GDT & PGT: Preds vs Nucks, Saturday, Mar.12, 2016, 7 PM PST on CBC

[Jack Fig]

17 minutes ago, TheAce said:

its such a world of difference on our PP having Hutton out there instead of Edler....... Hutton can carry the puck, can make moves and thinks the game much better than Edler does out there.

 

People look at Edlers point totals and think he is an offensive d-man but in reality he gets most of his points playing with the twins. I hope the coaching staff continues to play Hutton on the number 1 unit next season

Seeing Hutton out there on the PP, it becomes clear how dire the situation really was when Edler was in that role. Hutton looks to get the puck toward the net; Edler looked to get the puck to the Sedins, deferment style. 

[Stierlitz]

Funny stats:

 

Sportsnet Stats ‏@SNstats 16h16 hours ago

Justin Bieber played at Rogers Arena in Vancouver on Friday. Home teams are 12-4-3 in the game after Bieber plays in their building.

[Harvey Spector]

11 minutes ago, 6YPE said:

Not just scouting,  but development.  You can scout all the players you want, but if you don't develop them correctly you still have nothing.  

True that...

[joe-max]

12 minutes ago, 6YPE said:

Not just scouting,  but development.  You can scout all the players you want, but if you don't develop them correctly you still have nothing.  

Quoted for truth.

[NHTyrany]

On 11/03/2016 at 0:23 PM, debluvscanucks said:

Last game was a great pace and tons of energy - I actually go watch in person and can say I'm seeing a huge shift toward some jump and a fast team.   And they do stand up for themselves and don't shy away.  So I think they are in that process now...patience?  But don't let that get in your way of shredding the team to bits from afar?

 

Also, Jake on top line now?

Why so sensitive? I'm far from shredding, just criticising, I think fairly, the obvious soft and yoyo play this year. You may be right about things turning around--two good ones in a row.  By the way, I go to at least a couple of games a year despite my "afar" status. Over the last 2 seasons I've had the honour to see the nucks  in Florida, Tampa, Winnipeg, and Ottawa. I also watch 98% on Gamecenter. I'm a huge fan and I'm excited about the future but displeased with their inconsistent play at home this year, especially considering how they play on the road. You can't chalk it up to injuries and even fans deserve to criticize on CDC when they feel it's due. I'd say the CDC majority agrees the team is currently too soft to compete in the West--hence all the unfortunate hype surrounding Tryamkin the saviour. Thing is, it will take more than just inserting a giant; everyone, vets included, can and must improve on consistency and physicality. For me Ws and the points are currently secondary to positive team identity.  

[Harvey Spector]

1 hour ago, JamesB said:

Just as the outlier example of Edmonton is misleadingly used all the time to argue that drafting high doesn't help much, the example of Detroit picking Datsyuk and Zetterberg in low rounds is misleading used to argue that you can get franchise players with low picks if you just have good scouting.

 

Scouting has moved forward a lot in the past 10 years. There is now much less uncertainty about Russian players than there used to be (whether they would come over, how good they were, etc.) It much harder to find great players in the low rounds than it used to be. I don't think we will ever see two low round forwards being franchise players on the the same team at the same time again.

 

Defenceman are a bit different. They take longer to develop and are harder to assess at the draft than they used to be. So there is still a decent chance of getting excellent Ds in the lower rounds. That is one reason why the first round is usually dominated with forward picks and is one reason why I am not enthusiastic that Benning is leaning for a first round D this year. I would be happy to get Chychrun at 5 or Juolevi or Sergachev a bit lower, but I worry about taking a D over excellent forward prospects like Nylander, Dubois or Gauthier in the 6 to 10 range. 

 

 

I would agree with you that chances are slim in the current NHL world to find franchise European players in the later rounds. Things have changed greatly since the 90's in terms of getting players out of Europe. 

 

But in terms of finding hidden gems and franchise North American players outside the second round it can still happen even today. Ben Hutton was a 5th round pick. He looks to possibly be a top 2 defenceman and potential franchise player over the next 2-3 years. And what about Jamie Benn??  He was a FIFTH round pick and IS a franchise player, winning the Art Ross trophy last year.  So franchise players even in today's culture can still be had in the later rounds but as someone else pointed out it's not just enough just to draft them, you have to develop them as well in order to achieve success. 

