Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[PGT] Blackhawks @ Canucks


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, CANUCK-EXPRESS said:

A new coach will not help this team... we just suck plain and simple!

 

 

 

Don't be such a doom merchant ffs.

 

We played 3 Utica AHL players and a handful of rookies, with two of our best players sidelined with injury and more than matched one of the top teams for 2 periods getting AND DESERVING a 3-0 lead and you say "we just suck plain and simple"

 

I get you are disappointed, so am I but I'm not going to misrepresent a pretty good and exciting performance by saying we suck. I have words for "fans" like you but I don't want to get a warning.

 

You should go find another team, I'm sure there are one or two at the top that will match your expectations (at least for a limited time)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

Then explain why in the 3rd they went back to playing the way Willie has had them playing all year long. The first two periods was a very rare sustained style of play for the Canucks this season and even last season for the most part.

 

Anyone who doesn't think this was coaching has obviously never talked to an NHL player or an NHL coach about just what happens in intermissions and what coaches tell their players and how they adjust strategies and styles depending on the situation. 

 

I know Willie is not a big adjuster of strategies other than shortening his bench but this has coaching to not lose written all over it. Not 100% on him (it never is 100% on anyone, even Edler lol). But this was coaching to a certain degree for sure.

 

That's just butthurt hindsight BS.

Maybe you can describe the difference in styles other than our team got tired and lacked the quality of the opposition. 

 

Chicago were relentless and we were carrying too many players who just couldn't keep up the energy level of the first two periods. Read Hansen for Menga and Tanev for Stecher/Tryamkin and we might have held on. Just remember we were not beaten in regulation we held them to 3-3.

 

We are all disappointed but to turn this into another "stick the knife" in the coach thread is not only spurious but classless. Our team is showing signs of green shoots but we are still 2 or 3 quality players from defeating the likes of Chicago.

 

Go look at some of the comments on our chances BEFORE the game on the GDT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

 

That's just butthurt hindsight BS.

Maybe you can describe the difference in styles other than our team got tired and lacked the quality of the opposition. 

 

Chicago were relentless and we were carrying too many players who just couldn't keep up the energy level of the first two periods. Read Hansen for Menga and Tanev for Stecher/Tryamkin and we might have held on. Just remember we were not beaten in regulation we held them to 3-3.

 

We are all disappointed but to turn this into another "stick the knife" in the coach thread is not only spurious but classless. Our team is showing signs of green shoots but we are still 2 or 3 quality players from defeating the likes of Chicago.

 

Go look at some of the comments on our chances BEFORE the game on the GDT.

 

I dunno alf.  The Hawks basically turned the game over in the first few minutes of the third period after playing last night.  The Canucks were watching. It wasn't fatigue.  They were a completely different team in the first ten minutes of the third compared to the previous two periods.  It wasn't fatigue imo.  The core and the coach should know all about the Hawks by now and they weren't prepared to be intense at the crucial time.

 

pinning fatigue on guys like stecher and megna doesn't hold water when Edler was gaffing all net yet willy still trots him out there for 27 minutes.  Stechers play blew the doors off of anything tanev and Edler has done this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole team didn't show up for the 3rd period. While Edler may have had the roughest and Markstrom wasn't so good either it was a TEAM effort.  Not only were the shots 17-3 but there were at least one post and one crossbar and numerous close calls.  The whole team panicked trying to protect a 3-0 lead.  O.T. was better but the hawks bring cannons to the game and we mostly have pea shooters. We are rebuilding, they have all their stars in the peak of their careers mostly.  Just to get a point is pretty darn good though it hurts getting it this way. If we had come from behind 3-0 and lost on O.T. that would have felt better but been the same result. Such is the life of a rebuilding bottom team. We are slowly but surely working towards that high draft pick that everyone so desires ::D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Qwags said:

I feel like Stecher makes Edler redundant.

