Accountability

[khay]

Bench Edler and Hamhuis, so who will play defence? Our defence is beyond repair. It sucks I know. We basically need a new one but building a new defence corps is much harder than building your forward... it's going to be a long process to rebuild this defence. So, what can we do? As bad as Edler and Hamhuis are, they are our best options. 

I mean, Edler is a top 4, who is assigned top 2 duties. Hamhuis was a top 2 (2010-12), who then became a top 4 (13-15), and now he is a top 6, defensive defenceman (15-16 season) but Hamhuis is still being used as a top 4 because we don't have anyone better.

 

 

[HC20.0]

Here is our problem:

Edler(Top 4)-Tanev(Top 4)

Hamhuis(Top 4)-Weber(AHLer)

Sbisa(Top 6)-Bartkowski(Depth)

Hutton(Fringe Top 6)

Our defense is possibly the worst in the league. Getting rid of Bieksa was a good move(Ducks fans hate him actually...) but we brought in no one to replace him. Same as Garrison. He needed to go, but we didn't replace him. Hutton is a good steal, but was struggling before he injury, and Weber is the worst defenseman in the league. Bartkowski was a solid pick up.... For a depth player, not a top 6. 

[nom_de_plume]

35 minutes ago, TimberWolf said:

I remember watching an interview with Greg Norman (no need to point out golf is a different sport, I am aware, but the following philosophy applies)

When asked was separated the elites from the not so elite was not how great their best shots were but how not so bad their mistakes were. That more glaring your mistakes the less you could be considered elite.

Edler's good plays are good but his mistakes are god awful. It's why Tanev is beloved. Sure, his shots are as intimidating as a brony furry festival but his mistakes in his end are so slight that you always feel comfortable with him on the ice when the play is in our end.

 

 

Golf is a different sport... Oh wait.. Oh you already knew that?  Ok

[milk and honey]

36 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

It's also pretty evident that most of us have.

For sure not disagreeing there

36 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Does not playing sports make someone less cabable of voicing an opinion on an Internet chat site, even if it's about sports?  

They can voice their opinion, but the experience of playing sports as a kid gives a better perspective of how a team should/could be run. Calling out a rookie for a mistake or a bad run of games will hinder their relationship with the coaches and other players. In every team, certain guys will be closer than others. Mini groups, you can say and these groups are very important. If a coach calls you out especially when you are young and haven't had to deal with that since you were always among the best players growing up. It will be a weird situation. The mini group he is in will usually comfort him and will make the whole group have issue with the coaches. Calling out one player, making him upset that he has to deal with all the media and trade rumours is not what is needed. Veterans getting called out will just disrupt the leadership of the room and again they will lose trust and respect for a coach. Along with his close friends on the team. Calling out anyone can make 3-5ish players upset/lose trust with the coach. Young players and veterans will both have different ways of handling it and very few after being called out stay on the team long term/fulfill the potential. Fans will start thinking the player sucks and the pressure that comes with that is tough for many players. I can go on and on how getting called out hinders a ton of different areas of the team that is important for a good game day. Bottom line we don't need media knowing everything and telling us. Canucks are a professional club and if any issue with a player current form should be talked about in closed doors. Those coaches, managers, trainers, ect... are professional and know more than us. Trust me players will get on you if you are a hole in the team especially after public shame.

 

These guys know  that they need to continue to push harder and get better. Many will take responsibility at the end of the year for a poor season/poor post season.

IMO it's up to management to clean house on the holes of the team and add solid replacements for them. A good thing about JB and co he wants character guys and this is extremely important for a unified and happy dressing room. 

 

 

[nom_de_plume]

17 minutes ago, HC20.0 said:

Here is our problem:

Edler(Top 4)-Tanev(Top 4)

Hamhuis(Top 4)-Weber(AHLer)

Sbisa(Top 6)-Bartkowski(Depth)

Hutton(Fringe Top 6)

Our defense is possibly the worst in the league. Getting rid of Bieksa was a good move(Ducks fans hate him actually...) but we brought in no one to replace him. Same as Garrison. He needed to go, but we didn't replace him. Hutton is a good steal, but was struggling before he injury, and Weber is the worst defenseman in the league. Bartkowski was a solid pick up.... For a depth player, not a top 6. 

