Sterling.Archer Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Are Hank and Burr playing better partly because of the absence of Daniel Sedin? I was thinking about this today and thought it deserved some discussion. Maybe it's not the Sedins that have declined but rather Daniel alone that has declined, and Hank and Burr needed to be separated from him (and put on a line with a budding sniper) to find their games. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everybody Hates Raymond Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 It's because it's harder to sit around on your ass and slack when you have a young kid playing his heart out. Lack of youth has been deadly for this team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayRayDown Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Hank and Daniel were putting up loads of points at the beginning of the season. think what we are seeing is a healthy henrik and Burrows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 "re-emergence" more like "getting out of their slumps". Hank and Burr have been playing great all year but they haven't finished though. When Hank scored in the Islanders game and Burr scored in the Winnipeg game they got the monkey off their back and now look at the way their playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Am.Ironman Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 They started putting up points when Jensen started to score, and all 3 have been getting it done ever since Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 It's because it's harder to sit around on your ass and slack when you have a young kid playing his heart out. Lack of youth has been deadly for this teamThis post is just one pile of pure speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Jensen probably brings the shot and energy that Daniel hasn't been providing of late. Once Danny gets going again though, this team should be plenty dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Jensen probably brings the shot and energy that Daniel hasn't been providing of late. Once Danny gets going again though, this team should be plenty dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Are Hank and Burr playing better partly because of the absence of Daniel Sedin? I was thinking about this today and thought it deserved some discussion. Maybe it's not the Sedins that have declined but rather Daniel alone that has declined, and Hank and Burr needed to be separated from him (and put on a line with a budding sniper) to find their games. Thoughts? Or maybe neither has actually declined and injuries/confidence simply played a large role in their scoring drought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Two players out of three would still have done something if simply the third was slumping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 So what happens when Danny comes back?? I'd say keep Jensen on that 1st line & have Danny play on the 2nd line with Matthias & Kassian, (who happens to be a pretty good passer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 This post is just one pile of pure speculation. Aren't they all? I'd speculate Burrows breaking his slump was the largest factor, and whether Jensen's good play contributed to that or they were coincidental is open to further speculation. What I do doubt is that Daniel was such a dead weight that he was dragging the other two down. Daniel wasn't playing well, but none of them were offensively at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Or maybe neither has actually declined and injuries/confidence simply played a large role in their scoring drought. Ding, ding, ding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Two players out of three would still have done something if simply the third was slumping. Not so true, it's a team game and everyone on the ice is important. If someone on a line is not playing well it can mess up the entire lines play. There are not a lot of players that have the talent to overcome dead weight on there line. I'm not in anyway trying to say Danny is dead weight don't get me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Not so true, it's a team game and everyone on the ice is important. If someone on a line is not playing well it can mess up the entire lines play. There are not a lot of players that have the talent to overcome dead weight on there line. I'm not in anyway trying to say Danny is dead weight don't get me wrong. Generally I agree, but somewhewre in the last however many games the slumping has been going on, you'd think there'd be a 2 on 1 or a powerplay or SOMETHING just involving two players and seeing a goal or two. I agree a winger that drags a line down makes a big difference, but I can see a big drop in production, just not 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Or maybe neither has actually declined and injuries/confidence simply played a large role in their scoring drought. Agreed, it's also much more difficult to score if your the teams only offense. The other team loads up on your line and doesn't have to be concerned about secondary scoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theilluminati Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 When the Canucks went 0-3-1 after the St. Louis game (sandwiched around the Luongo trade) the players knew their season was done...once the pressure of making the playoffs was lifted, lo and behold Henrik and Burrows found their scoring touch...too little too late...we'll have 6 months to debate on whether or not they'll bounce back next season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 When the Canucks went 0-3-1 after the St. Louis game (sandwiched around the Luongo trade) the players knew their season was done...once the pressure of making the playoffs was lifted, lo and behold Henrik and Burrows found their scoring touch...too little too late...we'll have 6 months to debate on whether or not they'll bounce back next season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.