Raph Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 No he wouldnt. He wouldnt get the juicy power play points off the half wall here, and therefore be utterly useless. He only has 16 points in buffalo because he gets the primo minutes with the Sabres best players and gets the 2nd assist maker spot on the powerplay. Watch the Sabres games and tell me how good he is. lol, Hodgson is the driver on the team with everyone else riding shotgun. He has by far more goals and assists than anyone on the team, and he also leads the team in shooting percentage. He and Vanek (now Moulson) are the only ones on the team worth checking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Marchand Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 There are too many finishers in our top nine: players that can put pucks in the back of the net in prime scoring position but struggle to generate those scoring chances. It's not a bad thing to have guys like Higgins, Hansen, Booth, and Kassian. The problem is when they occupy almost 1/2 of the top 9 and aren't surrounded by enough creative offensive players. The Sedins can only make so many players better at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeanBeef Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 I'm pretty sure the 2010-11 team went on a 4 game losing streak at this time of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Once Rick Nash was made available I think Gillis missed a glorious opportunity to package Schneider for him at the 2012 deadline. I'm well over the Hodgson trade but I agree the timing of the trade was extremely poorly timed. Potential line up going against LA: Sedin - Sedin - Nash Burrows - Kesler - Hodgson Higgins - Pahlsson - Hansen Booth - Malhotra - Lapierre Hamhuis - Bieksa Edler - Salo Ballard - Tanev Luongo That would've matched up extremely well against the Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snucks Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Some good points but this team won't go far, there are too many areas that haven't been fixed since 2011. I think they banked on a better Luongo for the time and money the was signed for. The second mistake they made was making him Captain and the 3rd was making Sedin Captain. Its is unbelievable they actually got to a final, and remember they don't have the tough guys that team had. I heard the American announcers comment on Luongos swimming in the crease, when sportsnet lost the signal and switched over to the Florida telecast. I think Luo is part of the problem as he has always been molly coddled by management here. He is not the goalie he once was and he almost always has on bad goal scored on him. This is bad for a team that can't score. There are so many reasons this team is hooped and Torts has a hell of a job on his hands. I'm sure he will eventually realize what he has got himself into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Some good points but this team won't go far, there are too many areas that haven't been fixed since 2011. I think they banked on a better Luongo for the time and money the was signed for. The second mistake they made was making him Captain and the 3rd was making Sedin Captain. Its is unbelievable they actually got to a final, and remember they don't have the tough guys that team had. I heard the American announcers comment on Luongos swimming in the crease, when sportsnet lost the signal and switched over to the Florida telecast. I think Luo is part of the problem as he has always been molly coddled by management here. He is not the goalie he once was and he almost always has on bad goal scored on him. This is bad for a team that can't score. There are so many reasons this team is hooped and Torts has a hell of a job on his hands. I'm sure he will eventually realize what he has got himself into. Yeah usurping him with Schneider was really molly coddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeanBeef Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Once Rick Nash was made available I think Gillis missed a glorious opportunity to package Schneider for him at the 2012 deadline. I'm well over the Hodgson trade but I agree the timing of the trade was extremely poorly timed. Potential line up going against LA: Sedin - Sedin - Nash Burrows - Kesler - Hodgson Higgins - Pahlsson - Hansen Booth - Malhotra - Lapierre Hamhuis - Bieksa Edler - Salo Ballard - Tanev Luongo That would've matched up extremely well against the Kings. The rangers gave up Anisomov, Dubinsky, Erixon, and a first for Nash. The only significant players missing from that lineup are Raymond, Bitz, and Weise... Even then they weren't equal to the Rags payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 The rangers gave up Anisomov, Dubinsky, Erixon, and a first for Nash. The only significant players missing from that lineup are Raymond, Bitz, and Weise... Even then they weren't equal to the Rags payment. I think Schneider, our next best defence prospect behind Tanev, Raymond, Schroeder, and our 1st would've easily been enough. Here's how I see it: Schneider > Anisimov, Dubinsky Sauve, Schroeder = Erixon Raymond, 1st = 1st That would've been a tough offer to top IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 The rangers gave up Anisomov, Dubinsky, Erixon, and a first for Nash. The only significant players missing from that lineup are Raymond, Bitz, and Weise... Even then they weren't equal to the Rags payment. And Nash didn't want to play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Because our 2nd line needs skill not work ethic Shinkaruk Horvat Kesler > Burrows Santorelli Higgins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 We were a 1 line team pretty much in the WCE era. We are a one line team now. Only difference we have a better goalie, and a different, not better defence. Shut down Kesler and the Sedins, you win the game. It would have been interesting to see how we would have