Not really. I'm actually not an Edler fan at all, and wish we'd sell him off while his value might still have some significance. But comparing a (probably over estimated) 5'10" Stecher to Edler is silly. I hope big things for Stecher and I like him, but comparing him to Edler... come on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Boeser said:

You know what I'd love to see given all the "whining" on this site?

 

- I'd like to see someone do a review of all those complaining we're not "tanking" or not rebuilding fast enough who are also on here game after game that we lose friggen complaining about losses! 

 

- my guess is there is a very high correlation ! Lol

 

I sense a lot here just bitch regardless and that's why they come on here

 

That game was hella entertaining. Bo continues to take steps, Stecher played well, Granlund and Sutter looked good as did Tryamkin. Burrows upping his trade value at the deadline. Goals and excitement galore- why complain?

 

Oh that's right because that's all that mental midgets do-complain for the sake of complaining even when it's achieving what you want (tanking) 

 

a lot of donkeys on this site 

The donkey's kept pace to the 3/4 pole until jockey Q put the whip to his triple crown winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, riffraff said:

 

I dunno alf.  The Hawks basically turned the game over in the first few minutes of the third period after playing last night.  The Canucks were watching. It wasn't fatigue.  They were a completely different team in the first ten minutes of the third compared to the previous two periods.  It wasn't fatigue imo.  The core and the coach should know all about the Hawks by now and they weren't prepared to be intense at the crucial time.

 

pinning fatigue on guys like stecher and megna doesn't hold water when Edler was gaffing all net yet willy still trots him out there for 27 minutes.  Stechers play blew the doors off of anything tanev and Edler has done this year.

 

Frankly riff, the core are not inspiring me. Am I the only one having the shakes watching the Sedins in their own D zone trying to defend? They couldn't get near a Blackhawk most of the time and it was only the goalie and the other 3 players playing a blinder kept out the goals.

Burrows has impressed me and has taken his game up a step though.

 

Let's not kid ourselves it wasn't only the first 10 mins of the 3rd where the Hawks were running us around, they had spells in the first two periods as well. Our problem is what it always has been, we scored 3 and it should have been 5. The 2011 team would have feasted on the chances we made last night.

 

It has already been shown how this team collapses without Edler. Yes he makes mistakes but so does any D. It is what else he brings that counts. I pinpointed Stech because he is starting to get a bit ragged because he is finding the physical side draining and imo he would benefit from a rest - we expect too much from him.

 

All I am saying is the commentator said the coach sent them out with the instruction "more of the same" but what do you think the Hawks coach said? - it wouldn't be anything less than "step up the effort" We are NOT the Hawks, you just have to put the 2 line ups side by side and see we have a bit to go.

 

I was pleased with our performance last night and frankly I expected the Hawks to come back in the 3rd - that said there is too much made on the timing of the goals. It is immaterial whether you are 3 up if you are playing well above expectation and we were.

 

We didn't lose a 3-0 lead because of the coach, it was because we are a team in transition. Not only that, we were minus Tanev, Hansen and Dorsett. I would suggest if you took the equivalent out of Chicago, and replace them with Try, Stille and Menga, they don't win that game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Willie say earlier this year that he wanted to cycle all 4 lines equally?  Whatever happened to that?

 

 

We didn't lose a 3-0 lead because of the coach, it was because we are a team in transition. Not only that, we were minus Tanev, Hansen and Dorsett. I would suggest if you took the equivalent out of Chicago, and replace them with Try, Stille and Menga, they don't win that game.

If the Canucks played in the 3rd period like they did in the first 2 periods, they would've registered a win at the very least.

 

Remember 2010 Olympics where team Canada took leads in their games and then in 3rd period switched to conservative play and lost games that way? Yeah, that's a coaching thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, appleboy said:

Willie dropped his 4th line down to under 8 minutes.

You can't run 3 lines at that pace.

 

Coaching again is the problem.

That's what high end skill and speed teams like Chicago do, they force you into playing with a short bench and test your depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, CeeBee51 said:

Especially since our 4th line is basically an AHL line.