Worst in which league?  AHL or NHL?

[milk and honey]

42 minutes ago, tkanuk said:

THIS IS WHAT A TRANSITION LOOKS LIKE

this x100 as well

[Positive Canuck]

2 minutes ago, HC20.0 said:

Here is our problem:

Edler(Top 4)-Tanev(Top 4)

Hamhuis(Top 4)-Weber(AHLer)

Sbisa(Top 6)-Bartkowski(Depth)

Hutton(Fringe Top 6)

Our defense is possibly the worst in the league. Getting rid of Bieksa was a good move(Ducks fans hate him actually...) but we brought in no one to replace him. Same as Garrison. He needed to go, but we didn't replace him. Hutton is a good steal, but was struggling before he injury, and Weber is the worst defenseman in the league. Bartkowski was a solid pick up.... For a depth player, not a top 6. 

Hamhuis top 4 ?

are u serious ?

 

he's been an absolute train wreck last 2 years compared to his former self.

def entitled to your opinion, some people still think Hamhuis is o.k but his contract is up and unless he's willing to sign for 1.5M money than move him to a contender at the deadline for a pick or bundle him and get a player.

 

i see it like this

Edler- #3-#4 guy at best -Tanev #3-4

Hamhuis #6-7 - Weber SEL/KHL/AHL/ECHL

Hutton TOP4 very soon- Bart - #6-#7

Sbisa #6-#7

 

  This is a pitiful.

#InBenningWeTrust can no longer ignore unless the tank is in play because the best way to tank is having the softest D in the league that offers zero offence.

 

I'd trade Edler, Hamhuis,Weber asap and try and get Hamonic and sign Buff as a UFA , Tanev also not an untouchable, zero offence, zero physicality, zero net clearing ,zero intimidation, makes a good pass and is reliable but def not untouchable.  His good contract and age makes him a prime trade candidate imo.

[nom_de_plume]

8 minutes ago, milk and honey said:

For sure not disagreeing there

They can voice their opinion, but the experience of playing sports as a kid gives a better perspective of how a team should/could be run. Calling out a rookie for a mistake or a bad run of games will hinder their relationship with the coaches and other players. In every team, certain guys will be closer than others. Mini groups, you can say and these groups are very important. If a coach calls you out especially when you are young and haven't had to deal with that since you were always among the best players growing up. It will be a weird situation. The mini group he is in will usually comfort him and will make the whole group have issue with the coaches. Calling out one player, making him upset that he has to deal with all the media and trade rumours is not what is needed. Veterans getting called out will just disrupt the leadership of the room and again they will lose trust and respect for a coach. Along with his close friends on the team. Calling out anyone can make 3-5ish players upset/lose trust with the coach. Young players and veterans will both have different ways of handling it and very few after being called out stay on the team long term/fulfill the potential. Fans will start thinking the player sucks and the pressure that comes with that is tough for many players. I can go on and on how getting called out hinders a ton of different areas of the team that is important for a good game day. Bottom line we don't need media knowing everything and telling us. Canucks are a professional club and if any issue with a player current form should be talked about in closed doors. Those coaches, managers, trainers, ect... are professional and know more than us. Trust me players will get on you if you are a hole in the team especially after public shame.

 

These guys know  that they need to continue to push harder and get better. Many will take responsibility at the end of the year for a poor season/poor post season.

IMO it's up to management to clean house on the holes of the team and add solid replacements for them. A good thing about JB and co he wants character guys and this is extremely important for a unified and happy dressing room. 

 

 

I guess Ryan Miller didn't play sports as a kid

[khay]

33 minutes ago, HC20.0 said:

Here is our problem:

Edler(Top 4)-Tanev(Top 4)

Hamhuis(Top 4)-Weber(AHLer)

Sbisa(Top 6)-Bartkowski(Depth)

Hutton(Fringe Top 6)

Our defense is possibly the worst in the league. Getting rid of Bieksa was a good move(Ducks fans hate him actually...) but we brought in no one to replace him. Same as Garrison. He needed to go, but we didn't replace him. Hutton is a good steal, but was struggling before he injury, and Weber is the worst defenseman in the league. Bartkowski was a solid pick up.... For a depth player, not a top 6. 

