[PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs. Anaheim Ducks

[CanadianRugby]

7 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

that stat is meaningless. 

 

if someone wants to talk to me directly about anything I've posted I'm happy to discuss. I don't need you as a proxy. 

So if being -13 as a Canuck is a meaningless stat.  Why did you use him being +1 under Green as a meaningful stat?  

 

[Crabcakes]

2 hours ago, Rocksterh8 said:

You bet he does! You'll never see a high payed vet sit. 

I'll admit that my comment was flippant and put out there mainly to get a reaction.

 

Strictly speaking, you're right.  The high salary players do make the line up.  But the high salary players have a high salary because of what they bring to the table.  Eriksson gets roasted on here because he was brought in to partner with the Sedins and put the puck in the net.  He hasn't worked out in that role.  He is good without the puck and is good defensively which is why I think he could be slotted in on the Sutter line*.  In addition, unlike guys like Gaunce, he has shown in the past that he has the potential to score and score a lot.

 

On the other hand, I have seen Green play $7M players like 4th liners.  One game in particular, the team Captain spent the 3rd period opening the door to the bench for players who were "on" that night.  This is what I was really talking about.  Green will give ice time to players who are playing well, and take it away if they're not.  It's accountability and I like that a lot.

 

I heard a Yannik Hansen interview yesterday on 650.  He was talking about how difficult the move has been to San Jose.  He said that the hockey part is pretty easy.  You adapt to a new system.  Hansen is a family man and he said that the biggest challenge was off the ice dealing with the move for the family.  The wife and kids have left their friends behind and all the practical things of life have to be figured out.  Schools, banks, shopping, doctors, haircuts...the list goes on.  The home life which was a sanctuary from the world is now in turmoil.  Until that settles down, it will carry over into his game.  This explains partly why Hansen has been a healthy scratch; he has been a little pre-occupied.  Of course, a single player would adjust more quickly because he only has to worry about himself.  

 

We haven't missed the Eriksson who doesn't score much but maybe we should cut him some slack.  Surely, his family life has settled out, I believe he has 4 kids, but he still hasn't found regular line mates on the Canucks.  He has the potential to score in the right situations.  So does Granlund and Gagner.  That might make a decent line.

 

* I hadn't seen the line up from practice yesterday.  Eriksson with Sedins.

[Pete M]

13 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

woes 

or like they say in Calgary when riding the horse "whoooa"s

[WeneedLumme]

11 hours ago, riffraff said:

Sure.

 

but let's be real. Current Tanev would be more beneficial in 3 years.

And we could all be dead in 3 years. So are you suggesting we freeze him and then thaw him out in 3 years? Or trade him and count on being able to replace him in 3 years because it's so easy to drop into the D-store and grab one from the super reliable right-side Dmen shelf?

[riffraff]

5 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

And we could all be dead in 3 years. So are you suggesting we freeze him and then thaw him out in 3 years? Or trade him and count on being able to replace him in 3 years because it's so easy to drop into the D-store and grab one from the super reliable right-side Dmen shelf?

Triggered much?

 

and are you trying to be obtuse?

[Green Building]

6 hours ago, alfstonker said:

As I say, I don't agree. 

We HAVE shown them courtesy and respect as far as I'm concerned - 2 extended years of it. Realistically they should have retired at 35 imo. That way they would have gone out at the top.

This hanging on is not doing their image much good and it's certainly not helping their line mates imo.

Ok, so you're one of the the people who wants the Sedins out of the lineup. That's fine, we're all allowed an opinion on their value to the team, I still believe that while their play has obviously declined, they bring more than simply logging minutes to the team. If you're old enough to recall how tough it was to break into the league and be successful every day players, then you might agree that they have knowledge that could be helpful to the young new core of the team. Do they have to play to do that? That's probably debatable. 

 

Should have retired at 35 to help their image? That's a silly narrative. It's their choice to play out their contract for the team that drafted them, not the fans whose desire it is to see them off at their best. Green has reduced their minutes so others can enjoy more opportunities on the ice and the results are good. Each game I watch gives me a sneaking suspicion that this will be their last year and you can call me sentimental, but I'd prefer to watch them play it out rather than be scratched into retirement. It's not that we have much to gain by scratching them anyways. If we had prospects ready to step in 2 years ago who were waiting on the sideline that would be different. We don't have the players to replace them with that would be an improvement, it would just be different deficiencies.  

