Accountability

[nom_de_plume]

4 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

No team will ever desperately need a player like Burrows off its team.  Even if he declines and slows down, there's no reason he can't serve a role like Tikkanen on the Rangers or Recchi on the Bruins.  He would probably have to be about 42 before his game actually declined enough that he was a net liability on an NHL roster given what else he brings.

As for Hamhuis, again, no team desperately needs to be rid of a player like him.  On his worst day, and if he continues declining, he's a legit #5 or #6 D.  The guy was the captain of the World Championships team when Crosby was out.  He would have to be coughing up the puck a lot more regularly than he is now before he became someone that HAD TO GO.

And Higgins is a poor man's Burrows.  He should perhaps be lower on a depth chart than he is, but what on earth is the guy hurting?

The ability to have Gaunce in the line up. And the question could be asked the other way... What isn't he hurting?  Answer: The opposing players, the net with the puck.. The list could go on ad infinite...

[EdgarM]

The same theme has been going around for years regarding this team. Accountability,toughness,pushback,intensity,heart and compete level. I have brought this up before and I initially thought it might be because of our captain or the vets. I am not sure where it comes from but it has lingered around the team since the Nazzy years. The days of a hard working team night in and night out ended when Linden lost his captaincy. I had great expectations for this team early on in the year because it looked like they had finally gotten with the program of working hard every game , every period , every shift. Well they have gone back to half hearted play where the intensity level has just disappeared. This team can beat the good teams when they are on but they can be downright awful when they do not put in the effort.

When the game starts and I see a guy like Prust go into the boards and not lean into his check one bit, I know right away that the game is not going to end well. When a guy like Burrows does not throw one body check in a game and the team does their run around in their own zone, the game is pretty much over. 

Mediocrity is the main theme for this team and it is pretty much going to be the demise of this team. There are far too many so-so players in the line up and change needs to come before more fans grow tired of it and invest their time and money on something else.

[alfstonker]

3 minutes ago, Jack Fig said:

 

Atta boy, keep looking the other way. Free rides for everyone!

Does that really look like free rides for everyone?

Or does it look like I am analysing a problem at a deeper level than "lynch the guy who made a mistake." 

Honestly if we were booting every player who made a mistake or even a lot of mistakes the forwards would be cleared long before the D.

 

[nom_de_plume]

4 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

No team will ever desperately need a player like Burrows off its team.  Even if he declines and slows down, there's no reason he can't serve a role like Tikkanen on the Rangers or Recchi on the Bruins.  He would probably have to be about 42 before his game actually declined enough that he was a net liability on an NHL roster given what else he brings.

As for Hamhuis, again, no team desperately needs to be rid of a player like him.  On his worst day, and if he continues declining, he's a legit #5 or #6 D.  The guy was the captain of the World Championships team when Crosby was out.  He would have to be coughing up the puck a lot more regularly than he is now before he became someone that HAD TO GO.

And Higgins is a poor man's Burrows.  He should perhaps be lower on a depth chart than he is, but what on earth is the guy hurting?

And if we already have a Burrows, why would we want a poor man's version too?

[Toyotasfan]

9 minutes ago, Jack Fig said:

I'd sit Edler for a game. Anyone on that team who appreciates accountability would take notice, and that's the win in doing it.

9 minutes ago, Jack Fig said:

 I would love to do this, he lost the game for us. But I remember back 2 years when Torts reamed him out on the bench against the Rangers in New York after a bad giveaway. It had a negative effect, Edler quit playing, went on to have the worst plus/minus in the league. Veterans don't always respond well to being called out and it's usually the coach who pays for it in the end. 

[hlinkas wrister]

The reality is, nobody knows what is going on behind the scenes- guys could be being taken to task behind closed doors. Just because it's not happening on the bench or in interviews like Torts used to handle it, doesn't mean players aren't being held accountable. And the only reason top 6 forwards and top 4 d aren't getting benched is the lineup is just too thin to do it right now imho. 

[Tech N9ne]

4 hours ago, Rainism said:

Benching or sitting 30+ year old players aren't going to do anything as they've reached their ceiling and aren't getting any better.

Our defense is absolutely awful and we are still counting on our 35 year old superstars to score all the goals.

We clearly have a problem when your second line has Prust with Vrbata.

