Rollieo Del Fuego Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Qwags said: I can't be the only one who thinks Edler and Eriksson had a decent game. ...no your not...I thought they were among the best of a bad lot...but ....Edler missed a shot from point blank with half the net to shoot at and Eriksson played well but...to no end, no points and no luck... ...same as everyone on the luckless Canucks...something has to change around here big time for our luck to swing.... Pettersson and Gaudette are our best hopes for a paradigm shift.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU SERIOUS Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Just now, luckylager said: Entirely possible. They totally changed the teams chemistry and "power structure" by returning to the line up. Hopefully order will be restored soon. Agree. Like I posted earlier, it's not coincidence that the team started playing slow, boring, shinny hockey like they did all of last year and losing since the twins were given more ice time & the old sweeds got back from injury last week displacing our younger hungry players and destroying the new chemistry that was building. BIG STEP BACKWARDS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 3 hours ago, 10pavelbure96 said: Eriksson and Edler combined for 10 shots on net, 5 a piece. The most on the team. The problems run deeper than just 2 players. Too many people here have tunnel vision. 1 hour ago, luckylager said: I'm usually the first to complain about Edler, or Eriksson. I put those two on a microscope because I believe they play a huge role in developing our youngins. The reality is, they were two of the better Canucks last night. Solid effort from both of them. So many people here seem to want an easy scape goat (or two) to blame. Is it really so hard to admit that we're simply a bottom 1/2 of the league team right now? We're rebuilding. I feel like a broken record here but it's the same as the last few years. At best we're a bubble playoff team. At worst, we're a draft lotto team. Luck, health and legit NHL depth largely deciding where we fall on that spectrum until the rebuild is closer to the end. Was Eriksson's contract a misstep? So far, yup. Is Edler as good as he was 7+/- years ago? Nope. Neither however is the reason we lost last night. We lost because we're a bottom 1/2 team, mid rebuild, that isn't going to look good all 82 games. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 7 minutes ago, Qwags said: I can't be the only one who thinks Edler and Eriksson had a decent game. I think you express some of the concern here...two highly paid vets are deemed valuable because they have a "decent game". If "decent" is the standard we now accept, why not play kids in those roles and use the cap space to acquire players who are difference makers? Louie has been decent, he is defensively responsible...but that is not why he was signed and not what his role was intended to be. He was brought in to be a 30 goal scorer and fill a desperate need for offense. If he is not contributing offensively, we would have been better off to extend Burrows or Hansen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 9 hours ago, vladimirpuck said: I don't think it's a coincidence that since these guys were put back in the lineup the team has sucked. We might need Edler because of Tanev but I think a large pylon would be better than Edler right now. Right now Eriksson is no Virtanen which says a lot about how bad Eriksson is right now. Virtanen at least has speed and 2 more goals, I can't see how Eriksson can even score a goal with how he's playing. Looking at him tonight against the Sharks I just kept seeing... they both played fairly well against san jose you are just looking for easy scapegoats other players had worse games then them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU SERIOUS Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 12 minutes ago, luckylager said: 13 minutes ago, Qwags said: I can't be the only one who thinks Edler and Eriksson had a decent game. You're not. Glad to See Bob & Doug are the others that agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 7 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said: .something has to change around here big time for our luck to swing.... Pettersson and Gaudette are our best hopes for a paradigm shift.... Yeah, the rebuild needs to finish. Edler or Eriksson, playing or not (or any of the other vets for that matter), does not change the fact that the Canucks aren't going to be a better team over an 82 game season, until we have the next crop of kids ready to take on major roles. We're not there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 5 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said: I think you express some of the concern here...two highly paid vets are deemed valuable because they have a "decent game". If "decent" is the standard we now accept, why not play kids in those roles and use the cap space to acquire players who are difference makers? Louie has been decent, he is defensively responsible...but that is not why he was signed and not what his role was intended to be. He was brought in to be a 30 goal scorer and fill a desperate need for offense. If he is not contributing offensively, we would have been better off to extend Burrows or Hansen. Eriksson hasn't played like a $6m player for the Canucks, not even close, and Edler is still as inconsistent as ever, disappointing actually. But if they can both put in efforts like they did last night, consistently, I won't complain about them. Well unless Eriksson never scores again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Just