Canucks' Team Toughness

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Sweathog said:

Thomas played well but I don't think he was the main reason they won. The Canucks were intimidated, completely. That intimidation factor threw the Canucks totally off their game.

 

What was frustrating about the 2011 Canucks team was that they had an abundance of speed and skill but virtually no toughness at all. It's fine to have a team that's geared more towards skill and speed, but a team like that needs at least a couple of heavy for pushback, especially on the road. Considering the fact that heavyweights are relatively easy to aquire, that was a major fail by Gillis.

Gillis's major fail IMO was reacting to losing game seven and not leaving well enough alone.  At the time Hodgson was doing amazing as our third line center and usual picked up the slack when the top two line weren't going.

 

Sure Vancouver didn't push back physically, mostly because AV was betting on discipline and the PPs which we did get more of as a result...And pretty much every time Thomas literally and figuratively stood on his head.  

Luongo wasn't to blame, considering we went to game seven scoring I think around nine goals total, and he started the series with a shut out.  

The team didn't play scared at all IMO, which to me suggests Thomas made way more of an impact than anything else.

Gillis completely $&!# the bed and should have kept things exactly how they were. Who knows maybe our third line would have made the difference like they did so many times before and LA would be out and we would have gone back to the finals.

I do agree that toughness played a role against Boston but I can't think of any individual on our team that played scared, including and especially the Sedins.  The refs didn't give enough penalties at times especially a roughing call on Marchand and you have to give them credit for not taking retailation calls and sticking to AVs game plan.

Boston won mostly because Thomas was pulling a Roy/ W. Parent (PHI) and at the time was undoubtedly the best goalie in the world.

[Boudrias]

On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 6:54 PM, Googlie said:

Reading all these knocks against our non-fighting Euros led me to google the following:

Joe Sakic's greatest fights - just 1 in his career

Steve Yzerman's greatest fights - just 1 in his career

I don't think their teams suffered due to these good BC boys' lack of "toughness "

Meaning what? Joe didn't have Foote and Yzerman did not have McCarty? Get serious. Why didn't you include Gretzky?

[Boudrias]

15 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

We are getting skill and will keep drafting and developing skill.

 

We need size and toughness now just as much as in the future. Win or lose we need to bring about more a physical presence in games because as it stands now we are an easy team to play against physically.

Didn't you think that SJ was beat before the last game started? McClelland hammered them physically early in the series and then put the gas on with his skaters. The Sharks were turning from the hits and could not keep up skating wise. Thing of beauty even if it did cost us any chance of a 1st Rounder.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Sweathog said:

Thomas played well but I don't think he was the main reason they won. The Canucks were intimidated, completely. That intimidation factor threw the Canucks totally off their game.

 

What was frustrating about the 2011 Canucks team was that they had an abundance of speed and skill but virtually no toughness at all. It's fine to have a team that's geared more towards skill and speed, but a team like that needs at least a couple of heavy for pushback, especially on the road. Considering the fact that heavyweights are relatively easy to aquire, that was a major fail by Gillis.

Re considered your point.  I was secretly hoping we wouldn't play Boston because I was worried about how we would handle their size and defense/goaltending.  We all know the result and the feeling of dread we had after being up 3-2 and then Luongo and the team blowing game six.  Gillis did the right thing IMO by not adding an enforcer considering the odds of playing Boston at the final were not that high and nobody else in the East that were contenders has that big of a size advantage, certainly not by a large margin.

We did have some guys like Rome, Lappareier, Bieksa, Bug Eyes and even Kesler that could play a heavy game.  In fact Bieksa completely got under SJs skin and made them pay in game 5 OT.  That series was way closer than the result and if we lost in OT SJ could have gotten right back with momentum on their side.

My point is we weren't necessarily a soft team, we had guys that played on the edge and that could throw teams off their game, the same way Boston and Thomas did.

[mpt]

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

Not nearly enough skill?  Sedins, Horvat, Eriksson, Sutter, Baer, Boeser, all have no skill?

Moving forward only 1 or 2 of those likely have the ability of scoring 30+ goals a year, and only two are 70+ point players; only 3 of those are apart of our future.  So yes, we are lacking skill, especially since none of them are bonafide top line players, with only Boeser and Horvat have the potential to turn into one.

