PhillipBlunt Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The 2011 and 2012 Canucks were good enough to win 2 straight cups. In the 2011 finals we had Henrik playing through some kinda back problem, Kesler had basically one leg, Malhotra couldn't see, we lost our most reliable defencemen in Hammer in game 1, Edler had broken finger, and Raymond had a broken BACK. Looking back to the finals, it's amazing that that team made it all the way to game 7. Just shows how good that team really was when Boston only had Horton out with a concussion. If we won that year I'm pretty sure we could've won in 2012 as well. Think about it. We had the two previous art ross winners and the reining MVP on our team. A second line center that can shut anyone down and score 41 goals at the same time, and one of the best defence and probably the best goaltending duo in the league. Injuries aren't an excuse, but we would've DESTROYED those Bruins if we were as healthy as them and probably made another cup run in 2012.Shoulda coulda woulda. This kind of wishful hindsight is ridiculous. If the 2012 Canucks were so good why did they get thumped in the first round? Please don't use the Daniel Sedin injury as another excuse. The team didn't have enough offence to overwhelm LA's excellent balanced defensive corps (excellent mix of size and skill) or a good enough defense to stop LA's forecheck. The forward corps from last seasonwas definitely a step in the right direction, but the defense has been getting steadily worse over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I'm not saying it's aliens, but it's Aliens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seven pounds soft Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I think you're right on target there OP Nailed it. The secret is safe with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I could agree with that Sbisa contract being part of this plan, I mean if you want him to play 20 min a game then you will surely see the losses pile up. We just have to have faith in Benning and Linden. I really like Benning's focus on scouting, and Linden's ability to restore respect to the franchise and deal with players with his leadership. After the 2016 season is when we will really start to see the turn around, and yes that draft will be stacked. Im waiting for 2017 to see the real version of Benning and Linden's canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 I think you're right on target there OP Nailed it. The secret is safe with me. Good to know we can trust CDC. I could agree with that Sbisa contract being part of this plan, I mean if you want him to play 20 min a game then you will surely see the losses pile up. We just have to have faith in Benning and Linden. I really like Benning's focus on scouting, and Linden's ability to restore respect to the franchise and deal with players with his leadership. After the 2016 season is when we will really start to see the turn around, and yes that draft will be stacked. Im waiting for 2017 to see the real version of Benning and Linden's canucks. My thinking exactly. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 Yup, those are the gremlins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 The 2011 and 2012 Canucks were good enough to win 2 straight cups. In the 2011 finals we had Henrik playing through some kinda back problem, Kesler had basically one leg, Malhotra couldn't see, we lost our most reliable defencemen in Hammer in game 1, Edler had broken finger, and Raymond had a broken BACK. Looking back to the finals, it's amazing that that team made it all the way to game 7. Just shows how good that team really was when Boston only had Horton out with a concussion. If we won that year I'm pretty sure we could've won in 2012 as well. Think about it. We had the two previous art ross winners and the reining MVP on our team. A second line center that can shut anyone down and score 41 goals at the same time, and one of the best defence and probably the best goaltending duo in the league. Injuries aren't an excuse, but we would've DESTROYED those Bruins if we were as healthy as them and probably made another cup run in 2012. Shoulda coulda woulda. This kind of wishful hindsight is ridiculous. If the 2012 Canucks were so good why did they get thumped in the first round? Please don't use the Daniel Sedin injury as another excuse. The team didn't have enough offence to overwhelm LA's excellent balanced defensive corps (excellent mix of size and skill) or a good enough defense to stop LA's forecheck. The forward corps from last seasonwas definitely a step in the right direction, but the defense has been getting steadily worse over time. Every year one team wins the Stanley Cup. And at least two other teams (or their fans) think they deserved the Cup and would have one except (pick one) 1. The refs robbed us. 2. We had key injuries (as if this is not true of every team). 