The last time I looked all nhl teams have a 4th line made up of lower skilled players. Most 4th line players are AHL level. 

A coach needs to manage minutes and match lines. It is his job and why he is paid the big bucks.

Willie gets out coach every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Creepy Crawler said:

Didn't Willie say earlier this year that he wanted to cycle all 4 lines equally?  Whatever happened to that?

 

If the Canucks played in the 3rd period like they did in the first 2 periods, they would've registered a win at the very least.

 

Remember 2010 Olympics where team Canada took leads in their games and then in 3rd period switched to conservative play and lost games that way? Yeah, that's a coaching thing.

If we cycle 4 lines equally we bitch that he's playing Skille and dorsett too much.

 

If he shortens the bench we butch that he's over playing the sedins. 

 

No matter what he does he's doing it wrong and we can do better right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gooseberries said:

If we cycle 4 lines equally we bitch that he's playing Skille and dorsett too much.

 

If he shortens the bench we butch that he's over playing the sedins. 

 

No matter what he does he's doing it wrong and we can do better right? 

 

Only if we're losing, if we were. Winning he'd be doing it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

 

Frankly riff, the core are not inspiring me. Am I the only one having the shakes watching the Sedins in their own D zone trying to defend? They couldn't get near a Blackhawk most of the time and it was only the goalie and the other 3 players playing a blinder kept out the goals.

Burrows has impressed me and has taken his game up a step though.

 

Let's not kid ourselves it wasn't only the first 10 mins of the 3rd where the Hawks were running us around, they had spells in the first two periods as well. Our problem is what it always has been, we scored 3 and it should have been 5. The 2011 team would have feasted on the chances we made last night.

 

It has already been shown how this team collapses without Edler. Yes he makes mistakes but so does any D. It is what else he brings that counts. I pinpointed Stech because he is starting to get a bit ragged because he is finding the physical side draining and imo he would benefit from a rest - we expect too much from him.

 

All I am saying is the commentator said the coach sent them out with the instruction "more of the same" but what do you think the Hawks coach said? - it wouldn't be anything less than "step up the effort" We are NOT the Hawks, you just have to put the 2 line ups side by side and see we have a bit to go.

 

I was pleased with our performance last night and frankly I expected the Hawks to come back in the 3rd - that said there is too much made on the timing of the goals. It is immaterial whether you are 3 up if you are playing well above expectation and we were.

 

We didn't lose a 3-0 lead because of the coach, it was because we are a team in transition. Not only that, we were minus Tanev, Hansen and Dorsett. I would suggest if you took the equivalent out of Chicago, and replace them with Try, Stille and Menga, they don't win that game.

 

Fair points.  I think when you're, (not you specifically), hypothesizing different guys in and out it boils down to "that's hockey in this league"

 

i only disagree greed with you really on stecher.  I feel he is doing really well and thought his skating was tremendous last night.  I just don't see him "costing" is any more than any vet....and I'll go so far as to say his skill and speed easily makes up for mistakes.  

 

I also thought hutton had his best game last night.  He was completely different to the Hutton he have seen to this point.  The panel was even commenting fwiw.

 

megna is starting to display some speed. I wasn't aware of his skating capabilities but it's definitely legit NHL level.  I also like chaputs game.  Those two playing the way they are right now is certainly a testament to Greenes assessment.

 

all in all I was entertained more so than I have been all year.  Meltdown aside, complaint about the value of the on ice product last night would be silly.  And as a fan of the game I have to admit that seeing the Hawks skill and ability to flip the switch was a thrill to watch in itself.  Best buzz after a game this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ice orca said:

That's what high end skill and speed teams like Chicago do, they force you into playing with a short bench and test your depth.

Yes, I know Chicago has 4th liners that are super stars.

Seven minutes for Gaunce is a joke. Virtanen is gone and now he is focusing on Gaunce who is a solid two way player. Willie had a 3 goal lead and then he got out coached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...