[CanuckleHorse]

Spoiler

 

Hey oil fans you n your team have a male organ fetish go away you goofs

[-DLC-]

7 minutes ago, NHTyrany said:

Why so sensitive? I'm far from shredding, just criticising, I think fairly, the obvious soft and yoyo play this year. You may be right about things turning around--two good ones in a row.  By the way, I go to at least a couple of games a year despite my "afar" status. Over the last 2 seasons I've had the honour to see the nucks  in Florida, Tampa, Winnipeg, and Ottawa. I also watch 98% on Gamecenter. I'm a huge fan and I'm excited about the future but displeased with their inconsistent play at home this year, especially considering how they play on the road. You can't chalk it up to injuries and even fans deserve to criticize on CDC when they feel it's due. I'd say the CDC majority agrees the team is currently too soft to compete in the West--hence all the unfortunate hype surrounding Tryamkin the saviour. Thing is, it will take more than just inserting a giant; everyone, vets included, can and must improve on consistency and physicality. For me Ws and the points are currently secondary to positive team identity.  

Consistency comes over time....this is a team that's in the works, so you have to allow for that.  For them to figure it out - from the coaching style to how the others on the ice play.  And I think they're doing that..finding their groove and rhythm as they get more familiar.  We've taken a couple of vets out of the line up and have injected some youth in...so if they take time to adjust and go up against the beasts in the West it's understandable.  I'm excited about the process and just feels it's premature to assess consistency.  This year we knew would be a time to start introducing some "change" in a move to get faster.  We can't have our cake and eat it too - the cry was to get younger/faster and we're doing that.  And these guys are holding their own in terms of physicality....they aren't back away.  So not sure what it is you want here?

 

With Tryamkin added into the mix, we'll have some size as part of that.  Being displeased is fine...but it isn't an overnight thing and if you're excited about the future then put the focus there.  Being frustrated likely means you're being impatient.

 

[Hectic]

37 minutes ago, Stierlitz said:

Funny stats:

 

Sportsnet Stats ‏@SNstats 16h16 hours ago

Justin Bieber played at Rogers Arena in Vancouver on Friday. Home teams are 12-4-3 in the game after Bieber plays in their building.

That's a sweet stat haha but I bet if you take a random 19 game sample anytime around the league for randomly selected home teams you'd get a similar result 

[-DLC-]

Quote

That would be great if the teams has truly started to build identity and demonstrate pride. Unfortunately I haven't seen any sign of that at home this year, the last few years, or even lately. I hope this is a rock-bottom year and we have some might and pride next year. Tough to gauge because we have no idea what the environment is like in the locker room. Do the twins truly inspire the youth? What about Burrows with his antics?  Possibly but they are challenged by not being physical in a big, tough conference. They definitely don't inspire with aggressiveness but the way they can take a hit and keep on working magic could be sufficient inspiration. Then again, it could be propagating an attitude of submission. Until the team is much tougher, I expect little will change. It will be interesting to see where the As are stitched next year, and the size of the roster relative to this year.   

Let me explain rather than just throw out a "shredding the team" comment.

 

Started.  Key word.  At the beginning of a process that could take time.  Don't "judge" based on this season, accept that we are making some changes and it isn't a 'BOOM' done deal that comes with an explosion of change. 

 

In hoping it's a rock bottom year.....is that then the identity they will form?  Losers, hitting rock bottom?  I don't want that...I prefer what they're doing.  Battling.  Winning (some, even if it's too little too late).  How can you expect them to hit rock bottom but still perform and build an identity?  These are in contrast, and you should decide what it is you're expecting out of this year.  Our identity at the moment is:  "just starting out and finding some chemistry...look out future, it's looking bright".  Any expectations beyond that may be too much at this point.  And to expect something out of a "rock bottom year"?  Not sure how that could work. 

They're showing some pride right now...hard to criticize that.  They're battling despite the odds.  They beat a tough team and, at times, it was fairly dominantly executed.  They did peter out a bit, but there were some good things that came out of the game. 

 

Antics.  Were those when he blocked a shot to secure the win?  He's inspiring youth to fight to the end of the game...he's always done that.

 

What kind of physicality are you wanting?  Big hits (can slow down the pace if they're untimely...I prefer the speed).  Fights (we saw a pretty good one by Jake).  I prefer a balance, and think we're seeing that. 

 

You've declared that you expect little to change.  So I think you've already decided that your formula is the only one that can work.  I'm not convinced of that, or even that you're clear in it. 

 

What I've heard is all over the map;

 

You want a rock bottom year, BUT also for them to form an identity.

You want them to show pride,which is precisely what they're starting to do.