3. We had bad luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two drink minimum Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Trevor Linden is obviously a smart guy who has been successful at everything he has done. And Benning is clearly an excellent judge of talent. But some of the things they did last year do not seem to make sense, especially overpaying Miller, Sbisa, and Dorsett. But I think I have it figured out. It is all part of a secret plan. Don't tell anyone, as it won't be a secret plan anymore if lots of people know about it. But I think I can reveal a few details here. When TL and JB came on board they could see that the Sedins were still the best players on the team. However, even when the Sedins were at their peak in 2010-11 and 11-12, and the Canucks had arguable the best goaltending combo in the league (Lu and Schneider) and Hammer and Bieksa were in their prime, along with Ehrhoff, Salo, and Edler on D, that still was not good enough to win a Stanley Cup (although it was close and did win two President's trophies). If that team could not win in 2011 or 2012 it certainly was not going to win the Cup in 2015 or 2016. To win the Canucks needed to add some really high end talent and the best way to do that is with high draft picks. Note that Tampa is following that model, built around a #1 overall pick (Stamkos) and #2 overall pick (Hedman). Chicago of course did the same thing (Toews -- #3 overall pick and Kane -- #1 overall pick,) The problem is that ownership wanted a playoff team -- and the financial incentives are compelling as the playoffs generate a lot of profit and being in contention helps with regular season revenue as well. And making the playoffs makes it hard to get high draft picks. So, the Canucks needed to make the playoffs in 2015 to keep ownership happy and earn them some leeway. But they needed to do badly in 2016 and 2017 before re-emerging with a legitimate Cup contender. So they cleverly overpaid for Miller and others in 2015 to preclude adding players for the 2016 year.And they are trying to accumulate good young assets like Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Pedan, Baertschi and Clendening. With a few young assets left over from Gillis regime (Horvat, Cassels, Markstrom) they have part of an emerging young core. . At the trade deadline in 2016 the Canucks will be in a position to trade Bieksa, Hammer, Vrbata and maybe others for draft picks. (Those guys will only have a couple of months left on their contracts anyway so would probably be happy to go to contender to end the season. Maybe we could even re-sign Hammer in the summer of 2016). Then the Canucks could have a monster draft in 2016. (Benning has already said that the thinks the 2016 draft will be even better than the 2015 draft). Assuming they add at least one good young player in the 2015 draft, they should be well-positioned 3 or 4 years from now. I am pretty sure that is the secret plan. But, like I said, keep it secret.I was thinking the exact same thing. This is incredible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If the defence was good enough to win the Cup it would have one the Cup. It wasn't. This has always been the Canucks biggest issue. While Erhoff and Salo were well versed offensive d-men, neither was a deterrent against a strong forecheck (such as Boston's overwhelming 2011 version). Luongo played out of his head in the 2011 run, and due to that, the glaring issues with the defense's lack of size and physicality was never exposed. Edler was the biggest defenseman, and Bieksa the most truculent, but all the same both played as they are 2/3 defensemen. This team needs to remedy this point in the offseason by trading for some convincing size on the blueline, and acquire raw talent for it through the draft. Are you saying a team should win the Cup no matter how many injuries they are carrying or how many players they have lost to injury? That makes no sense. The team that played in 2010-11 would have imo won the cup with ease if they had remained mostly healthy. I also think they would likely have won in 2012 and maybe 2013 if Gillis had reinforced it using some imagination instead of chucking dead legs like Bitz, Mancari, Oreskovich, Barker, Booth, Ebbett, Duco, Gragnani, Sturm, Sulzer at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltt Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I'm not saying it's aliens, but it's Aliens. Source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Are All Cynics Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Every year one team wins the Stanley Cup. And at least two other teams (or their fans) think they deserved the Cup and would have one except (pick one) 1. The refs robbed us. 2. We had key injuries (as if this is not true of every team). 3. We had bad luck Luongo. Fixed it for you. He melted down on the road in typical Luongoan fashion (8.05 GAA, 0.773 SV%, 15 goals in approx. 5.5 periods of play) blowing three games letting the Bruins back in the series much like he did in Games 4-5 the first round against Chicago. We could've won this series and the Cup easily in 4-5 games if Luongo remained consistent but his Jekyll and Hyde play doomed the Canucks since injuries were a factor and the longer the series went, the worse off the team's chances were. Consistency has never been Luongo's strong suit. It's why he has no Cup, Vezina or poker championship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Are you saying a team should win the Cup no matter how many injuries they are carrying or how many players they have lost to injury? Not at all. Again, elfstroker, you make things up. As per usual with your posts. The Canucks had an exceptional forward corps during the Cup run, and a goalie who played out of his mind. The defense was adept at contributing offence, that is proven. However, it was not very good from a defensive standpoint. Too many times during the playoffs the defense would get danced around and Luongo would end up saving their bacon through making an amazing save. When he did get ventilated