wallstreetamigo Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 20 minutes ago, Crabcakes said: There are some good players, I agree. Maybe I mean depth. There are plenty of fringe NHLers making regular appearances in the line up: Skille, Megna, Chaput, Biega, Larsen. Development, I disagree. They have done a nice job with Horvat, Baertschi, Granlund, Sbisa, Strecher, Tryamkin, and cudo's to Benning for sending Virtanen and Gaunce down when they needed to. I think that Markstrom is doing well but not playing enough. Hutton is going through a sophomore slump and has been injured. Maybe our expectations were a bit overblown. Many more just need some time. It's funny how in the case of Horvat, Tryamkin, and Stecher none of them would have likely been given an opportunity by Desjardins without injuries forcing his hand. He pigeon holed Horvat as a defensive only player but Bo proved him wrong in spite of the coach not because of him. Tryamkin would be back in the KHL without the Tanev injury because he couldn't get in ahead of Larsen even under Willie. Stecher would have likely spent the whole year in Utica without injuries. And he very likely would have been back there had he not completely forced the Canucks to keep him or look like fools. The reason all 3 are developing is because of them more than the coaching staff doing anything tangible to develop them. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorry, did I Sutter? Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I love the sedins but they try so hard not to emotionally engage the other team. The rest of the team seems to follow. The Canucks don't finish their checks hoping the other team will so How agree to play the same way. But we end up getting physically embarrassed and now we don't have the skill to win the game so we get embarrassed by the score too. Could we we have some little victory besides Horvat racking up points. I think that that is why we love Tram so much because he actually doesn't get bullied by the other team. So in the eternal words of Bill Murray, "so at least I got that going for me" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Crabcakes said: Lack of talent = conservative style Only partly true...Sedins, Eriksson, Horvat, hansen, Baertschi, Sutter have talent. The style they are being made to play, which is to play extremely conservative and always play defensive, sucks the energy, speed and creativity out of what talent we do have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 In my opinion, the Canucks' best game this year was their last game in Edmonton where they won 3-2 and really controlled the game. The game was a wide open up tempo game with lots of physicality and end to end rushes. They showed in this game that they could keep up with one of the fastest teams in the league So the real question is.....why can't they or why aren't they allowed to play this style of game on a more consistent basis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Tired of watching the old guard go through the motions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I posted this in another thread,but it relates to this topic.. .The game pattern is all to familiar..You would think that being home ice and all,that the "home team" would be the team that initiates..That is never the case with Willie and the Canucks....We start in a boring 'holding pattern' until the inevitable happens,the other team scores...The Canucks then,have no choice but to open the game up,which usually winds up with us conceding yet another goal. I don't know how many games I've seen this season where we have spotted the opposition a 2-0 lead..Kudos to the Canucks for always trying to come back (sometimes they do,mostly that obstacle is just too big)...the effort is there,but the poor depth and experience, usually springs a leak in the late stages of the game . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 hour ago, falcons said: Why are Canucks games so hard to watch ? Short answer: I don't know, they're fine for me a lot of the time. Long answer: write out a worthwhile thread and you'll get responses that help you answer the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie the grim Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 They have got to be the softest team in the league. thats why they suck against physical teams.No hitting, no response to being hit. Not much offensive talent, not great for prospects. Very questionable management decisions, eg, trade deadline, signing Erickson. questionable coaching decisions. Questionable ownership decisions, have to get those 2 playoff games.Its disheartening watching teams making moves that will give their teams better chances at winning the Stanley Cup. And the Canucks goal is to squeek into the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuporbust Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 hour ago, DeNiro said: Team doesn't play to win, they play to not lose. Soft dump ins and forecheck allow the other team to keep possession and come at them in waves as they continually retreat to their own zone. Av s team did that too, but they had skill. We lack skilled players. Thats what makes it fun to watch imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 They play WD's style they fall behind then to catch up they're given the green light to be creative, THAT'S when they are fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said: They play