You're saying they're challenged, but the sample size is fairly limited and the experience level is as well.  Patience grasshopper.

You're calling for size and toughness but speed can help dissipate that need.  Don't have to engage physically if they can't catch you and you're keeping the puck away from them.   And these guys aren't shying away from the scrums.  They're having fun and are already establishing that they won't be pushed around even though they ARE very much boys vs men in some cases.  Give them some credit.

 

You're concerned about who has the A's stitched on....I'd like a team where they all qualify.   And will support them as they figure it out.

 

 

0

 

[Bo fan]

We have the rookies!

We have the rookie coach!

We have rookie management!

But last nights game was one of the best Canuck games I have seen in a very long time. So I say let the rookie movement  carry on.

[Harvey Spector]

We're technically still in the playoff hunt for a wild card spot. 8 points back of Minnesota with 2 games in hand. I can only imagine what would happen if we actually caught up to Minnesota and squeaked into the playoffs!!  Lol!! Would CDC have to shut down due to overloaded servers??  Would there be another riot downtown??  Would Jim Benning get arrested??

 

These next few weeks should be interesting. I will go on the record to say it ain't gonna happen, but if we had Tanev, Edler, Sutter and Hansen as well as Hank at full health along with a few showings from the BEAST, I wouldn't actually have ruled it out...

[Cerridwen]

45 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Let me explain rather than just throw out a "shredding the team" comment.

 

Started.  Key word.  At the beginning of a process that could take time.  Don't "judge" based on this season, accept that we are making some changes and it isn't a 'BOOM' done deal that comes with an explosion of change. 

 

In hoping it's a rock bottom year.....is that then the identity they will form?  Losers, hitting rock bottom?  I don't want that...I prefer what they're doing.  Battling.  Winning (some, even if it's too little too late).  How can you expect them to hit rock bottom but still perform and build an identity?  These are in contrast, and you should decide what it is you're expecting out of this year.  Our identity at the moment is:  "just starting out and finding some chemistry...look out future, it's looking bright".  Any expectations beyond that may be too much at this point.  And to expect something out of a "rock bottom year"?  Not sure how that could work. 

They're showing some pride right now...hard to criticize that.  They're battling despite the odds.  They beat a tough team and, at times, it was fairly dominantly executed.  They did peter out a bit, but there were some good things that came out of the game. 

 

Antics.  Were those when he blocked a shot to secure the win?  He's inspiring youth to fight to the end of the game...he's always done that.

 

What kind of physicality are you wanting?  Big hits (can slow down the pace if they're untimely...I prefer the speed).  Fights (we saw a pretty good one by Jake).  I prefer a balance, and think we're seeing that. 

 

You've declared that you expect little to change.  So I think you've already decided that your formula is the only one that can work.  I'm not convinced of that, or even that you're clear in it. 

 

What I've heard is all over the map;

 

You want a rock bottom year, BUT also for them to form an identity.

You want them to show pride,which is precisely what they're starting to do.

You're saying they're challenged, but the sample size is fairly limited and the experience level is as well.  Patience grasshopper.

You're calling for size and toughness but speed can help dissipate that need.  Don't have to engage physically if they can't catch you and you're keeping the puck away from them.   And these guys aren't shying away from the scrums.  They're having fun and are already establishing that they won't be pushed around even though they ARE very much boys vs men in some cases.  Give them some credit.

 

You're concerned about who has the A's stitched on....I'd like a team where they all qualify.   And will support them as they figure it out.

 

 

0

 

OH HELL YEAH!!!

 

 

 

[NHTyrany]

5 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Let me explain rather than just throw out a "shredding the team" comment.

 

Started.  Key word.  At the beginning of a process that could take time.  Don't "judge" based on this season, accept that we are making some changes and it isn't a 'BOOM' done deal that comes with an explosion of change. 

 

In hoping it's a rock bottom year.....is that then the identity they will form?  Losers, hitting rock bottom?  I don't want that...I prefer what they're doing.  Battling.  Winning (some, even if it's too little too late).  How can you expect them to hit rock bottom but still perform and build an identity?  These are in contrast, and you should decide what it is you're expecting out of this year.  Our identity at the moment is:  "just starting out and finding some chemistry...look out future, it's looking bright".  Any expectations beyond that don't sit in line with "rock bottom year".  And they're showing some pride right now...hard to criticize that.  They're battling despite the odds.  They beat a tough team and, at times, it was fairly dominantly executed.  They did peter out a bit, but there were some good things that came out of the game. 