Agree, our defence is probably one of the worst in the league.  Hamhuis hasn't been playing like top 4 lately and Weber is probably one of the worst defeceman at defending although, he is not too bad on offence. I actually think that if the Sedins are playing with Salo type player on the PP, who can handle the puck and pass the puck, they are still capable of 90+ points in a season.

Only quick fix that I can think of is for us to go and get one top 2 defender, maybe Hamonic and form a top 4 with

Hamhuis-Hamonic

Edler-Tanev

Once Hutton comes back, we will slot him in as Sbisa's partner so that he can continue to improve and hopefully take Hamhuis's spot starting next season. 

If no such move to improve the backend can be made, this team will miss the playoffs. I actually think that with full lineup, we have a chance to compete for the playoffs spot (with Tanev and Hutton back) but injuries will surely take place and then we will slide off as we are witnessing right now.

In yesterday's game, we gave up at least 10 (maybe more) grade A scoring chances. The defence just can't move the puck out! Had it not been for Markstrom and the incapable LA forwards, we would have lost 5-1.

 

[milk and honey]

22 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

I guess Ryan Miller didn't play sports as a kid

Am I missing something here?

[nom_de_plume]

7 minutes ago, milk and honey said:

Am I missing something here?

Saturday’s matchup against the Buffalo Sabres brought heartbreak for Ryan Miller and the Vancouver Canucks.

The goaltender hopes it also brings a wake-up call.

Miller was not happy with the way his blue liners defended — or didn’t defend — the game-winning goal scored by Rasmus Ristolainen with a mere 16.8 seconds left in the game.

Sabres centre Tyler Ennis got the game-winning play started when he stole the puck from Canucks winger Daniel Sedin — “A bad turnover on my part and it cost us the game,” Sedin said after the game — and gave it to Ristolainen at the point, who made the final score 3-2.

“We’ve got to have better awareness,” Miller said after the game, addressing the goal. “I don’t think a D-man can be in the slot and walking down and then get contested by your D-man in the last minute. It’s a pretty critical error.

“We tried to back check and I don’t want to fault them, but we had two and maybe three guys looking at the puck.”

The Canucks have a noticeable third period problem, having lost four games this season in which they led going into the final frame. (The Canucks were trailing as they entered the final period Saturday, then climbed back before losing the lead late.)

“It’s been the script for our third periods and at some point we’ve got to take issue with it,” said Miller, who also says the Canucks need to have better attention to detail. “We’ve talked about it but it’s becoming a bigger issue. Maybe that one will be a wake-up call.”

[nom_de_plume]

11 minutes ago, milk and honey said:

Am I missing something here?

Following Buffalo's loss to Washington on Sunday, Miller told reporters Kaleta "needs to grow up" after being told the forward wasn't happy about being a healthy scratch after serving a five-game suspension.

[EdgarM]

1 hour ago, tkanuk said:

THIS IS WHAT A TRANSITION LOOKS LIKE

Thats a poor excuse for poor team play. The same team earlier in the year were playing much better hockey and were beating the exact teams they are losing to now. Thats crap to give them that kind of excuse. When firing on all cylinders this team plays much better than they are now. 

[darkpoet]

This looks really bad right now. 

Significant injuries to 3 key guys in Sutton, Tanev, and Hutton are leaving the team reeling.

If i can draw ONE positive out of this, it's that (hopefully) Markstrom gets a lot more playing time until those guys get back.
It's a shooting gallery out there right now and that's no good for a 35 year old Miller.... Markstrom on the other hand is probably embracing it in that he gets a chance to show he can make a difference all on his own - which he is.
Even though we're losing games it'd be worse if he wasn't stopping nearly 40 shots every night.