[JM_]

5 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

So if being -13 as a Canuck is a meaningless stat.  Why did you use him being +1 under Green as a meaningful stat?  

 

really? you can't figure out what the difference is between last year and this year for that stat?

[alfstonker]

3 hours ago, Green Building said:

Ok, so you're one of the the people who wants the Sedins out of the lineup. That's fine, we're all allowed an opinion on their value to the team, I still believe that while their play has obviously declined, they bring more than simply logging minutes to the team. If you're old enough to recall how tough it was to break into the league and be successful every day players, then you might agree that they have knowledge that could be helpful to the young new core of the team. Do they have to play to do that? That's probably debatable. 

 

Should have retired at 35 to help their image? That's a silly narrative. It's their choice to play out their contract for the team that drafted them, not the fans whose desire it is to see them off at their best. Green has reduced their minutes so others can enjoy more opportunities on the ice and the results are good. Each game I watch gives me a sneaking suspicion that this will be their last year and you can call me sentimental, but I'd prefer to watch them play it out rather than be scratched into retirement. It's not that we have much to gain by scratching them anyways. If we had prospects ready to step in 2 years ago who were waiting on the sideline that would be different. We don't have the players to replace them with that would be an improvement, it would just be different deficiencies.  

I see a lot in what you are saying.

 

However I am of the opinion that "we do have something to gain" by retiring them now. 

Firstly anyone reading my posts knows that I am of the opinion you can't play 2 styles of play in one team and be effective especially when one of the styles is dictated by slow, ineffectual veterans whose mediocre days are well behind them never mind their best days.

 

We are 3 years into a rebuild which is purposed to ultimately give us a team based on skill with speed, high compete and a reliance on youth. That is roughly what Linden and Benning promised us unless I am mistaken.

How do you play a high speed, high compete and high skilled game if the momentum is lost every time the 2nd/3rd line takes to the ice - you can't, it gives the opposition a breather and consequently puts more onus on the other 3 lines.

 

I am a big fan of the Twins, always have been (up to 2 years ago) BUT those were the days when our whole effort, our whole style was based on their play and they were able to deliver.

Now, I think of them as pretty ordinary players, who occasionally show a flash of the old Sedinary BUT these flashes are far outweighed by the giveaways, detrimental "excessive passing" and lack of speed and defensive compete on a nightly basis. Cutting their minutes only emphasises it and keeping them on the PP? well surely anyone can see that line is just not working and is ultimately damaging us.

 

Pretty ordinary players get nights off occasionally.

[Green Building]

1 minute ago, alfstonker said:

I see a lot in what you are saying.

 

However I am of the opinion that "we do have something to gain" by retiring them now. 

Firstly anyone reading my posts knows that I am of the opinion you can't play 2 styles of play in one team and be effective especially when one of the styles is dictated by slow, ineffectual veterans whose mediocre days are well behind them never mind their best days.

 

We are 3 years into a rebuild which is purposed to ultimately give us a team based on skill with speed, high compete and a reliance on youth. That is roughly what Linden and Benning promised us unless I am mistaken.

How do you play a high speed, high compete and high skilled game if the momentum is lost every time the 2nd/3rd line takes to the ice - you can't, it gives the opposition a breather and consequently puts more onus on the other 3 lines.

 

I am a big fan of the Twins, always have been (up to 2 years ago) BUT those were the days when our whole effort, our whole style was based on their play and they were able to deliver.

Now, I think of them as pretty ordinary players, who occasionally show a flash of the old Sedinary BUT these flashes are far outweighed by the giveaways, detrimental "excessive passing" and lack of speed and defensive compete on a nightly basis. Cutting their minutes one emphasises it and keeping them on the PP? well surely anyone can see that line is just not working and is ultimately damaging us.

 

Pretty ordinary players get nights off occasionally.