now, luckylager said: Eriksson hasn't played like a $6m player for the Canucks, not even close, and Edler is still as inconsistent as ever, disappointing actually. But if they can both put in efforts like they did last night, consistently, I won't complain about them. Well unless Eriksson never scores again Last night was just one game and as you and others have pointed out, those two were not the reason for the loss though, they only played "decent". My issue is more the fact that we have "decent" vets taking spots that could be used to develop youth. If the vets aren't playing to a level that is better than what the kids could then they aren't mentoring or setting an example and in fact, could be delaying the kind of change in culture JB has recently spoken of. The vets are supposed to be creating a winning environment for our youth and setting the example...so far, it appears to be the young guys that most nights are carrying the torch. It may just be coincidence but the increased minutes given to the Sedins following the dominant performance the team had against Pittsburgh was a turning point in this team's playing style. Coincidence maybe but I am not happy to just write-off this year watching a bunch of vets underperform and still keep their spot in the line up. Is Rodin so bad he can't even get one game when we have injuries? If this is supposed to be a developing team, how does his sitting make sense? How about Demko? Why not give him a game when Marky has been over-worked (remember he is new to this starter role) instead of risking injury to a tired keeper? It seems since the Pittsburgh game, that Green has changed his approach and is leaning more on vets...we all saw how this group of vets delivered for Willie D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said: Last night was just one game and as you and others have pointed out, those two were not the reason for the loss though, they only played "decent". My issue is more the fact that we have "decent" vets taking spots that could be used to develop youth. If the vets aren't playing to a level that is better than what the kids could then they aren't mentoring or setting an example and in fact, could be delaying the kind of change in culture JB has recently spoken of. The vets are supposed to be creating a winning environment for our youth and setting the example...so far, it appears to be the young guys that most nights are carrying the torch. It may just be coincidence but the increased minutes given to the Sedins following the dominant performance the team had against Pittsburgh was a turning point in this team's playing style. Coincidence maybe but I am not happy to just write-off this year watching a bunch of vets underperform and still keep their spot in the line up. Is Rodin so bad he can't even get one game when we have injuries? If this is supposed to be a developing team, how does his sitting make sense? How about Demko? Why not give him a game when Marky has been over-worked (remember he is new to this starter role) instead of risking injury to a tired keeper? It seems since the Pittsburgh game, that Green has changed his approach and is leaning more on vets...we all saw how this group of vets delivered for Willie D. Agreed, the last few games seem to be lacking the intensity and drive that got me all excited, gave me hope, early in the season. Oh well, I'll just watch the rain fall today. Seems appropriate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 18 minutes ago, aGENT said: So many people here seem to want an easy scape goat (or two) to blame. Is it really so hard to admit that we're simply a bottom 1/2 of the league team right now? We're rebuilding. I feel like a broken record here but it's the same as the last few years. At best we're a bubble playoff team. At worst, we're a draft lotto team. Luck, health and legit NHL depth largely deciding where we fall on that spectrum until the rebuild is closer to the end. Was Eriksson's contract a misstep? So far, yup. Is Edler as good as he was 7+/- years ago? Nope. Neither however is the reason we lost last night. We lost because we're a bottom 1/2 team, mid rebuild, that isn't going to look good all 82 games. Period. So you are saying we didn't look good in any of the games already played? ....how about the night the killer B's got 11 points all by themselves...? We are not a solid playoff team...but we are your best case scenario " a bubble playoff team" All we need to do is go back to playing the Sedins less, get Stecher back and play Edler less, bring up Rodin and bench at least 1 or 2 of Burmistrov, Gagner, Vanek, Granlund or Eriksson (if he slips back again)...maybe rotate 2 of those through the lineup until Rodin and Gaunce have had 10-12 games....then we will see how this team is really going to shake out. 2-3 of those guys should be gone at the trade deadline. In the spring if we are making a run for the playoffs we bring up Goldie and maybe MacEwen and then we get Gaudette after that. It may not be a solid playoff team but it could be an exciting team to watch...all the way to the crash and burn.