Harvey Spector Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 6 hours ago, ajhockey said: I beg to differ. Offense right around the turn of the century was extremely low, much like today. Looks like Bure and his back to back 60 goal seasons skewed the numbers for 1992 and 1993, not to mention his Calder trophy winning first year of 1991. The Russian Rocket definitely changed the game in so many ways... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 6 hours ago, ajhockey said: I beg to differ. Offense right around the turn of the century was extremely low, much like today. Yeah right around the time New Jersey was dominating the league. Coincidence?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 5 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said: Looks like Bure and his back to back 60 goal seasons skewed the numbers for 1992 and 1993, not to mention his Calder trophy winning first year of 1991. The Russian Rocket definitely changed the game in so many ways... So, do we need elite game breaking skill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 JB's just setting the table for a legendary "worst to first" in 16-17... It's all part of the plan....maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucksfollower1983 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 44 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said: If we're as bad as the '98-99 team, does that mean we'll somehow swing the 2nd and 3rd overall picks for this year's entry draft? dare to dream my friend, dare to dream. how cool would it be to go from a deadly Swedish duo to a deadly Finnish one. Too bad the Finns aren't twins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 With the number of young forwards we've got, it's not surprising that our scoring is way down. Baertschi, McCann, Virtanen and Horvat are all showing enough offense to suggest that the dip is temporary, though. Then there's Boesser. But if we can crash into the top 3 on the draft board, of course we go for one of those forwards. Until recently, I have been much more concerned about our defense, but with Tryamkin and Pedan stepping up, things are looking better on that front. Undoubtedly we still need a D prospect with #1 pedigree and will take a shot at that if we pick in the 5-10 range. But I like OP's observation because it does call for a fresh look at what our organization most needs. Things will get really interesting if we end up with the #4 pick and have to choose between Tkachuk and Chychrun (or whichever of the D prospects JB rates the highest). Would they consider that a tie as far as best player goes and go with organizational need? Is JB still leaning towards D as the highest organizational priority? As of a few weeks ago he seemed to be but all bets could be off if the Coil shut us out a few more times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 3 hours ago, gameburn said: It makes the Messier team so much worse -- and I don't recall that team suffering from injuries or an aged core of the same kind at the time. Just major league bad morale, and poor treatment of Linden. And suckage. And leadership lol. And Keenan. It probably predates the era of league-wide awareness of Tanking too. The team was just everything bad. Our Torts year was more like the Keenan year I think. This one is just the rebuild taking hold. Actually in 1998 Pavel Bure sat out, went back to Russia and demanded a trade which he got after Keenan was fired and replaced by Crawford. Burke traded him to Florida in January 1999. So that year we didn't have the services of Bure for the first half of the year even though he was technically still a Canuck. That skewed the numbers so I think today's numbers are unfortunately worse than in 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 3 hours ago, combover said: The majority of Benning moves bring in less and less skill scoring isn't going to be a strong part of this team moving forward. Dump and chase will be so we better get use to being on the bottom of goals for list. Sven Baertschi and Brock Boeser say hi... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 24 minutes ago, Nucksfollower1983 said: dare to dream my friend, dare to dream. how cool would it be to go from a deadly Swedish duo to a deadly Finnish one. Too bad the Finns aren't twins. They are - fraternal. We want them! ALF HAS SPOKEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 31 minutes ago, Alflives said: So, do we need elite game breaking skill? Of course. Add a Bure to this team and we are a completely different team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 3 hours ago, canuckpuckluck15 said: I think this is a really bad call. i am not a huge pro Benning fan, but I respect he was unbelievably handcuffed when he arrived. I personally will give him until the end of next season to show me what he end result will look like and then I will make judgement. But prior to that its just not fair to call him on it. Yes some trades are a bit odd, but you have to let the man build his team before you crucify him I take your point that we should wait until the end of next year before going too far in assessing Benning. I am hopeful that the team will do well next year. But if it is does it will be largely a matter of Benning's strengths (prospect evaluation) offsetting his weaknesses. I think it is pretty clear that he has made some bad moves and it is possible to see that already. But all GMs make some bad moves and, as I indicated, I hope his strengths will offset his weaknesses. If Baertschi, Tryamkin, Virtanen, Pedan, Sutter, Granlund and McCann (and maybe Vey or Etem) all turn into valuable players on the Canucks next year and help lead the team to the playoffs, and Boeser and Demko continue to play well as prospects, then we call be impressed. And that outcome is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 9 hours ago, afan said: Vancouver's PP is a joke with the twins keep passing to each other to slow