means 2/3 were won by teams which had Canadian captains. What it also means is that teams with a Europeans captain won a proportionally higher number of Cups for the number of potential participants.

You are most welcome.

regards,

G.

[Bodee]

#1 is certainly playoff scoring. I don't care how we get it done but we must score more than this.

#2 is size at the back end. Can we finally knock ppl down in front of our net pretty please?

[Bodee]

Look at the teams still in the dance; all but Jersey have a stud D man who will be a Norris candidate if not now, soon. And even Jersey has stud D prospects.

Then look at our D, particularly right side;

Bieksa- great second pair, and versatile D, but if he's our best right side D?

Salo- great depth defender if he does not retire

Tanev- best fill player imagineable, but really just a fill player. 20 something hits all year?

After that we currently had only Hanson as a natural right wing (besides prospect Kassian), had size mis match & toughness problems up front, and all our playmaking (in Danny & Hank) is stacked on our top line.

Last, our talent depth in prospects needs a boost!

Here are my moves;

1) Lou, our first & Tanev to T.O. for Kadri (replace our center prospect), their first (5th overall) and rights to Cody Franson.

2) Sign Sheldon Souray 2 years $2.4 each.

3) Sign Justin Schultz first choice, Jason Garrison second

4) If not retired, sign Salo $2 mill

D depth, size & prospect talent restocked, no major cap hits.

4) Sign Jason Arnott. Plays shut down center, and physical RW. Fills for Kesler & role player with ring! $2.6 x 1 or $2 x 2 years. Over 500 career assists and 220 lbs to make a stunning 2knd line winger when Kess is back! Kess, Booth & Arnott against any physical match up you could imagine?

5) Sign Bitz.

RW, center, size, toughness and playmaking (Kadri + Arnott) all filled.

Then you can kick the tires on any value achievable for Raymond (unpopular choice, but absolutely qualify him for 3 years at min raise of 10%) & Ballard.

FTR, Kadri is not T.O.'s top prospect & Franson was picked up for a 2knd round pick. They are not key to Toronto but fill valuable depth & key skills for us. The first trade is about the 5th overall pick, a good haul for Lou! Resign Franson $1.8 x 4 years. One of Grigorenko, Dumba or MURRAY should be avaiable? T.O. can pay Lou with cap increase & in reality we have $3 mill extra cap space plus the increase. Oh, I can just taste shopping at the deadline, or trying to steal Jagr (in moves un-accounted for below)!

To start year

Danny Hank Burrows

Booth Arnott Kassian (No size problems here boys!)

Higgins Lapierre Hansen

Raymond Schroeder Bitz Great second defensive stopper line

Manny, Kadri, Volpatti & Pinnizotto???

Kesler

Edler Souray

Hamhuis Bieksa

Ballard Franson (oh dangerous offensively & both 215 lbs, if only one stays at home when the other rushes?)!

Schultz, Salo, Gragnani Salo and Souray could trade ice time and press box days to extend careers).

Then you could really have fun?

Ballard and the 5th pick to Montreal (they do need a left D?) for rights to the 3rd pick. Would love Grigorenko! Well, they need a big center, but ...

Edler, Jensen and a first for Weber? Nah, we have cap room for next year.

[one-x]

depth scoring i think. thats the reason we lost to the bruins and i'm not sure if we will ever be able to win a cup if its not addressed.

[DaMacNamedDre]

Parise,H.Sedin,Burrows

D.Sedin,Kesler,Kassian

E.Kane,LaPierre,Hansen

Higgins, Bitz, C.Neil

Moen,Volpatti,Jensen,

___________________________

Hamhuis,Weber

Garrison,Bieksa

B.Allen ,Tanev

(Alberts,Rome,Salo)