done had Manny not had the eye injury. That might have been the depth scoring we could have needed. Kesler and the Sedins had a great playoffs in 2011. Once that scoring dried up, we had no offence. We lack consistency in every different situation. Burrows, Higgins might be great guys, but they aren't consistent enough threats game in and game out. We blew draft picks, and made trades that in hindsight were bloody awful. (Ballard trade in particular.) There's no use pining about Hoff, he was going for the money, so we wouldn't have signed him. It's karma he's on a team worse than Vancouver. Gillis' problem is a lot of times he just does the deal for a short term gain, without thinking about long term - Ballard - Roy - Hodgson. I'm not saying to keep him, but we could have gotten more if we waited until the Draft to trade him. Now to be fair it looks like he's trying to address the issues by drafting Gaunce, Horvat, and Shinkaruk. But it might be 1-3 seasons before we see the benefits. The team is trying, but not getting the results. I'm not sure which disturbs me more. The anemic offence? Or defensive gaffes? If you think losing Volpatti or Torres is our issue you're dreaming. It's not toughness. It's the offensive drought that's the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domyours Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Same old crap, no toughness, lack of motivation....SAD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted November 21, 2013 Author Share Posted November 21, 2013 Same old crap, no toughness, lack of motivation....SAD. Nope I said nothing about toughness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spliced Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 The team peaked in 2011. The twins were at the top of their game, Luongo was very good and that was the year Kesler scored big. There is a lot that goes into it but secondary scoring is big. In 09-10 they had Hoff, Raymond getting 25 and Sammy getting 30. Then for 10-11 you still had Hoff plus Kesler's 41. Those were the 2 years that the team had better secondary scoring and it made a difference. Things could change if they could somehow get secondary scoring again. Easier said than done though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Main reason? Gillis. Hodgson trade: Horrible horrible timing, I don't even care about the backround story behind why he was traded, it was just retarded to trade him at the deadline when you could've let him play out the season with team in the playoffs and then shop him in the draft or packaged him with Luongo for a better return... There's 2 parties involved in any trade. Gillis wanted a young power forward for Hodgson. Buffalo was in dire need of a center to make a playoff push. Buffalo made a young power forward available and wasn't going to wait until the off-season. Sometimes you have to make a deal when it becomes available because you never know if or when another similar player will be available on the trade market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 -No 3C replacement -PP/Loss of Erhoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Coaching. Overly defensive coaching leads to the inability to produce offensively. Game 7 in '11, 1st round '12, 1st round '13. No surprise that both the Rangers and Canucks stuggle to score. Last week everyone was singing Torts praises while bashing our other candidate, Dallas Eakins, but maybe Eakins would of been the better choice if he would of been able to coach a more offensive style. How is Torts not an offensive coach? He has said multiple times he wants his players to err on the side of aggression, he always wants the defensemen pinching in and jumping up in the play, etc etc. He heavily values continuous forecheck, etc. What more do you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 I think Schneider, our next best defence prospect behind Tanev, Raymond, Schroeder, and our 1st would've easily been enough. Here's how I see it: Schneider > Anisimov, Dubinsky Sauve, Schroeder = Erixon Raymond, 1st = 1st That would've been a tough offer to top IMO. Why would the Rangers want Schneider? I think they are more than fine in goal. I'm pretty sure the 2010-11 team went on a 4 game losing streak at this time of the year. You're right, they did. People overestimate the implications of a losing streak/players being cold. I mean Crosby just snapped a 1 goal in 10 games streak, the Ducks are on a 5 game losing streak right now, the Sharks had a 5 game losing streak a week or so ago etc etc. That doesn't mean any of those teams are bad, just like it doesnt mean our team is bad. After 23 games this year, the Canucks have 26 pts, last year they had 28, the year before that they had 27, the year before that they had 29, and the year before that they had 24. That's an average of 26.4 pts at this point in the season. Oh how the mighty have fallen, by 0.4 pts on average. Even the Canucks best regular season ever, we started off with 29 pts. We're only 3 points off that pace. I think we're still ok as a hockey club. I don't know who the heck you think you are using the heresy that is logic and facts, on CDC. Shame on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Industrious1 Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Once Rick Nash was made available I think Gillis missed a glorious opportunity to package Schneider for him at the 2012 deadline. I'm well over the Hodgson trade but I agree the timing of the trade was extremely poorly timed. Potential line up going against LA: Sedin - Sedin - Nash Burrows - Kesler - Hodgson Higgins - Pahlsson - Hansen Booth - Malhotra - Lapierre Hamhuis - Bieksa Edler - Salo Ballard - Tanev Luongo That would've matched up extremely well against the Kings. Hmm. What am I missing...why would the Rangers need Schneider in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Wrinkles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.