I'm surprised Daniel is even producing above PTS/G with our horrible defense that don't even know how to run the powerplay or simply hit the net. (Weber you got lucky tonight with skating that puck in, it'll only happen once like that and once only for you)

We are in dire need of a trade- I don't care how we do it, it's not gonna be easy but we need a GOOD one.

Players that we desperately need out of our team:

Edler (29), Weber (27), Hamhuis (32), Burrows (34), Higgins (32), Vrbata (34)

I doubt anything is going to even happen since Benning is happy with our group when we're healthy- as heard on TSN1040

 

I agree with most of the things you've said, except about trading Burr, Hammer, And Vrbata. All have had their struggles this season but that aside, they bring an element to the team off the ice. You can not just throw a bunch of rookies out there and expect them to elevate to NHL caliber without proper coaching, both by staff and players. Not to mention as of right now I doubt any of the mentioned have much trade value. Let burr and hammer retire as canucks, pawn off vrbata at the deadline so you can get more for him......Lets be honest here, the odds of us making the playoffs are slim. We don't want to be the next Edmonton. Keep a couple vets.

[Jack Fig]

2 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Does that really look like free rides for everyone?

Or does it look like I am analysing a problem at a deeper level than "lynch the guy who made a mistake." 

Honestly if we were booting every player who made a mistake or even a lot of mistakes the forwards would be cleared long before the D.

 

This thread is about accountability. Edler is the second-longest serving defenceman and highest-salary of the bunch. His level of consistency is close to non-existent. When pointing fingers, I start with him. If you want to shelter him and look past his level of play, that's your choice. But we have young kids on this team watching him go about his business. I'd like to know what they honestly think of his limp-wristed play, lack of leadership, and inability to bear down under pressure.

[Jack Fig]

9 minutes ago, Toyotasfan said:

 I would love to do this, he lost the game for us. But I remember back 2 years when Torts reamed him out on the bench against the Rangers in New York after a bad giveaway. It had a negative effect, Edler quit playing, went on to have the worst plus/minus in the league. Veterans don't always respond well to being called out and it's usually the coach who pays for it in the end. 

Sadly, this is all true. And the real problem never gets addressed ... just swept under the rug with a blind hope that things will get better.

[Kevin Biestra]

16 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

And if we already have a Burrows, why would we want a poor man's version too?

There's a lot of spots in the lineup to be filled.  The forwards don't need to be twelve players with no overlap in their abilities or skillset.

A player who is 80% of Burrows can still be better than whatever alternatives present themselves.

Murray Craven was a poor man's Ronning but he played an important role in 1994.

[Dekey Pete]

29 minutes ago, Jack Fig said:

Atta boy, keep looking the other way. Free rides for everyone!

Ha, you obviously don't remember his rants on Kassian.  

[nom_de_plume]

13 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

There's a lot of spots in the lineup to be filled.  The forwards don't need to be twelve players with no overlap in their abilities or skillset.

A player who is 80% of Burrows can still be better than whatever alternatives present themselves.

Murray Craven was a poor man's Ronning but he played an important role in 1994.

Craven and Ronning had near identical career stats and double the points of what Higgins and Burrows have in their careers.  Craven also only played 2 seasons with the Canucks while Ronning played 6.  Canucks must have recognized Craven's redundancy and allowed his release.  Where we at with Higgins and Burrows?

My bad: Craven played 1 season and 10 games.  He served his purpose and moved on.

[Kevin Biestra]

2 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

Craven and Ronning had near identical career stats and double the points of what Higgins and Burrows have in their careers.  Craven also only played 2 seasons with the Canucks while Ronning played 6.  Canucks must have recognized Craven's redundancy and allowed his release.  Where we at with Higgins and Burrows?

We're just going around in circles.

Murray Craven got old and his career ended shortly after leaving the Canucks.  Doesn't mean an excellent team didn't have room for Ronning and Craven.  They would have both made the roster of any team in the NHL at that time, no questions asked.

Brent Sutter was a poor man's Bryan Trottier but - though that would make him redundant by your terms - he scored 100 points in a season, they won the Stanley Cup with him, and both he and Trottier remained with the team for several years.

Charlie Huddy was the poor man's Kevin Lowe, and an asset to any team in the NHL.

Tim Hunter was the poor man's Gino Odjick and we made it to the Stanley Cup finals with both of them.