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 38 minutes ago, aGENT said: So many people here seem to want an easy scape goat (or two) to blame. Is it really so hard to admit that we're simply a bottom 1/2 of the league team right now? We're rebuilding. I feel like a broken record here but it's the same as the last few years. At best we're a bubble playoff team. At worst, we're a draft lotto team. Luck, health and legit NHL depth largely deciding where we fall on that spectrum until the rebuild is closer to the end. Was Eriksson's contract a misstep? So far, yup. Is Edler as good as he was 7+/- years ago? Nope. Neither however is the reason we lost last night. We lost because we're a bottom 1/2 team, mid rebuild, that isn't going to look good all 82 games. Period. teams have also taken space away from Bo-Boeser, so they have to figure that out too. it may take a few games. But sure lets all or see things that aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billabong Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Eriksson is worst signing in canucks history hands down but we’re stuck with him edler weeeeelllll it’s complicated cause he’s the only veteran defensive left side d we got trading edler would be Putting del zottto, hutton, pouliot or whomever in a unfair position to be playing against the other teams best players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said: Eriksson at least looks like he is interested in playing now.... Edler had half the net to shoot at and couldn't get it through...Gagner had half the net to shoot at and did the same. I am hoping that Eriksson or Vanek or Gagner go on a roll for a few weeks and make themselves tradable by the deadline. Edler is fine for a shutdown 5-6 D. man...he has gotten better at resisting the urge to pinch at the offensive blueline (which he is very bad at and should never attempt again) Edler is good on the PK and in his own zone. Jetison as many of those guys and Burmistrov at the deadline ...cal up Rodin and Goldy and give Gaudette some games at the end of the season. Next year bring on Elias and Dahlen and maybe MacEwen. Baer / Bo / Boeser Dahlen / Pettersson / Goldy Granlund / Sutter / Rodin Gaunce / Gaudette/ Virtanen MacEwen or Dorsett Actually I think we trade Goldy as well and then Jake or Adam can take his spot on the 2nd line and MacEwen can play 4th line center. That is what we need to do...I doubt management has the balls to do it though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viper007 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 17 minutes ago, billabong said: Eriksson is worst signing in canucks history hands down but we’re stuck with him edler weeeeelllll it’s complicated cause he’s the only veteran defensive left side d we got trading edler would be Putting del zottto, hutton, pouliot or whomever in a unfair position to be playing against the other teams best players I think the Messier deal was worse. MDZ is a veteran too, and he was basically playing against the other teams best players some nights while Edler was out. The canucks are not the same team without Tanev. He is the glue that binds the defense together. I think the last 2 games are indicative of this, more than of Edler and Ericksson being back in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuckYa Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 41 minutes ago, luckylager said: Agreed, the last few games seem to be lacking the intensity and drive that got me all excited, gave me hope, early in the season. Oh well, I'll just watch the rain fall today. Seems appropriate Calling it now, next game Eriksson scores a goal assisted by Edler for the game winner. Eriksson 1st star Edler 2nd star Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 It's not a matter of "do we really need them?". More of "How can we trade them for something useful?" $11 million makes it difficult to move, and Edler has stated before he won't be traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 8 minutes ago, CoolCanucklehead said: Calling it now, next game Eriksson scores a goal assisted by Edler for the game winner. Eriksson 1st star Edler 2nd star Eriksson better start scoring Asap. I'd like to see a career year out of him so he asks for a trade the second the twins retire, and we can actually get something for him. I'd rather them youts winning the stars though, ushering in a new era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 The OP’s question is “do we need Edler and Errikson”? I think we need them playing to guarantee another top five pick in the 2018 draft. Maybe (privately) JB/TL/TG know that too? We are rebuilding, and high draft picks are essential to how good our next core will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 1 hour ago, DIBdaQUIB said: I think you express some of the concern here...two highly paid vets are deemed valuable because they have a "decent game". If "decent" is the standard we now accept, why not play kids in those roles and use the cap space to acquire players who are difference makers? Louie has been decent, he is defensively responsible...but that is not why he was signed and not what his role was intended to be. He was brought in to be a 30 goal scorer and fill a desperate need for offense. If he is not contributing offensively, we would have been better off to extend Burrows or Hansen. Not playing up to a contract is not the same as being the reason we lost a game though. Arbitrarily throwing the loss at Loui or Edler’s feet because people don’t like how much money they make is unproductive. Considering at the moment he’s untradable and in a buyout-proof contract I can’t understand the amount of complaining on Loui... there is literally nothing to be done with him. As you admit, he’s playing well enough to warrant a spot so the coach shouldn’t sit him either. All we can do is hope he finds his groove. Not extending Hansen or Burrows netted us Goldobin and Dahlen. Loui in the lineup might be a waste of cap but he does free up other vets to be traded if you’re worried about having a balanced roster - some vets to help steady the kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.