[GDT] CANUCKS VS WINGS | November 6th, 2017 | 7PM PST/10PM EST | SN650/SNP

[CeeBee51]

1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

True, Granlund-Sutter-Dorsett has been very good, wouldn't want to disrupt that. I'm concerned that once Gaunce comes back, Virtanen will be sent down. I'd rather Burmistrov be the odd man out.  

The real crunch will come when Louie comes back unless there's another forward injured by then. Jake should not be going down IMO

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Just now, NUCKER67 said:

True, Granlund-Sutter-Dorsett has been very good, wouldn't want to disrupt that. I'm concerned that once Gaunce comes back, Virtanen will be sent down. I'd rather Burmistrov be the odd man out.  

Things will become more chaotic when Eriksson returns as well. It's really hard to take someone out when everyone has been playing great. But with Eriksson on a six-million contract, I really doubt they would want him to sit him when he's cleared to play. I think it's between Burmistrov, Virtanen, and Gagner as the guys that will rotate with Gaunce and Eriksson, assuming there are no injuries.

[Hairy Kneel]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Canucks need to start getting some offensive from the back end if we want to maintain a wildcard spot.  When tanev is our leading point man from the point you know there's an issue.

I think it's time to start looking at other guys if our D is so snakebitten. Try McEneny or Subban from Utica.

We can't have our whole D go Ericksson on us.

[Green Building]

1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

True, Granlund-Sutter-Dorsett has been very good, wouldn't want to disrupt that. I'm concerned that once Gaunce comes back, Virtanen will be sent down. I'd rather Burmistrov be the odd man out.  

I was thinking about this during the last game while following Virts (and the Twins) TOI. Maybe it's on Virtanen to do show he can do more with the time he's given, but we'll be 1/5 of the way into the season after the Flames game and I'm not thrilled with how much ice time he's been getting. Attaching him to the hip of the Twins seemed to be a good attempt at getting each other going, but if the Twins minutes are reduced then obviously his will be as well. I'm not panicking over him, I just want him to get lots of ice time. Or at least more, and so far that's not the case.

[Hairy Kneel]

4 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Things will become more chaotic when Eriksson returns as well. It's really hard to take someone out when everyone has been playing great. But with Eriksson on a six-million contract, I really doubt they would want him to sit him when he's cleared to play. I think it's between Burmistrov, Virtanen, and Gagner as the guys that will rotate with Gaunce and Eriksson, assuming there are no injuries.

No I think sitting him would be great to extinguish any self entitlement, if that's his problem.

[SamJamIam]

1 hour ago, Green Building said:

Since 2010 the Canucks are 4-8-0 on home ice against the Red Wings.

 

5-8-0 as of tomorrow.

On the upside, those were Babcock years.  Hopefully his absence counts for something.

[SamJamIam]

double post

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Just brainstorming of what the lineup could look like with Gaunce and Eriksson:

 

Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser

Sedin - Sedin - Virtanen

Granlund - Sutter - Dorsett

Vanek - Gaunce - Eriksson

Gagner, Burmistrov

 

If the Canucks were carrying 14 forwards, Gagner could have rotated with Virtanen and Burmistrov with Gaunce. Unfortunately, one has to go.

[Nucker 67]

I guess it's a good problem to have, players like Eriksson, Virtanen, Gagner, Burmistrov and Gaunce all fighting for spots. We'll still have to be patient with Jake, as he's getting great experience playing with the Sedins, but doesn't have the weight of the team on his shoulders. If he sits some games it's not the end of the world. That Eriksson contract is looking like quite the albatross though. Damn, 5 more years? 

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Just brainstorming of what the lineups could look like with Gaunce and Eriksson:

 

Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser

Granlund - Sutter - Dorsett

Vanek - Gaunce - Virtanen

Sedin - Sedin - Eriksson

Gagner, Burmistrov

 

If the Canucks were carrying 14 forwards, Gagner could have rotated with Virtanen and Burmistrov with Gaunce. Unfortunately, one has to go.

Fixed that line up for ya. Although looking at it now, that 4th line has to be the most expensive in NHL history at $20M.

 

I do think that Gaunce will have to really impress with his chance, as Burmistrov is playing pretty well lately. Definitely would sub out Gagner for Eriksson though.

[Green Building]

2 minutes ago, SamJamIam said:

On the upside, those were Babcock years.  Hopefully his absence counts for something.

You're right, but the Canucks haven't beat the Wings on home ice since Blashill took over as coach. We're 2-2-1, with both wins coming on the road. 

[Angry Goose]

9 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Just brainstorming of what the lineup could look like with Gaunce and Eriksson:

 

Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser

Sedin - Sedin - Virtanen

Granlund - Sutter - Dorsett

Vanek - Gaunce - Eriksson

Gagner, Burmistrov

 

If the Canucks were carrying 14 forwards, Gagner could have rotated with Virtanen and Burmistrov with Gaunce. Unfortunately, one has to go.

No way I play Vanek over Gagner or Burmi.  Both have played much much better than Vanek

[The_Rocket]

3 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

No way I play Vanek over Gagner or Burmi.  Both have played much much better than Vanek

Vanek has more points tho

[Angry Goose]

Just now, Canadian Clay said:

Vanek has more points tho

Kind of a narrow minded way to look at it.  I bet Burmi and Gagner as a line would have more points without Vanek on it, killing all momentum.

[Green Building]

2 minutes ago, Canadian Clay said:

Vanek has more points tho

There's a guy who needs to take more slapshots.

[Angry Goose]

6 minutes ago, Canadian Clay said:

Vanek has more points tho

 

5 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Kind of a narrow minded way to look at it. 

That may have come off as harsh.  Let me re phrase that.  I think overall, points dont tell the whole story with that line.  I think they would be doing better as a line without Vanek on it.

[luckylager]

19 minutes ago, Green Building said:

You're right, but the Canucks haven't beat the Wings on home ice since Blashill took over as coach. We're 2-2-1, with both wins coming on the road. 

They're gonna change that tonight!

 

 

[Green Building]

1 minute ago, luckylager said:

They're gonna change that tonight!

 

 

Damn skippy.

[Freaky Freak]

24 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Just brainstorming of what the lineup could look like with Gaunce and Eriksson:

 

Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser

Sedin - Sedin - Virtanen

Granlund - Sutter - Dorsett

Vanek - Gaunce - Eriksson

Gagner, Burmistrov

 

If the Canucks were carrying 14 forwards, Gagner could have rotated with Virtanen and Burmistrov with Gaunce. Unfortunately, one has to go.

They wont go with 14 forwards once Stetcher and  Edler are back (although I could see Stecher on a 3-4 (or till another injury) week stint in the "A") and send Weir back 

Leaving 7 & 14 for a bit

 

But I can see Gaunce going in for Granny and Granny back with the twins (as that worked good last year) and Greener likes BG alot it seems 

 

Giving us a three line set and a 5 man rotation

 

 

Baer Bo Brock

Sedins Granny

Gaunce Suts Dorse

 

Louie Virt Vanek Brum Gagne 

TO FILL OUT A LAST LINE (then trade or waive one if no injuries and when they want to go back to 8 & 13 )

[The_Rocket]

22 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

 

That may have come off as harsh.  Let me re phrase that.  I think overall, points dont tell the whole story with that line.  I think they would be doing better as a line without Vanek on it.

Maybe they would be, but I don’t think it sends a good message to bench a guy who is scoring goals.