[IBatch]

59 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Meaning what? Joe didn't have Foote and Yzerman did not have McCarty? Get serious. Why didn't you include Gretzky?

Gretzkys big fight his opponent told him to hang on and not to worry he wouldnt hurt him.  Then the refs separate them and four guys are bee lining with violence in mind with half the bench one foot over the boards. Gretzky stopped them from murder.  At least that's how he describes it more or less.  Semenko and McSorely (what great goon names!) Had his back but so did twenty other players.

The Detroit-Colorodo rivalry was outstanding, same with Calgary -Edmonton, and before that Boston-Montreal and Philly-League.  It seems all the greatest teams all stand up for each other no matter what.  

Detroit-Colorado spanned 1996-2002 and in that span they met in the Conference final five out of seven years and combined for five cups. Over twenty players went on to the Hall of Fame and either the Wings of the Avalanche made it to the Conference final each year.  

The goons fought, the skilled players fought, the goalies fought, the fans fought and each game was an ultimate treat to watch.

Detroit may have won more cups but Colorado had a slight edge overall....

 

According to THN the players speak in reverant terms about the rivalry, calling it the best hockey they've ever part of.

 

Reference: Hockey's Greatest Rivalries Vol.68 No.SIP

[JamesB]

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

Not nearly enough skill?  Sedins, Horvat, Eriksson, Sutter, Baer, Boeser, all have no skill?

That list makes depressing reading. Those are our top skill players and not one of those guys was even close to being a legitimate first line forward in the NHL last season.

Horvat is the closest, but his numbers (52 pts) and his general style of play at the level of a very good 2C, not a first liner.

 

The Sedins were obviously excellent players for a long time. But last year they were borderline 2nd liners. Their scoring was at a decent second line level. Their defensive play was not. Baertschi is a good player and managed to play at legitimate second line level, but only barely (i.e. just above the 0.5 PPG that you expect for good second liners and decent defensively). Sutter (34 pts in 81 games and -20, playing, admittedly fairly tough minutes) was not far from his career average, which is not close to a legitimate top 6 level. Eriksson we are all know had a bad year last year and, at his age, is unlikely to have a major bounceback. You did not mention Granlund, but his numbers were also at a 3rd line level and his defense is no better than ok.

 

Boeser is a good looking prospect but obviously has not played in the NHL much yet.

 

If you make a list of the top 7 skill fowards on every team in the NHL and compare that with the seven guys listed above, the Canucks probably come in last place or very close to it. They also lack scoring support from the D.

 

So, no, the Canucks do not have enough skill. They also do not have enough toughness or, with Tryamkin gone, enough size. Also the Canucks do not have enough speed. In the above list, Horvat and Baetschi are good skaters by NHL standards. Sutter was supposed to be good but now looks no better than average (possibly due to nagging groin problems), and the Sedins, Eriksson and Boeser are below average in speed. The Sedins are now a long way below average. 

 

As I have indicated before, up to his point I don't think Benning has done a good job of assembling a team. I would not mind the lack of veteran skill players if the team had been focussing on rebuild -- maximizing draft picks and getting as many high yield lottery tickets in the system as possible. But we have not done that. The only really good young player in the system who has proven himself at the NHL is Horvat, and he was drafted by Gillis.

 

Baertschi has done fairly well and Stecher shows promise, although he hit the wall toward the end of last season and, obviously, will always be small for an NHL D. Hutton (also a Gillis pick) also has potential. And of course we hope Juolevi, Brisebois, Gaudette and others can play effectively at the NHL level. But compared to what other recent bottom feeders have in their pipeline the Canucks are not in great shape.

 

 

[ilduce39]

59 minutes ago, JamesB said:

As I have indicated before, up to his point I don't think Benning has done a good job of assembling a team. I would not mind the lack of veteran skill players if the team had been focussing on rebuild -- maximizing draft picks and getting as many high yield lottery tickets in the system as possible. But we have not done that. The only really good young player in the system who has proven himself at the NHL is Horvat, and he was drafted by Gillis.

 

I find this unrealistic.  

 

Asking for "high yield lottery tickets(?)" through the draft but then critiquing a lack of "good young players who have proven themselves at the NHL level"

 

... how many more good young NHL players do you hope to have if Benning had forgone the Vey / Clendenning / Granlund / Baertschi / Goldobin / Dahlin trades and rolled the dice on low percentage draft picks? (To even make the NHL, let alone star in it.) It's not like Jim had the assets to rack up top-10 draft picks.  

