DefCon1 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 8 hours ago, messier's_elbow said: This is what happens to an aging core.... This shouldn't be a shock to anyone... Well, the Sedins and Miller are still playing good. I doubt its the age rather the players we have, afterall, Edler, Sbisa, Bartkowski, Weber aren't old at all, they just plain suck. The Sedins are the oldest players yet they are top 10 in scoring. What Benning should do is instead of getting crappy players to play defense, he should be targeting actual defensemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEGCanuck Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 You see some of these guys on the ice and you really have to question their intelligence. It is not a difficult game when you pay attention to the basics yet most players some of the time ignore what they have been taught years before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 23 minutes ago, DefCon1 said: Well, the Sedins and Miller are still playing good. I doubt its the age rather the players we have, afterall, Edler, Sbisa, Bartkowski, Weber aren't old at all, they just plain suck. The Sedins are the oldest players yet they are top 10 in scoring. What Benning should do is instead of getting crappy players to play defense, he should be targeting actual defensemen. there in lies the rub, ...to get better d-men right now, they would have to give up #1 draft picks and good young prospects, like horvat, hutton, mccann and boeser....benning was hoping that this team could make the playoffs without giving up what he is putting together...teams are not going to give us good defensemen for our aging vets.... we know going forward, we'll have the sedins, hansen, sutter, the kids, and dorsett....and edler, tanev, sbisa and hutton...markstrom...going forwards, the others will be replaced....but it will take time... it is hard to watch, but there is no magic formula that will make us contenders over night....everyone on this team wants to win and it kills them too that their losing...higgins ian't the problem on this team..he isn't scoring like most other players but he is playing because he is the defensive member on the line he plays on...willie likes to play one man high that can get back defensively when the other team gets the puck.... the whole plan is to keep the vets here until you young one can push them out....it hasn't happened yet...i'm sure the lights are burning late in the war room but unlike the cdc gm's, benning can't trade higgins for pk subban.... if people hate watching their team go through hard times, i suggest that they stop going to games or turn off their tv's and go out and coach a hockey team .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 7 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: Sand in the vaseline?! Haha! Ya, something like that I guess.. Or because I got sucked into his rage: Fly's in the vaseline we are, sometimes it blows my mind Keep getting stuck here all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 You clearly don't remember the Messier/Keenan era where the team had all the skill and tools to win but just decided not to bother. Right now we are not winning because we aren't good enough. There isn't any sign that the players have given up. That isn't nearly as bad as the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 I dont believe anybody on the team is playing above their pay scale and that's why this team sucks. We used to have guys who did that but now we dont, most of the guys now are playing well below it. Once those players are gone then the Canucks should rise again, hopefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hlinkas wrister Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 10 hours ago, homersexual said: It might if you just relax a bit. Such a terrible post. I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Bagues Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 10 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: Messier years were worse. I was ashamed of the team, and I was ashamed of the coach and the executives. I was ashamed of pretty much everything related to the Canucks. The new uniforms, the new captain. The last ten games have been bad. Pathetic, really. But...I have experienced TRUE SHAME and that was worse. Very much agreed. Those were very dark times when clowns named Tikanen and Beranek wore the jersey. Makes having a Y. Weber in the line-up a little less painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireGillis Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Messier years were still worse! I'm not ashamed of this team because I never expected them to do well due to a lack of talent. We're in a rebuilding phase, so I'm ok with the losses and want to tank for the future! This has been a great rebuilding year so far, if we can keep the tank going and get a top 5 pick! The only way this team would be disappointing is if you bought the benning retool kool-aid this summer, then you would have false expectations of this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Just re-posting that the Messier era was worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Bagues Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 1 hour ago, smithers joe said: there in lies the rub, ...to get better d-men right now, they would have to give up #1 draft picks and good young prospects, like horvat, hutton, mccann and boeser....benning was hoping that this team could make the playoffs without giving up what he is putting together...teams are not going to give us good defensemen for our aging vets.... we know going forward, we'll have the sedins, hansen, sutter, the kids, and dorsett....and edler, tanev, sbisa and hutton...markstrom...going forwards, the others will be replaced....but it will take time... I felt before the year we were in trouble with our d; and it's worse than I had imagined. I don't think our forwards would seem so inept if our d was any good at moving the puck. I've played on teams with crappy d and awesome forwards and the season was a wash. The forwards have to spend too much time waiting, stopping, and chasing vs getting the puck on the move. Any moves Benning makes needs to address the d-core; oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 I find it easier to just assume the Canucks will lose every game, and then if they win, I'm pleasantly surprised. This team is in trouble and I feel bad for the Sedins. They genuinely care about this team, but there are too many inexperienced rookies and coasting vets on the roster as well. Prust, just seems to be going through the motions, probably missing his fiancé in MTL and is maybe hoping another team out east picks him up. I