 

Antics.  Were those when he blocked a shot to secure the win?  He's inspiring youth to fight to the end of the game...he's always done that.

 

What kind of physicality are you wanting?  Big hits (can slow down the pace...I prefer the speed).  Fights (we saw a pretty good one by Jake).  I prefer a balance, and think we're seeing that. 

 

You've declared that you expect little to change.  So I think you've already decided that your formula is the only one that can work.  I'm not convinced of that, sorry?

 

0

 

A rock bottom year for the Nucks is not an Edmonton or Toronto bottom but essentially where the team is at now--at least that's my hope. I think you misunderstood my comment. I hope this season is the bottom and it's all up from here--I'm actually pretty optimistic vs. many other CDC posters who feel the next few years are bleak.

 

I won't engage in a Burrows debate here. Suffice to say we have different views of his worth to the team. I just hope the rest of his time here positively influences the youth--he's not the only Canuck to have blocked a Webber shot and I doubt he will be around in 18 months. 

 

Lastly, please don't exaggerate my comment about "little will change". It's clearly conditional on the team not getting any tougher. The toughness I'm looking for is more in line with how they played against Nashville vs. what they showed in so many other games this year, including the Toronto Marlies. I hope they can string that level of performance together more consistently. That would be a true sign that they are swinging up from the bottom. TBH, I like the Jet's model of toughness but, like the Nucks, they are a work in progress and have deficiencies. I think a more punishing D core and at least one more big bodied forward is essential. Of course toughness is more that just size and its psychology is a contagion that will spread to a tougher team identity.    

[JamesB]

3 hours ago, Harvey Spector said:

I would agree with you that chances are slim in the current NHL world to find franchise European players in the later rounds. Things have changed greatly since the 90's in terms of getting players out of Europe. 

 

But in terms of finding hidden gems and franchise North American players outside the second round it can still happen even today. Ben Hutton was a 5th round pick. He looks to possibly be a top 2 defenceman and potential franchise player over the next 2-3 years. And what about Jamie Benn??  He was a FIFTH round pick and IS a franchise player, winning the Art Ross trophy last year.  So franchise players even in today's culture can still be had in the later rounds but as someone else pointed out it's not just enough just to draft them, you have to develop them as well in order to achieve success. 

I think we have reached agreement. I was actually going to mention Hutton in my post as an example of low pick who looks like he will be a solid top 4 D at least. (Actually he already looks like a top 4 D, although the sample is pretty small so far. And who knows what his ceiling is. And we hope that Tryamkin will also be a farily low pick (3rd round) who becomes a sold NHL D.

 

And you are right about Benn. So it is not impossible to get good players or even franchise players in late rounds. But it takes good scouting and good luck. Nomatter how good your scouting is, if another team takes your targetting players first there is not much you can do.

 

And of course development is important. That is one reason I think the Canucks are lucky to have Green and Willie as coaches.

 

On the other hand I think we call agree that EIchel and McDavid look great, and Ekblad from the previous year also looks great. Obviously we would love to have those guys. And this year it would be great to get any of the top 3 (as Benning has noted). But it is not likely and luck (through the lottery) plays a big part anyway.

 

So I have given up wanting the Canucks to lose for the rest of this season. The difference between the expected value of, say, 6 overall and 10 or 11 overall just isn't enough to get excited about. And the difference in lottery probability between #6 and #11 on the draft list isn't all that big either. And it is more fun hoping for the team to win, especially if the young guys continue to do well. 

 

I just hope Benning does not overpay the young guys when they become RFAs. We have Baertschi, Granlund, Etem and Vey coming up this year and Hutton and Horvat (and I think Tryamkin) after next year. Granlund, Etem and Vey will probably not get any more than their qualifying offers but Benning might tempted to overpay for Baertschi, Horvat, and Hutton. That will be a good test of his skills as a GM.

 

 

[Harvey Spector]

8 minutes ago, JamesB said:

I think we have reached agreement. I was actually going to mention Hutton in my post as an example of low pick who looks like he will be a solid top 4 D at least. (Actually he already looks like a top 4 D, although the sample is pretty small so far. And who knows what his ceiling is. And we hope that Tryamkin will also be a farily low pick (3rd round) who becomes a sold NHL D.

 

And you are right about Benn. So it is not impossible to get good players or even franchise players in late rounds. But it takes good scouting and good luck. Nomatter how good your scouting is, if another team takes your targetting players first there is not much you can do.