 

In the meantime, as you've pointed out and dismissed, Jim has accumulated a good number of middle-6 and middle pairing young players and prospects.  The kind of players you're lucky to find with 2nd round picks.  

 

The fact is Jim's drafts are just now reaching AHL/Rookie NHL level and the real lack of NHL talent is still squarely on Gillis.

[iceman64]

33 minutes ago, JamesB said:

That list makes depressing reading. Those are our top skill players and not one of those guys was even close to being a legitimate first line forward in the NHL last season.

Horvat is the closest, but his numbers (52 pts) and his general style of play at the level of a very good 2C, not a first liner.

 

The Sedins were obviously excellent players for a long time. But last year they were borderline 2nd liners. Their scoring was at a decent second line level. Their defensive play was not. Baertschi is a good player and managed to play at legitimate second line level, but only barely (i.e. just above the 0.5 PPG that you expect for good second liners and decent defensively). Sutter (34 pts in 81 games and -20, playing, admittedly fairly tough minutes) was not far from his career average, which is not close to a legitimate top 6 level. Eriksson we are all know had a bad year last year and, at his age, is unlikely to have a major bounceback. You did not mention Granlund, but his numbers were also at a 3rd line level and his defense is no better than ok.

 

Boeser is a good looking prospect but obviously has not played in the NHL much yet.

 

If you make a list of the top 7 skill fowards on every team in the NHL and compare that with the seven guys listed above, the Canucks probably come in last place or very close to it. They also lack scoring support from the D.

 

So, no, the Canucks do not have enough skill. They also do not have enough toughness or, with Tryamkin gone, enough size. Also the Canucks do not have enough speed. In the above list, Horvat and Baetschi are good skaters by NHL standards. Sutter was supposed to be good but now looks no better than average (possibly due to nagging groin problems), and the Sedins, Eriksson and Boeser are below average in speed. The Sedins are now a long way below average. 

 

As I have indicated before, up to his point I don't think Benning has done a good job of assembling a team. I would not mind the lack of veteran skill players if the team had been focussing on rebuild -- maximizing draft picks and getting as many high yield lottery tickets in the system as possible. But we have not done that. The only really good young player in the system who has proven himself at the NHL is Horvat, and he was drafted by Gillis.

 

Baertschi has done fairly well and Stecher shows promise, although he hit the wall toward the end of last season and, obviously, will always be small for an NHL D. Hutton (also a Gillis pick) also has potential. And of course we hope Juolevi, Brisebois, Gaudette and others can play effectively at the NHL level. But compared to what other recent bottom feeders have in their pipeline the Canucks are not in great shape.

 

 

Horvat is the closest, but his numbers (52 pts) and his general style of play at the level of a very good 2C, not a first liner.   No he's a first line player and there is enough support for that statement around the league, HOWEVER with him playing with guys who don't have complimentary skills then no he isn't but he obviously has first line talent

 

Sedins, yes again first line but without a BIG skilled line-mate to compliment their style they don't have a chance to have the open ice for their magic. Add a Dustin Buff or a Lucic to that line and we have winners.  (is management capable of doing that?)  well not since Anson Carter and i doubt we will ever see it, worst waste of players i have ever seen in my life.

 

Eriksson, Yes again but he isn't built for a 1st assignment with the Sedins like Carter was. Does he have first line skill?  obviously so but with needs the right players on his line.

 

Boeser, yes of course but he will have to make the adjustment to the NHL but he will do this next season.

 

Baer, again yes but he needs to improve on over-all strength to get there. 10-15 pounds on his frame and a month or 2 training plus maintaining would get him there but that's up to coaches and management to help.

 

We certainly DO have enough skill on the team to do some serious damage BUT until it's properly managed and deployed and a couple of changes, it won't right away.

 

Finally the Sedins need to go after the seasons end next yr, have been loyal to them as a fan for years but that's over. As a franchise, the canucks have paid them MILLIONS since they arrived and started to put points up so are they owed something?  Absolutely NOT!  have they put up with a lot of $&!#e here? yes but not enough to pay them to stay unless it's for peanuts and even they don't deserve that so time for them to move on (with all the money that a person could ever want)

[NewbieCanuckFan]

24 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

Horvat is the closest, but his numbers (52 pts) and his general style of play at the level of a very good 2C, not a first liner.   No he's a first line player and there is enough support for that statement around the league, HOWEVER with him playing with guys who don't have complimentary skills then no he isn't but he obviously has first line talent.