If Markstrom get more of a split of the games until our injured guys get back I think he'll be better for it, and that's great for the team. He looks really confident out there and once you're in guys' heads the game is in your pocket.
It won't take long if he keeps doing what he's doing.

The defence now though.... ugh........ what a nightmare.

I was never one to jump on the trade Edler bandwagon but at this point you have to give to get, and I'm on board with the guy who said send him over in a deal for Hamonic. Even with a healthy defence our back end needs to be addressed. Edler is a guy who has the size and skill but always needs a guy with him that stabilizes the pairing. 
Time for a change.

 

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, Jack Fig said:

If you say so. Keep enjoying those Eddie Turnovers.

Well if we are going to talk about Eddie turnovers let's just clarify what a real turnover looks like.

63 secs into the game Hamhuis actually played Toffoli in (that is the only way to describe it) a total "has the game started?" thumb up ass move and only a great save by Marky kept him out.

Then 4 mins into OT Henrik whiffs on a pass presenting it to Lewis 15 feet out and in front of goal. Again a good save prevented him from looking a fool and not for the first time has Hank done that this season with a tired sloppy pass.

Now we get to Edlers giveaway. Vibrata one of only 3 other Canucks on the ice and the Canuck in the easiest position to take a cross ice pass sticks his brain in neutral and starts wondering what he will have for dinner that evening, then suddenly realises Edler has passed to him. Absolute lack of awareness and the act of a rookie not a seasoned veteran. By the time he wakes up Carter has left him for dead, passed to Kopitar. That was as much Vibrata's fault as Edler. Even the LA commentator said as much.

There were 2 open chance giveaways against LA and neither was Edler's fortunately these two cost us nothing and it is popular to heap hate on Edler, as you seem inclined to do.

I thought Edler had a pretty good game, as did Biega, Bartowski and Sbisa. Most of the forwards as I say above were out to lunch and that is what is hurting us

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, TimberWolf said:

 

Guess Healy and Stock's opinions are far greater than McKenzie and Friedman's.

 

 

When it comes to on ice personal stuff, and locker room stuff, from the players' points of view, then yes, Healy and Stock have insight the other two cannot.  In all other hockey matters your sarcasm is appropriately placed.  I don't mind Stock, but Healy elucidates complete idiocy.

[VenitoHammer]

8 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?

Oh man.... The thought of someone even thinking Hamhuis would be worth resigning just hurts my brain...  Do you Hamhuis lovers even watch the guy play the last 2-3 seasons??  Or just so infatuated with the fact he made an Olympic squad that he also contributed absolutely nothing too.  Guy is an overrated plug and I would gladly watch this team finish the year with the likes of Pedan,  Biega or Fedun.   

[nom_de_plume]

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

Thats a poor excuse for poor team play. The same team earlier in the year were playing much better hockey and were beating the exact teams they are losing to now. Thats crap to give them that kind of excuse. When firing on all cylinders this team plays much better than they are now. 

For the most part, earlier in the season the pace is slower.  Pace of the game picks up around the 20 game mark.  Teams begin to settle into their style and systems; are comfortable with them and begin to ratchet it up. We were also healthier at the beginning of the year, not so much now. 

[Melt]

The novelty of having rookies seems to be over as per Purst;s comment.  It seems all the team building is declining.  There doesn't seem to be a real team leader on the ice.  Post and pre game comments about playing a full 60 minutes are not followed up .  Not sure if it is Willie that is not being heard or are the players starting to question his coaching style.  Was Purst not brought in for some toughness which would include making sure the skilled players are not taking cheap shots and that would include the rookies.  

[elvis15]

51 minutes ago, VenitoHammer said:

Oh man.... The thought of someone even thinking Hamhuis would be worth resigning just hurts my brain...  Do you Hamhuis lovers even watch the guy play the last 2-3 seasons??  Or just so infatuated with the fact he made an Olympic squad that he also contributed absolutely nothing too.  Guy is an overrated plug and I would gladly watch this team finish the year with the likes of Pedan,  Biega or Fedun.   

So, to be clear, you wouldn't bring back Hammer for $2-3M? We aren't talking about re-signing him for $5-6M or anything like that. Just so we're clear.