 

And of course development is important. That is one reason I think the Canucks are lucky to have Green and Willie as coaches.

 

On the other hand I think we call agree that EIchel and McDavid look great, and Ekblad from the previous year also looks great. Obviously we would love to have those guys. And this year it would be great to get any of the top 3 (as Benning has noted). But it is not likely and luck (through the lottery) plays a big part anyway.

 

So I have given up wanting the Canucks to lose for the rest of this season. The difference between the expected value of, say, 6 overall and 10 or 11 overall just isn't enough to get excited about. And the difference in lottery probability between #6 and #11 on the draft list isn't all that big either. And it is more fun hoping for the team to win, especially if the young guys continue to do well. 

 

I just hope Benning does not overpay the young guys when they become RFAs. We have Baertschi, Granlund, Etem and Vey coming up this year and Hutton and Horvat (and I think Tryamkin) after next year. Granlund, Etem and Vey will probably not get any more than their qualifying offers but Benning might tempted to overpay for Baertschi, Horvat, and Hutton. That will be a good test of his skills as a GM.

 

 

Cool I agree with everything you say. Last year we had two franchise players in McDavid and Eichel. After those two the next 10-15 guys were interchangeable. As a matter of fact Brock Boeser at 23 picked by our very own Jim Benning could turn out to be the best of the bunch after the top two. That would be incredible scouting by Benning as lots of draft people and CDC people laughed at Benning and didn't even know who Boeser was at the time.

 

As for this year we have 3 potential franchise players in Matthews and the Finns. After that the next 10-15 guys are interchangeable. So I agree with the people who want to pull a TO and go full on tank mode to try and get a franchise player in the top 3. However what I don't agree with are the people who are wanting to tank just to move from 8 or 9 to 4 or 5. That's makes no sense as the guy who will be picked at 9 may turn out better than the guy picked at 4. So you are correct we should just cheer the kids on and hope they gain confidence over the next few weeks and win as many games as they can.  Let Jim Bennimg worry about picking up the next Brock Boeser in this year's draft with his top 10 pick. 

[Toni Zamboni]

[4thLineGrinder]

7 hours ago, Stierlitz said:

Funny stats:

 

Sportsnet Stats ‏@SNstats 16h16 hours ago

Justin Bieber played at Rogers Arena in Vancouver on Friday. Home teams are 12-4-3 in the game after Bieber plays in their building.

so just make beiber play before all the rest of the games and were in the playoffs, a never ending bieberpollooza

[Hairy Kneel]

Teams and refs aren't playing us as hard anymore like earlier in the season...kinda like garbage time in basketball. I would say there is benefit to winning but teams coming in not as afraid and/or not as intense.. which is not a true indicators of where we are at in our development..

 

Not as much expectations allows our young guys to play looser so I hope they remember that free flowing game when the going gets tough next year. 

 

Plus Vancouver has a history of showing up great heading into the playoffs..like a habit or style which has been passed down over time. 

 

Didn't a lot of us see that Hutton would be more creative on the power lay than Eddie?

 

Is Burrows playing hard to stay on the team next year?..like playing to keep his contract? Where's that been?

 

Weber was playing physical? Is that Nik he's seeing in his rear view?

 

Quit about Edmonton already..who cares about Edm... they quietly point at the championship banners in their rink..

[gameburn]

3 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Teams and refs aren't playing us as hard anymore like earlier in the season...kinda like garbage time in basketball. I would say there is benefit to winning but teams coming in not as afraid and/or not as intense.. which is not a true indicators of where we are at in our development..

 

Not as much expectations allows our young guys to play looser so I hope they remember that free flowing game when the going gets tough next year. 

 

Plus Vancouver has a history of showing up great heading into the playoffs..like a habit or style which has been passed down over time. 

 

Didn't a lot of us see that Hutton would be more creative on the power lay than Eddie?

 

Is Burrows playing hard to stay on the team next year?..like playing to keep his contract? Where's that been?

 

Weber was playing physical? Is that Nik he's seeing in his rear view?

 

Quit about Edmonton already..who cares about Edm... they quietly point at the championship banners in their rink..

Yes to Burr and Weber having throwback games; Weber was physical repeatedly, like a new player.  Bur was invisible for most of the previous 45 games.

 

And yes to intensity issue: remember the games the team won in the Torts year, after we were out of the playoff race.  And how good Kassian looked, but perhaps couldn't sustain?  Looks the same now.