I'm probably in the minority; but I'd rather have Horvat over a 1st line forward.  Tough to get a guy with (I think) future leadership potential (future C I think) with enough skill to be a more than solid 2C.

 

The problem is...he can't do it alone (much like a 1st line forward can't do it alone - else the Pens would be winning the Cup every season & they got TWO franchise forwards).  Boeser is looking pretty darn good so far though!

Edited April 23, 2017 by NewbieCanuckFan

[Bad_Dog]

This is canucks new addition for next season trainers for the boys

200 (1)canucksnewwomantrainer.webp

[HarryCanuck]

On 23 April 2017 at 8:53 PM, IBatch said:

Re considered your point.  I was secretly hoping we wouldn't play Boston because I was worried about how we would handle their size and defense/goaltending.  We all know the result and the feeling of dread we had after being up 3-2 and then Luongo and the team blowing game six.  Gillis did the right thing IMO by not adding an enforcer considering the odds of playing Boston at the final were not that high and nobody else in the East that were contenders has that big of a size advantage, certainly not by a large margin.

We did have some guys like Rome, Lappareier, Bieksa, Bug Eyes and even Kesler that could play a heavy game.  In fact Bieksa completely got under SJs skin and made them pay in game 5 OT.  That series was way closer than the result and if we lost in OT SJ could have gotten right back with momentum on their side.

My point is we weren't necessarily a soft team, we had guys that played on the edge and that could throw teams off their game, the same way Boston and Thomas did.

We also complied a long list of injuries in that series which took their toll in game 7. With the exception of Rome who received the NHLs longest SCF suspension and hurt us more than many might believe. The players you listed above all finished the series. 

[Nox]

Which team would you like to play against the most from a physical standpoint?  The Canucks must be right up there, the most polite group of nice guys.

Can't really blame the players.  The management put the team together.  Hindsight says Tkachuk over Juolevi, but the Canucks really did need someone like Tkachuk in the lineup.  Hopefully Virtanen fills that spot soon.  Speed and skill are the new NHL but it's still a physically tough sport especially during the playoffs.  We better have more than just mid-sized friendly dudes as prospects if we ever want to be a winner in the playoffs one day.

 

 

 

[Bad_Dog]

On 3/29/2017 at 8:30 PM, kingofsurrey said:

1) Do we have enough?

 

Canucks have zero toughness.  It is a major problem for our club.  It is critical we find some toughness on our top 6.  Virt are you reading this ?

We are in serious trouble if we do a rebuild with youth and no one to ride shotty for the kids.. How did that work out for the Oil stain ?

I would have loved to see Lucic or Kass on our current club.....   Oil have marron as well.

Who do we have that compares to any of these 3  ?  

 

 2 )Should we draft it? Summer-sign it? Trade for it? Or all of the above?

 

We need to sign it as drafting a tough 18 yr old will not help us in the immediate future.  We needed to sign toughness up front but instead our brilliant GM signed Loui E the magician now famous for his disappearing act. 

 

[Bad_Dog]

bring in this guy!!!!! 

[J-23]

I'm not even joking, Benning should sign Torres, Eager and Lapierre for cheap to play on our 4th line. No one would dare to mess with any of them, except Lapierre lol. We would automatically be the most physical team in the NHL. 

[aGENT]

Hoemtown boy E. Kane UFA in 2018 just as we have $14m coming off the books...

 

Him, Virtanen, Horvat and Boeser in top 9, some grit on the 4th line (prospect or UFA), Gudbranson (and hopefully Tryamkin back) on D and it's far less of a concern IMO.

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

I've noticed a trend this past season that teams carry at least one or two big thick pugilists to slug it out in the regular season, that goes with the wear and tear of an 82 game schedule.  Anaheim had Jared Boll, Edmonton tag teamed with Lucic, Kassian and Maroon, Pittsburgh saddled with Tom Sestito, Steve Olesky, Nashville went heavy with McLeod and Watson, Washington with Tom Wilson, The Leafs with Matt Martin and Roman Polak, Sharks with Michael Haley, the Blues with Ryan Reaves.  They all played a large part of the regular season, however, come playoff time their reduced roles were given to the skilled players (Minus Washington and Edmonton).