don't even notice Burrows anymore, whereas before he was electric every time on the ice. Higgins looks old and slow and disinterested. Edler just seems to want his paycheque, and shows no emotion. Miller has been very good this year, but with a depleted D, he looks frustrated with his team mates and can only do so much. They've let him down, often. I'm sure he'd love to jump ship as well. Horvat has been bad this year and I wonder what's going on with him. No one ever talks about Horvat, we're still in-love with what he did last year and he's gotten a pass this year. Why? Are we blaming the Sutter injury? Please. In the words of Jim Mora, former head coach of Indy Colts: "Playoffs?!! Don't talk about playoffs! Are you kidding me? Playoffs?! I'm just hoping we can win a game!" The Canucks will be out of a playoff spot by the trade deadline (or sooner). But I'm okay with that. I would rather bomb this year (get the high draft pick, force Benning to trade off the vets for picks and rebuild), than squeak into the 8th spot and then get hammered 4 straight, quick exit. Gotsta go: Vrbata, Higgins, Burrows, Edler, Hamhuis, Prust, and Glen Gulutzen (special teams coach) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Messier era was worse because that team was more talented. Id also say circa '83-'88 was worse too. This year's team is "paper bag o shame" bad.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Just now, Darius71 said: Messier era was worse because that team was more talented. I don't think it was. Dave Scatchard quick;y became our 2nd line center because Linden had to go. Bure and Mogilny could never work as an effective tandem. Messier himself was sub-par. Lumme's skill level took a dive, as did McLean's. We went through nine goaltenders in three years. Brian Noonan was top-6. So was Bill Muckalt. So was Donald Brashear. We had prospects in Ohlund, Aucoin, Walker, and Scatchard, but only Ohlund worked out for us. Aucoin was lost due to money. (A large part of the problem was the lack of money.) Walker and Scatchard are bottom-6 guys. No scoring was coming up through our system until the Sedins were drafted. We did trade for Naslund, B-Mo and Bertuzzi here though, and the rest is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 5 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: I don't think it was. Dave Scatchard quick;y became our 2nd line center because Linden had to go. Bure and Mogilny could never work as an effective tandem. Messier himself was sub-par. Lumme's skill level took a dive, as did McLean's. We went through nine goaltenders in three years. Brian Noonan was top-6. So was Bill Muckalt. So was Donald Brashear. We had prospects in Ohlund, Aucoin, Walker, and Scatchard, but only Ohlund worked out for us. Aucoin was lost due to money. (A large part of the problem was the lack of money.) Walker and Scatchard are bottom-6 guys. No scoring was coming up through our system until the Sedins were drafted. We did trade for Naslund, B-Mo and Bertuzzi here though, and the rest is history. That D was better than this D. Up front its debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Just now, Darius71 said: That D was better than this D. Up front its debatable. Maybe with Hamhuis out, and on paper. Ohlund was nice and Aucoin had a big shot, but overall the Messier-era D and goaltending was atrocious. Considering the lack of top D prospects we have now, this is a potentially huge problem for the team going forward. It might cause the rebuild to collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 1 hour ago, smithers joe said: if people hate watching their team go through hard times, i suggest that they stop going to games or turn off their tv's and go out and coach a hockey team .... Agree with the entire post Joe, but this line pretty much says it all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 4 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: Maybe with Hamhuis out, and on paper. Ohlund was nice and Aucoin had a big shot, but overall the Messier-era D and goaltending was atrocious. Considering the lack of top D prospects we have now, this is a potentially huge problem for the team going forward. It might cause the rebuild to collapse. I agree about the D- there are no D prospects that will bloom into impact players. Not going to be an easy fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 13 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: I don't think it was. Dave Scatchard quick;y became our 2nd line center because Linden had to go. Bure and Mogilny could never work as an effective tandem. Messier himself was sub-par. Lumme's skill level took a dive, as did McLean's. We went through nine goaltenders in three years. Brian Noonan was top-6. So was Bill Muckalt. So was Donald Brashear. We had prospects in Ohlund, Aucoin, Walker, and Scatchard, but only Ohlund worked out for us. Aucoin was lost due to money. (A large part of the problem was the lack of money.) Walker and Scatchard are bottom-6 guys. No scoring was coming up through our system until the Sedins were drafted. We did trade for Naslund, B-Mo and Bertuzzi here though, and the rest is history. I think a lot of people assume that because both Pavel and Almo were Russian (and former linemates) that they were close friends, but a conversation I had with a former Canuck who was on the team at the same time, indicated that this was not the case. Bure had a circle of teammates who he was close with and they formed a clique, which Almo was not part of. FWIW, the player I talked to said that Mogilny was one of the hardest working guys on the team and the consummate teammate. (Thus implying that Pavel was not) It isn't like Bure and Mogilny didn't like each other. They just weren't the "comrades" that many people assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Just now, RUPERTKBD said: I think a lot of people assume that because both Pavel and Almo were Russian (and former linemates) that they were close friends, but a conversation I had with a former Canuck who was on the team at the same time, indicated that this was not the case. Bure had a circle of teammates who he was close with and they formed a clique, which Almo was not part of. FWIW, the player I talked to said that Mogilny was one of the hardest working guys on the team and the consummate teammate. (Thus implying that Pavel was not) It isn't like Bure and Mogilny didn't like each other. They just weren't the "comrades" that many people assume. At the end of the day it shouldn't have mattered. They did play well with each other (and Fedorov) for the Red Army, did they not? At least i vaguely recall on junior tourney or something. Not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.