in both Chicago and Boston, did the defence clampdown and save him? No they didn't. The Canucks have had elite (that goes out to apollo) talent in both the forward and goalie postion. But the defense corps has never been one that was truly on par. The 2011 d-corps was exceptional in joining the rush and contributing offensively, but when it came time to grind out a physical game, they lacked both the necessary size and grit (outside of Bieksa) to keep up. That makes no sense. Yes it does. You just don't get it. The team that played in 2010-11 would have imo won the cup with ease if they had remained mostly healthy. Again, this is hindsight that is speculative. Hamhuis and Raymond were out. Everyone else played. Did the Bruins sustain injuries during the Finals? I also think they would likely have won in 2012 and maybe 2013 if Gillis had reinforced it using some imagination instead of chucking dead legs like Bitz, Mancari, Oreskovich, Barker, Booth, Ebbett, Duco, Gragnani, Sturm, Sulzer at it. I will agree that after 2011, Gillis lost focus of where he was going with this team and tried to moneyball it with retreads and AHL rejects. Although Tanev, Lack (if he stays), Horvat, and possibly more will factor in to the future of the team quite prominently. Benning has a plan and hopefully that includes either trading for or looking to develop some serious talent on the blueline. Edler, Tanev, Corrado, and Clendening are players who could really be major contributors to a great defensive core going forward. Bieksa and Hamhuis are players who maybe deserve a shot (considering their ages) to go to a contender for a couple of cracks at the Cup before they retire. This defense needs to get larger, meaner, and faster if it hopes to stay in contention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Fixed it for you. He melted down on the road in typical Luongoan fashion (8.05 GAA, 0.773 SV%, 15 goals in approx. 5.5 periods of play) blowing three games letting the Bruins back in the series much like he did in Games 4-5 the first round against Chicago. We could've won this series and the Cup easily in 4-5 games if Luongo remained consistent but his Jekyll and Hyde play doomed the Canucks since injuries were a factor and the longer the series went, the worse off the team's chances were. Consistency has never been Luongo's strong suit. It's why he has no Cup, Vezina or poker championship! Another misinformed poster who lumps all the responsibility on Luongo and not on the defensemen who watched instead of defended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Another misinformed poster who lumps all the responsibility on Luongo and not on the defensemen who watched instead of defended. Game 7, that third goal Luongo let in was one of the worst in Stanley Cup final Game 7 history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Fixed it for you. He melted down on the road in typical Luongoan fashion (8.05 GAA, 0.773 SV%, 15 goals in approx. 5.5 periods of play) blowing three games letting the Bruins back in the series much like he did in Games 4-5 the first round against Chicago. We could've won this series and the Cup easily in 4-5 games if Luongo remained consistent but his Jekyll and Hyde play doomed the Canucks since injuries were a factor and the longer the series went, the worse off the team's chances were. Consistency has never been Luongo's strong suit. It's why he has no Cup, Vezina or poker championship! It was the "Pump my tires" comment that sparked Boston and Thomas and that was the end of the series Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdubuya Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Linden hype is overdone. He just finished his rookie year in the hockey world, and it largely fell on willies and jbs shoulders. Why don't we give him a few more years before we pass judgment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Lindens role is the President of the Canucks. I believe his job is to restore faith in the franchise after the Torts era led to empty seats and a boring style of play. Linden was the one who persuaded Benning, on of the hottest GM's in the league, to come to Vancouver, and was instrumental in hiring Willie as well. We cannot underestimate what having a person who is as respected in the hockey world as Linden has done for our franchise. This affects team morale, the ability for Free Agents to want to come here, and his ability to talk with players who know what he has done on the ice. This is a complete turnaround from the Gillis era, where a former Player Agent did not have the ability to do what Trevor has done. Lindens hiring was IMO the only move that brought me back and watch the Canucks. Even if it is one year, as a fan I could not be happier that he is the President and I even watched every game last season. Have faith in Linden is all i gotta say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdatb Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well you've gone and ruined the secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Game 7, that third goal Luongo let in was one of the worst in Stanley Cup final Game 7 history.And where was the defense during that goal. They were atrocious during game 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 It was the "Pump my tires" comment that sparked Boston and Thomas and that was the end of the seriesThe Horton hit was the impetus and the blind zebras the gasoline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.