 

Point is that teams were focused with dealing with these hombres which opened space for the skilled guys and also benefitted them from having to deal with the grinding out games.

 

Canucks need a big thick tough hombre (too bad without Tryamkin) to wear down the opposition and take the focus off the young players.  Doesn't need to play regular minutes or even be a regular player in each game, but having a thick body against thick bodied teams does help players stay fresher over the long haul, and also reduce injuries.  with the amount of youth we will have and the lack of size and toughness, the Canucks are in absolute need to find a cheap tough option just to do some spot duty.  Can't have anymore of that Matt Martin nonsense, and don't want Bo to have to step up to the plate often.

 

Canucks need to sample out some cheap options like Anthony Peluso (UFA), Michael Haley (UFA), Marcus Foligno (RFA), Chris Thorburn (UFA), Ryan White (UFA)

Edited April 26, 2017 by CRAZY_4_NAZZY

[J-23]

1 minute ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

I've noticed a trend this past season that teams carry at least one of two big thick pugilists to slug it out in the regular season that goes with the wear a tear of an 82 game schedule.  Anaheim had Jared Boll, Edmonton tag teamed with Lucic, Kassian and Maroon, Pittsburgh saddled with Tom Sestito, Steve Olesky, Nashville went heavy with McLeod and Watson, Washington with Tom Wilson, The Leafs with Matt Martin and Roman Polak, Sharks with Michael Haley. They all played a large part of games regular season, however come playoff time their reduced roles were given to the skilled players (Minus Washington and Edmonton).

 

Point is that teams were focused with dealing with these hombres which opened space for the skilled guys and also benefitted them from having to deal with the grinding out games.

 

Canucks need a big thick tough hombre (too bad without Tryamkin) to wear down the opposition and take the focus off the young players.  Doesn't need to play regular minutes or even be a regular player in each game, but having a thick body against thick bodied teams does help players stay fresher over the long haul, and also reduce injuries.  with the amount of youth we will have and the lack of size and toughness, the Canucks are in absolute need to find a cheap tough option just to do some spot duty.  Can't have anymore of that Matt Martin nonsense, and don't want Bo to have to step up to the plate often.

 

Canucks need to sample out some cheap options like Anthony Peluso (UFA), Michael Haley (UFA), Marcus Foligno (RFA), Chris Thorburn (UFA), Ryan White (UFA)

Well said, there are some free agents we can pick up. Surprisingly Penguins have kept Sestito in their lineup, as they have realized they need some physicality with their skilled team. However, I think we have a physical player in Utica, Pedan who can play as a 4th liner. He just needs to get the right opportunity.

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

I've noticed a trend this past season that teams carry at least one of two big thick pugilists to slug it out in the regular season that goes with the wear a tear of an 82 game schedule.  Anaheim had Jared Boll, Edmonton tag teamed with Lucic, Kassian and Maroon, Pittsburgh saddled with Tom Sestito, Steve Olesky, Nashville went heavy with McLeod and Watson, Washington with Tom Wilson, The Leafs with Matt Martin and Roman Polak, Sharks with Michael Haley. They all played a large part of games regular season, however come playoff time their reduced roles were given to the skilled players (Minus Washington and Edmonton).

 

Point is that teams were focused with dealing with these hombres which opened space for the skilled guys and also benefitted them from having to deal with the grinding out games.

 

Canucks need a big thick tough hombre (too bad without Tryamkin) to wear down the opposition and take the focus off the young players.  Doesn't need to play regular minutes or even be a regular player in each game, but having a thick body against thick bodied teams does help players stay fresher over the long haul, and also reduce injuries.  with the amount of youth we will have and the lack of size and toughness, the Canucks are in absolute need to find a cheap tough option just to do some spot duty.  Can't have anymore of that Matt Martin nonsense, and don't want Bo to have to step up to the plate often.

 

Canucks need to sample out some cheap options like Anthony Peluso (UFA), Michael Haley (UFA), Marcus Foligno (RFA), Chris Thorburn (UFA), Ryan White (UFA)

Peluso is a great option for the forward corps, but the defense already has a very effective, more so that Tryamkin, player to protect the youth.