down the pace every time they have the puck. Eventually Henrik will make that cross-ice pass to turn it over to result in an odd men rush against Vancouver. No surprise the PP has no goals in 20 attempts recently, which is a coincidence with the return of Henrik from injury. It has been like this all year and nothing has changed. The sorry Canucks don't even have a coach. I've noticed this the past few games and considering Hank's high hockey IQ, it's a bit of a head-scratcher. It looks great when it works, but It's a very low percentage play. When he isn't attempting that one, it seems like he's making the pass down low to Daniel at the side of the net, who either tries to quickly stuff it in the short side, or one-time it into the slot for a shot from the third forward, or an onrushing D. It honestly looks to me like they're running out of ideas and I think a large part of the problem is not having a legitimate threat from the blueline. We all know that Tryamkin has a cannon and the season is basically done anyway. Might be worth a shot (pun intended) In regards to the Canucks' low scoring average, I can't imagine that getting shut out by the Oilers of all teams, will do much to alleviate the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowardrobertford Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 2 hours ago, Alflives said: So, do we need elite game breaking skill? Vey and Nylander are not elite but are quite skillfull yet you hate em Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said: I've noticed this the past few games and considering Hank's high hockey IQ, it's a bit of a head-scratcher. It looks great when it works, but It's a very low percentage play. When he isn't attempting that one, it seems like he's making the pass down low to Daniel at the side of the net, who either tries to quickly stuff it in the short side, or one-time it into the slot for a shot from the third forward, or an onrushing D. It honestly looks to me like they're running out of ideas and I think a large part of the problem is not having a legitimate threat from the blueline. We all know that Tryamkin has a cannon and the season is basically done anyway. Might be worth a shot (pun intended) In regards to the Canucks' low scoring average, I can't imagine that getting shut out by the Oilers of all teams, will do much to alleviate the problem. Actually It's re-hashing an old one. Remember when they used run that quick cycle to cross-ice chance with both Ehrhoff and Edler? The real problem (as you identified) is that there's fewer options for that play, therefore it's easier to defend. Why is OV so successful at that play? Cause Washington has other options, and the second that OV is covered 1 on 1 against that play they can dump it to the other side Dman for the bomb. We don't have those options, therefore we either get shutdown in front or spend half the PP cycling down low...a PK gift. EDIT: so the point with OV is that other teams can't just cover him 1-on-1 or they create a 4 on 3 chance out front (because WSH has those options, which we don't...sorry if I wasn't clear on that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 13 hours ago, Toni Zamboni said: copy the url of the tweet and paste it in yer post...you can click on the 3 dots beside the hearts at the bottom of the tweet to get the url. What about getting the content of it to paste, like an image or gif? Only seems to include the text. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 2 hours ago, Harvey Spector said: Looks like Bure and his back to back 60 goal seasons skewed the numbers for 1992 and 1993, not to mention his Calder trophy winning first year of 1991. The Russian Rocket definitely changed the game in so many ways... To be fair, it was a lot more than just Bure scoring goals in 1992-93. An unbelievable number of players set career highs in that year. Frankly, I'm more impressed by Bure's goal scoring in Florida, when offense was at a pathetic low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan since 82 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 13 hours ago, Rocky Balboa said: Canucks, always on the wrong side of records. Or helping others set records and achieving milestones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSnipeshow91 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 13 hours ago, vladimirpuck said: "I'M COMING VANCOUVER! PEDAN...GIVE ME MY #29 JERSEY!" Laine in a Canucks jersey, wow Just give me a moment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gameburn Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 2 hours ago, Harvey Spector said: Actually in 1998 Pavel Bure sat out, went back to Russia and demanded a trade which he got after Keenan was fired and replaced by Crawford. Burke traded him to Florida in January 1999. So that year we didn't have the services of Bure for the first half of the year even though he was technically still a Canuck. That skewed the numbers so I think today's numbers are unfortunately worse than in 1998. I'm tempted to point to all our injuries, but every team has injuries. Our D and team defense has been hurt with the injuries, but I'm not sure we've lost all that much scoring with them. On balance, you may be right: this team is possibly worse. Of course, goalie equipment is more enhanced now... but,... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Just now, gameburn said: I'm tempted to point to all our injuries, but every team has injuries. Our D and team defense has been hurt with the injuries, but I'm not sure we've lost all that much scoring with them. On balance, you may be right: this team is possibly worse. Of course, goalie equipment is more enhanced now... but,... See my thread on injuries vs. points drop and you'll see that we are 15th in man-games lost but 3rd overall for largest point drop off from last year. So in our case it has definitely got more to do with lack of depth than injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.