Canuck Clay Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Hey Canucks fans. As the team passed the mid-way part over the weekend, I handed out letter grades to each player. There's an A for Horvat, and A- for Miller, and a bunch of Bs and Cs. Take a look and let me know what you think! God Bless, Clay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Like the effort! well spoken. Planned out well. Agreed with a lot of what you said. I think eriksson hasn't lived up too the offensive expectations but he has been a terrific defensive player who has prevented many goals. I think we will see more from him as he gets more comfortable in the lineup. Enjoy the vid tho :D great work clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Hey Clay! I would agree with your assessments more if the Canucks were 1st in the Pacific, but they're not. When you compare us to the other teams in the league, 43 points in 42 games, 19th over all and -16 goal differential, that makes us below average. Yes, lately we have been playing better, but if you are grading on the season so far, then other than perhaps Horvat, everyone else should be B's, C's and D's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 The presentation was really good but I agree that you probably over-rated our lower tiered players a bit. I would have handed out some straight up Fs to players like Larson. You don't get a passing grade if you're brought in to do one thing and utterly fail at it. It is hard not to argue that we are overachieving though, simply by the fact that all the prognosticators said we were going to be absolute bottom feeders this year. No, we're not contenders but given that we're in the thick of the wildcard fight at the halfway mark means we are doing better than expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.B Cooper Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Great video. Love the positive grades, but they are way too positive. This team is no good and our stats show that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Thanks for this. I'd be hard pressed to give anyone an A on this team other than the goalies. - Overall I would say you are way too generous on the so-called "sexy" picks, that is the new, young players that seem to be playing at key times of the the game and give a glimmer of hope. For this people seem to want to give inflated opinions of these players. - Any of the scoring forwards earning 6+ million per year and are not at least 0.75 ppg shouldn't get a B or better, I would be hard pressed to give any of these guys a C based on what they are expected to do. - I think you are too hard on Gaunce. He is not one in that sexy grouping but he is getting there and does way more than he gets credit for. - Skille scores a couple nice goals and gets a B? This sounds like the Chris Higgins rule to me. - I appreciate that you have recognized Sbisa for the warrior that he has become and not thrown him under the bus like many have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianRugby Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Good assessment of most of the players, good video. Grades are too high, if a player stinks why is he getting a C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Clay Posted January 9, 2017 Author Share Posted January 9, 2017 Thanks everyone for the great feedback so far. I will admit that I was probably too lenient with some players; I'm very optimistic (some would say too much so...haha) when it comes to this team. God bless, Clay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyM Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Grades are high for some players, but he clearly states at the beginning of the video that the grades are based on pre-season expectations of them. So, players who are scored high (Skille/Chaput/Megna) are the way they are because they weren't really expected to be NHLers to begin with and not in relation to other players on the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeBee51 Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Great job Clay Probably a few grades are high but I understand how and why so I don't have a problem with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 good assessment. grades will always to subject to various opinions. i think it is important to note that while we are rebuilding, there will be growing pains. as the rebuild goes on, some players will have different line mates that could upgrade what they do on the ice. i see the sedins eventually dropping down the line up. so far it is the coaching staff's job to play them where they best help the team win. it should also be noted that the coaching staff as a group make player decisions. so how much of willies grade should go to the entire coaching staff. personally, i believe the coaches are getting the best out of the players they have. agree or disagree with their decisions, all of them have winning as their main motive along with what's best for the players. 2 or 3 years to respecability . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Great job Clay, I agreed with almost everything you said. I would give Gudbranson a C+, he is showing some great leadership skills on and off the ice and he has shown that he can step up his game from time to time. I expect him to come out strong after his injury. This video was great, a well presented video! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googlie Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Good work Clay, and great presentation. I would just take issue with 2 evaluations: I'd rate Loui slightly higher. For sure he hasn't been the offensive force we thought we were getting, but he has been conscientiously backchecking and has been good defensively. He and Bo should be 1st unit PP though. I think you rate Tram too highly. Sure he has been good - mostly - but still ices the puck too frequently, and is prone to lazy penalties. And ever since the Richardson broken leg incident, has been reluctant to go full Monty with the hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 2 hours ago, CanadianRugby said: Good assessment of most of the players, good video. Grades are too high, if a player stinks why is he getting a C? Because a C stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 18 minutes ago, ajhockey said: Because a C stinks. C's get degrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Just now, Jägermeister said: C's get degrees. And end up A's bosses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Shotgun Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Good job. Polished and smooth. Is this an audition video for TSN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 i agree with the grades thing but i think it is generational those of us not part of the younger crowd who was subjected to more gentle grading criteria believe grades actually are a true reflection of value younger crowd has been a bit massaged by grades being a bit higher than the value they actually reflect my view: c is average d is poor or barely fail e/f is fail b is good a is excellent, top shelf.. given to less than 10% of the class.. so limit it to 3 canucks at most only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Clay Posted January 10, 2017 Author Share Posted January 10, 2017 I'm 42 years old, so likely one of the older ones on here. I agree with your thoughts coastal.view! 11 hours ago, coastal.view said: i agree with the grades thing but i think it is generational those of us not part of the younger crowd who was subjected to more gentle grading criteria believe grades actually are a true reflection of value younger crowd has been a bit massaged by grades being a bit higher than the value they actually reflect my view: c is average d is poor or barely fail e/f is fail b is good a is excellent, top shelf.. given to less than 10% of the class.. so limit it to 3 canucks at most only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Clay Posted January 10, 2017 Author Share Posted January 10, 2017 Hey Johnny Shotgun: no audition here...I'm too old for that haha. Appreciate the kind words. I've been doing video blogs off and on for 6 years now, and parody songs for the past 5 years or so. So I don't mind being in front of the camera! 17 hours ago, Johnny Shotgun said: Good job. Polished and smooth. Is this an audition video for TSN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.