CanadianRugby Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 5 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said: Tkachuk is also getting first line minutes, so is Ritchie and Nylander and multiple other young players/prospects. Our coach has decided that our young players need to be scrubs and earn the time over senior skaters, even if said senior skaters are not producing. Why not not give Horvat and Virtannen some laditude and see if they can create some offence. Horvat has been one of our better forwards. Yet he gets fewer ozone starts and has ice cold Baer as his linemate. Virtannen gets 8-9 minutes of ice time a game. When one guy has 11 points in 11 games, and the other guy has 1 point in 9 games. It probably means one guy is way better than the other, more than they're comparable but.. ice time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 19 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said: As the poster said, he was fined for being excessively honest, obviously not something you can relate to. He was a rube..an honest one tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 44 minutes ago, theilluminati said: Mmmmm...ice cold Baer... I didn't even realize that when I wrote it. Damn decent moniker for Baer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: When one guy has 11 points in 11 games, and the other guy has 1 point in 9 games. It probably means one guy is way better than the other, more than they're comparable but.. ice time. Have you beaten that horse to death yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 The following may explain why Virtanen (who's an instinctive player) may not be getting the minutes that he wants: Benning on Desjardins: "We asked him to play with more structure & he's done that. We've been in all the games, we just need to score." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviewonder20 Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 12 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said: Clearly Benning stated that they've had to advise Willie on deployment. Never a good sign when a GM and president have to train the coach. He's as good as gone. Back to the minors. It's also very interesting that they had to tell WD to "play with more structure". Maybe the bloom is off the rose for WD, although I don't think he's as much of the problem as a mediocre roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 13 hours ago, VIC_CITY said: Concerning? He said he won't trade Boeser, Demko and Juolevi. That's quite the opposite actually... Very concerning the the haters he meant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 15 hours ago, Brad Marchand said: He flat out said he wouldn't trade Boeser, Demko, and Juolevi. Also said "It would be nice to have some players who have the courage to drive to the net every time". Not holding back on that one. Note the absence of Virtanen on that list.... very telling in what he doesn't say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 5 hours ago, Conscience said: I still think aquilini has a big say in the direction of this team. Notice how Benning says aquilini allows him to do what he wants to be competitive not what's best for the team. Of course he's he's going to kiss his bosses butt in public. Aquilini is the owner. It would be naive to say he doesn't have input on the transactions of the team. He absolutely should. He's the one paying the bills (courtesy of the fans). This city's fanbase is one of the biggest whiners in the league. Some teams had really really bad owners (i.e. cheap/thrifty) and fans had good reason. Now you have an owner willing to spend to the cap and people are whining. It's incredulous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 14 hours ago, luckylager said: Actually thinks we've "been in all the games". - -Delusional. "Trams real good.. big body, played well, moved the puck well" (really, moved the puck well?) They have been in almost every game because the defensive system has been solid...they just can't score...but the games are mostly close. As for Tram...he did move the puck well several times and others made a smart play getting it out....which is more than we can say about 'up the middle Sbisa' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckleHorse Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 Willy's Vancouver Canucks coaching career now sleeps with fishes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nux_win Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 10 hours ago, iBlueGreen said: I wonder if this version of the Canucks could beat a new Las Vegas(LV) expansion team? If we keep every thing pretty much status quo, and play the new LV team, we may have a hard time getting two points. If that happens we should just swap the entire roster with LV and make the biggest trade in NHL history, if they would even make that deal ... Now that would be pretty low! We were almost the first team to beat Montreal this year. I think we need to keep our sights set on a bigger prize than what you suggest. We're neither as good as some people think nor as bad as our last few results would suggest. These are the dark days when the club needs support not abandonment (oh, this is CDC I forgot). Anyway, it's not like we're losing 10-0 (had to get that in). We haven't been winning much lately but we have at least been close (and yeah, close doesn't count for much - but we're really not that far from winning). GCG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 43 minutes ago, Provost said: Note the absence of Virtanen on that list.... very telling in what he doesn't say. I think you're reading too much into that. None of Boeser, Demko, or Juolevi are on the team, so that's why they were grouped together in that statement. The fact that he didn't lump Virtanen in there doesn't indicate anything more than the fact that he didn't lump any roster player in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 16 hours ago, Brad Marchand said: Also said "It would be nice to have some players who have the courage to drive to the net every time". Not holding back on that one. Basically Benning pointing out that we don't have the skill to score beauty goals and generate offence. Blatantly stating that we need to be crashing the net and scoring greasy/dirty goals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeneedLumme Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 30 minutes ago, Provost said: Note the absence of Virtanen on that list.... very telling in what he doesn't say. Also note the absence of EVERY other Canuck property with any NHL experience at all. He listed the team's top 3 prospects outside the NHL. The players EVERY GM would grab in an instant if they could, since they have huge upside but take up zero roster space or cap space. And note that he states he would like to have players willing to drive to the net - something that probably describes Jake more than any other Canuck player. So what exactly are you implying is "very telling"? Telling what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 ...you can put lipstick on a monkey or a pig...but in the end you only have a monkey or a pig... imagine them getting shutout by the Leafs...this will be the dagger in the heart, but they will still be putting lip stick on the monkey. to be clear...the monkey is the Sedins being as slow as molasses and LE playing like a 31 year old...these are their top players who get the most ice time (including PP). but produce nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 1 hour ago, Provost said: Note the absence of Virtanen on that list.... very telling in what he doesn't say. Horvat wasn't either.... must be a trade in the works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 I agree the twins need to be second or third line and as stated let Bo be 1st line and Sutter with Granlund and Hansen looked good,then put the twins and Eriksson on the third and see how they play as they want minutes they should earn them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 46 minutes ago, Remy said: I think you're reading too much into that. None of Boeser, Demko, or Juolevi are on the team, so that's why they were grouped together in that statement. The fact that he didn't lump Virtanen in there doesn't indicate anything more than the fact that he didn't lump any roster player in there. Well believe what you want... there have been too many times when he has neglected to mention Virtanen when talking about the young core. I was right with Hodgson, Kesler, Bonino, and McCann when people flamed me for saying they were being moved out well in advance of it happening. Barring something changing dramatically Virtanen is not long for this team. If I were to guess I would see one of our top D (Tanev or Edler) being moved out before the deadline and maybe even before Christmas... and Virtanen goes along with them as the sweetener. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frail Granny Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 15 hours ago, VIC_CITY said: You know, no one expected us to take Juolevi, but it was widely considered to be a huge drop off from PLD/Puljujarvi to Tkachuk, so there really weren't too many people disappointed that we didn't take Tkachuk, myself included. We knew from the start that a defenseman wasn't going to be a 'sexy' pick, given the extra development time, but it just sucks seeing Calgary already reaping the rewards. Especially since our D went from our weakest to our strongest position practically over night. Who knew we'd actually need a forward more than a defenseman? But it's not all bad. He'll be able to turn one of our better defensemen into a big trade chip. We just have to be patient. If the Canucks drafted Tkachuk, he'd be in London right now. Next year, he would be on the farm, or getting 7 minutes alongside Dorsett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.