I could go on listing players with overlapping skillsets that can and should co-exist on a roster.  I'm sure you can go on trying to discredit them.

 

[alfstonker]

21 minutes ago, Jack Fig said:

This thread is about accountability. Edler is the second-longest serving defenceman and highest-salary of the bunch. His level of consistency is close to non-existent. When pointing fingers, I start with him. If you want to shelter him and look past his level of play, that's your choice. But we have young kids on this team watching him go about his business. I'd like to know what they honestly think of his limp-wristed play, lack of leadership, and inability to bear down under pressure.

Edler is +3 the 5th best in the team and bettered by only Hamhuis and Tanev in the D and given these 2 play an average of 3 mins less every night I don't know what games you are looking at.

By the way Horvat is -12. Vibrata is -13, 

[riffraff]

2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

The post I responded to said that "we desperately needed" the listed players off the team.

If it's that desperate, it's implied that they're hurting something.

Nobody wants a mediocre team or mediocre players, but what's the point in cattle prodding "mediocre" players out the door if they're going to be replaced by players that are mediocre in the AHL?

We already have our best prospects in the NHL right now.  And the team kind of sucks.  The next guys to make the jump are mediocre-to-poor prospects.  The Virtanens are already up here and aren't setting the world on fire.

So...we desperately need to trade Burrows for a 6th rounder tomorrow so that we can give more icetime to Vey or Shinkaruk?

I wasn't specifically referring to burrows to clarify.

 

you trade when the players could be interchanged with younger guys. For example Higgins for Gaunce.  The result of that is development, and the clearing of contract and cap space to aquire better players.

 

dont assume that the end result of trading the above mentioned players is a late round pick.  There are many avenues to improve the team through trade.

[alfstonker]

14 minutes ago, The Sedge said:

Ha, you obviously don't remember his rants on Kassian.  

Yeah and I was right then as well.  I don't think Jack was all that keen on Kassian either ?

[Jack Fig]

16 minutes ago, The Sedge said:

Ha, you obviously don't remember his rants on Kassian.  

Some things are best forgotten.

[Jack Fig]

4 minutes ago, riffraff said:

I wasn't specifically referring to burrows to clarify.

 

you trade when the players could be interchanged with younger guys. For example Higgins for Gaunce.  The result of that is development, and the clearing of contract and cap space to aquire better players.

 

dont assume that the end result of trading the above mentioned players is a late round pick.  There are many avenues to improve the team through trade.

Freeing-up cap dollars doesn't hurt either.

Guys like Higgins are just like the old guy at the plant punching the clock, dreaming of retirement and depressing the hell out of everyone.

[nom_de_plume]

9 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

We're just going around in circles.

Murray Craven got old and his career ended shortly after leaving the Canucks.  Doesn't mean an excellent team didn't have room for Ronning and Craven.  They would have both made the roster of any team in the NHL at that time, no questions asked.

Brent Sutter was a poor man's Bryan Trottier but - though that would make him redundant by your terms - he scored 100 points in a season, they won the Stanley Cup with him, and both he and Trottier remained with the team for several years.

Charlie Huddy was the poor man's Kevin Lowe, and an asset to any team in the NHL.

Tim Hunter was the poor man's Gino Odjick and we made it to the Stanley Cup finals with both of them.

I could go on listing players with overlapping skillsets that can and should co-exist on a roster.  I'm sure you can go on trying to discredit them.

 

I never said overlapping skills wasn't a good thing.  I agree with that as long as the other skills brought to the table don't include an inaccurate shot, skating by hits, disappearing for 20 game stretches and rocking a great beard.

The players you mentioned were very much heart and soul guys that I would never discredit because of the other stuff they brought to the ice.  Burrows, when on, is a heart and soul guy that could fit those moulds.  Higgins is most definitely not and would NEVER be lumped into the same category as a Huddy, Sutter, Odjick, Hunter, etc....

I never discredited Craven or Ronning.  BTW Craven played 6 more seasons after the Canucks, the length of Higgins stay here. 

[Jack Fig]

7 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Edler is +3 the 5th best in the team and bettered by only Hamhuis and Tanev in the D and given these 2 play an average of 3 mins less every night I don't know what games you are looking at.

By the way Horvat is -12. Vibrata is -13, 

If you say so. Keep enjoying those Eddie Turnovers.