And I see where you're coming from. The one thing I don't see is who we have in the organization that could play better than them. There's no-one ready who would do a better job, it would likely just be job done is all, which is what I see the Sedins doing. Job done. Not amazing, but done. I don't agree with moving assets for 2 players to replace them, nor do I feel we have anyone in Utica that would be any better over the course of the year. We simply haven't developed the players yet. 

[alfstonker]

1 minute ago, Green Building said:

And I see where you're coming from. The one thing I don't see is who we have in the organization that could play better than them. There's no-one ready who would do a better job, it would likely just be job done is all, which is what I see the Sedins doing. Job done. Not amazing, but done. I don't agree with moving assets for 2 players to replace them, nor do I feel we have anyone in Utica that would be any better over the course of the year. We simply haven't developed the players yet. 

Well what happens when Goldy is deemed ready or Boucher (unlikely he will ever be) and Rodin needs to get into the team and Burmistrov has played well.

 

The sad truth is, I suspect that if every one of these players were ready and fit to play our GM wouldn't allow it to be at the expense of the Twins.

[Green Building]

Just now, alfstonker said:

Well what happens when Goldy is deemed ready or Boucher (unlikely he will ever be) and Rodin needs to get into the team and Burmistrov has played well.

 

The sad truth is, I suspect that if every one of these players were ready and fit to play our GM wouldn't allow it to be at the expense of the Twins.

The only player who could be ready later in the year (no guarantee but it's looking pretty good so far) is Goldobin. I'd call that a good problem to have, and if he were ready today you're probably right, the Sedins still wouldn't come out. Goldy would likely replace Burm or Gagner, or even trade places with Jake if Green wants him to get tons more minutes. Plenty of options with the parts we have around this year. 

[Rocksterh8]

6 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

I'll admit that my comment was flippant and put out there mainly to get a reaction.

 

Strictly speaking, you're right.  The high salary players do make the line up.  But the high salary players have a high salary because of what they bring to the table.  Eriksson gets roasted on here because he was brought in to partner with the Sedins and put the puck in the net.  He hasn't worked out in that role.  He is good without the puck and is good defensively which is why I think he could be slotted in on the Sutter line*.  In addition, unlike guys like Gaunce, he has shown in the past that he has the potential to score and score a lot.

 

On the other hand, I have seen Green play $7M players like 4th liners.  One game in particular, the team Captain spent the 3rd period opening the door to the bench for players who were "on" that night.  This is what I was really talking about.  Green will give ice time to players who are playing well, and take it away if they're not.  It's accountability and I like that a lot.

 

I heard a Yannik Hansen interview yesterday on 650.  He was talking about how difficult the move has been to San Jose.  He said that the hockey part is pretty easy.  You adapt to a new system.  Hansen is a family man and he said that the biggest challenge was off the ice dealing with the move for the family.  The wife and kids have left their friends behind and all the practical things of life have to be figured out.  Schools, banks, shopping, doctors, haircuts...the list goes on.  The home life which was a sanctuary from the world is now in turmoil.  Until that settles down, it will carry over into his game.  This explains partly why Hansen has been a healthy scratch; he has been a little pre-occupied.  Of course, a single player would adjust more quickly because he only has to worry about himself.  

 

We haven't missed the Eriksson who doesn't score much but maybe we should cut him some slack.  Surely, his family life has settled out, I believe he has 4 kids, but he still hasn't found regular line mates on the Canucks.  He has the potential to score in the right situations.  So does Granlund and Gagner.  That might make a decent line.

 

* I hadn't seen the line up from practice yesterday.  Eriksson with Sedins.

I agree with some of your comments, but lets be clear Eriksson is on year two of his 36 Mil contract. It's not a small sample size, and he has had time with the Sedins and just about everyone else in the line up. For 6 Mil per year he is supposed to be driving the play, not complement it and he hasn't done that at all. 

 

If he's with the Sedin's tonight, time to man up and play like you care, not just cash the pay cheque. I don't hate Eriksson but would never have singed him because I though he was over rated in Boston and he's proven me right so far.  He better start soon or he's a complete bust.