WD's style they fall behind then to catch up they're given the green light to be creative, THAT'S when they are fun to watch. Exactly. As soon as they're out of the game that's when they decide to take chances and make plays. It never happens until they're down at least 2-0 though. Then Willie abandons his game plan which was flawed from the beginning. His plan of playing it safe only ever works if Miller or Markstrom completely steal the game for them. That's happening less and less lately though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Because Gud, is injured, Hutton is about to come back. Larsen is a defensive nightmare, Edler looks like he handling a live hand grenade. The only real offensive threats are Horvat, Baer, Sutter, Hansen, Granlund on occasion, The Sedin's have lost a step. Eriksson is struggling to find a fit on a line. The only threat on the 4th line is Skille. The only offence on D is Stetcher. This is a transition year. There is no quick fixes in the era of the salary cap. Next year we have Boeser, more depth on D, and possibly some other forwards, and not to mention whatever we get in the draft. It's going to take time and patience. Unless the Canucks have a radical turnaround, I don't expect WD coaching the Canucks next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 8 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Exactly. As soon as they're out of the game that's when they decide to take chances and make plays. It never happens until they're down at least 2-0 though. Then Willie abandons his game plan which was flawed from the beginning. His plan of playing it safe only ever works if Miller or Markstrom completely steal the game for them. That's happening less and less lately though. You know how some football teams switch up to the no huddle 2 minute drill, to be creative and not predictable. That's WD, wayyyy too predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Soldier Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 hour ago, falcons said: I am having a tough time watching games lately. Not sure what it is. Maybe it's time to make some big moves and create a new identity . I hope you're aware that such a thing takes time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabinessence Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 39 minutes ago, Sorry, did I Sutter? said: I love the sedins but they try so hard not to emotionally engage the other team. The rest of the team seems to follow. The Canucks don't finish their checks hoping the other team will so How agree to play the same way. But we end up getting physically embarrassed and now we don't have the skill to win the game so we get embarrassed by the score too. Could we we have some little victory besides Horvat racking up points. I think that that is why we love Tram so much because he actually doesn't get bullied by the other team. So in the eternal words of Bill Murray, "so at least I got that going for me" Very good post. I agree on the Tryamkin point, but what i see more and more is a gentle giant. Imagine if he had a bit more of a mean streak? Why do the Canucks only respond physically when they keep getting hit first? I know they don't have the team to compete in that type of game too often, but when they do, it provides a spark that can ignite the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcons Posted February 7, 2017 Author Share Posted February 7, 2017 22 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Short answer: I don't know, they're fine for me a lot of the time. Long answer: write out a worthwhile thread and you'll get responses that help you answer the question. Really ? Try moving the sedins, miller and coach as a start. Way too much loyalty to players way past their prime on this team . The coach has zero passion and it reflects on the players. We deserve more from Linden ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks.brad Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 because they really have no exciting player and the games are boring? the only times i have tuned in on games this year, are when the opponents are good/have exciting players. ex. Sharks, Ducks, Jets, Blackhawks, Flames, Oilers, Leafs, Wild.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 need more cowbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ey40 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said: I think we actually have a fair bit of talent. It is not being utilized or developed properly in this system though. I agreed 100%. I hate when people say we don't have the skill and/or talent to score. Ask yourself this question first: Does the coach ice the best lineup every game? Does he make certain adjustment during game to generate a win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 There are many reasons for the Canucks lack luster style........ #1. No real first line......no elite puck control, quick striking line........Horvat is a cut above his line mates, but not an elite player #2. The Sedin's remind me of a Mars Bomber when doing the cycle...now a days #3. We play the trap, which is designed to never be out of position....never take risks, clog the middle #4, No #1 Offensive Dman #5. No Offensive creativity on the PP #6. Young guys are stiffled......punished for mistakes #7. We have been spoiled for a few years..........but it's becoming a distant memory! OK.......I am depressed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.