Report Cards: The halfway point [Discussion]

[billabong]

Selecting eriksson as the most disappointing player implies you had expected him to have a come back year pffft seriously?!

 

the guy has cashed out and checked out

 

there is zero bite/hunger/desire/battle/heart to his game. That is never going to change. 

 

He has 16 goals and 1 ppg to his name as a Canuck 

[higgyfan]

Overall, I think the team has done well, considering the continuous injuries.  For biggest disappointment, I checked Horvat and Tanev (I would have put Sutter, but he's so far gone that the OP didn't even list him).  Without these injuries, the Canucks would have won quite a few games that they ended up losing.

[-AJ-]

4 hours ago, drummerboy said:

They are all fairly close grades, but let's be honest.   If our team was loaded with Bs and As, we wouldn't be a bottom feeder again.   

The grades are a little optimistic IMO 

 

1 hour ago, Comet Fan 0727 said:

I agree. How can there not be lots more Ds and Fs?

 

1 hour ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

That's exactly what I was thinking 

 

I think there has to be a few more D's and F's in the mix unfortunately. 

Depends on your standard. I based them on my expectations coming into the year. Because I expected our team to be a bottom feeder, my expectations were low, thus my grades are a bit higher. If I had counted on the team being full of stars to bring us to Cup contender status, you'd see way more Fs and Ds from me.

[Jester13]

12 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

 

Depends on your standard. I based them on my expectations coming into the year. Because I expected our team to be a bottom feeder, my expectations were low, thus my grades are a bit higher. If I had counted on the team being full of stars to bring us to Cup contender status, you'd see way more Fs and Ds from me.

Unsurprisingly, it appears some people didn't read your post closely. 

 

I agree with almost all of your grades, and I like that you made in it relation to realistic expectations. I'd, personally, give Burmi a D (I thought he was going to prove that he could at least be a serviceable guy in and out of the lineup) and Dowd a B (I quite like his hustle, faceoffs, and overall style of play).  

 

I'd also give DD an A+, because that guy came back with a vengeance and went out on top like the warrior he is.

 

Other than that, tho, nice post, AJ. 

[Westcoasting]

17 hours ago, -AJ- said:

We’re halfway through the season at this point and I figured this kind of thing might crop up, and I’m interested to hear opinions, so though I’d start a thread on a halfway “report card” for our players throughout the year. I’ll mention my thoughts below and feel free to share your own!

As a rubric, I’d say I’m probably 75% judging our players based off of my expectations from the start of the year, not objective performance nor off of expectations that have developed part way into the season, so take that into account. Feel free to use whatever rubric you want.

 

Forwards:

• S. Baertschi - A-
  • Baertschi started to cool off before he was injured, but he was still on pace for career-bests in goals and assists.

 

• B. Boeser - A+
  • This one’s obvious. I expected him to be good, but not this good. So far, he’s the best rookie in Canucks history.

 

• A. Burmistrov - C+
  • Couldn’t shine very well and then retired. Pretty forgettable time in Vancouver.

 

• D. Dorsett - A-
  • Was playing the best hockey of his career before he had to cut his career short. Was on pace for bests offensively and was a great shut down forward.

 

• N. Dowd - C+
  • Hasn’t done much here so far this year. Was much better last year. Hasn’t been terrible though. I had low expectations for him.

 

• L. Eriksson - B
  • A bit of an odd year so far for Eriksson. Started injured, then got hot and has now cooled off. He’s still on pace for better numbers than last year though, so he gets a mediocre satisfactory grade.

 

• S. Gagner - B
  • Started quite poorly, but has picked it up as of late. Still not doing as well as last year, but isn’t terrible. 

 

• B. Gaunce - B
  • I’m disappointed he hasn’t been getting more points, but his defensive game is still great and he does create some chances. Average grade.
• N. Goldobin - B-
  • I was hoping for a bit more from Goldobin this year, but he’s been pretty similar to last year. Maybe something will click soon.

 

• M. Granlund - C
  • Having a far worse year than last year. He can play defensive hockey, so he’s still useful, but his offense has vanished.

 

• B. Horvat - A
  • Horvat continues to improve, and was on a drastically higher goal-scoring rate than he’s ever had before he was injured. He still might break his career best in goals even with his injury.

 

• D. Sedin - B+
  • I expected Daniel to regress, but he’s actually on a slightly better point pace than last year. On pace for 6 more points this year than last year.

 

• H. Sedin - B+
  • Same deal as his younger brother. Also on pace for a better year, even if just barely. A pleasant surprise not to see them regress much at all.

 

• T. Vanek - A-
  • Despite scoring at a lower rate than he did last year, I expected Vanek to play at about Eriksson’s level when he arrived here. He’s far exceeded my expectations and is scoring at a borderline first line forward’s rate.

 

• J. Virtanen - B
  • Virtanen has made the team full-time and is fitting in well. He’s learning to do the little things right and that will make him last long in the NHL. His offense still leaves something to be desired, so hopefully that improves at some point.

 

• M. Chaput - I
• R. Boucher - I
• J. Megna - I

 

Defensemen:

• A. Biega - B
  • Biega has scored 5 points in 21 games, far more than usual, but his energy is sometimes inconsistent. If he could go full “bulldog mode” every game, he’d be an NHL regular.

 

• M. Del Zotto - B-
  • While not terrible, I did hope for a bit more from Del Zotto. He’s scored just 1 goal and I was hoping for more than 5 on the year. Maybe he picks up his offense in the second half, because our defense sorely needs it.

 

• A. Edler - B-
  • Edler is the same guy he’s been for the last several years. Mostly reliable, but makes egregious errors every now and then. His lack of offense continues to leave me wanting more from him.

 

• E. Gudbranson - C+
  • He’s brought the physical side and the leadership, but doesn’t seem to have many tangible skills to offer besides those. He’s average defensively and very poor offensively.

 

• B. Hutton - C
  • I don’t think Hutton’s year has been as bad as some are saying, but that doesn’t mean it’s been good. His offense is lacking this year. His defense has some good moments, but can be a bit inconsistent.

 

• D. Pouliot - B+
  • Pouliot has been a pleasant surprise for me. When we acquired him, I had him penciled in as the 7th defenseman, but he’s worked his way onto the main roster. His offense isn’t amazing, but it’s among the best of the team’s defensemen (which isn’t saying much, admittedly). He shows promise.

 

• T. Stecher - C
  • He makes less egregious errors than Hutton, but Stecher is in a very similar boat, though he’s lacking even more offensively with just 3 points in 27 games.

 

• C. Tanev - A
  • Tanev continues to be outstanding and by far our best defenseman. His injury problems are frustrating, but have no bearing on his rating. His offense is fairly poor, but that’s never been his calling card. His calm and steady play on the back end is mesmerising to watch. He’s a fantastic decision-maker.

 

Goaltenders:

• J. Markstrom - B-
  • Markstrom has struggled a bit to take the starting role, but did have a strong start. His current save percentage (.907) is only slightly below last year’s .910, but I was hoping for an improvement, not a decline.

 

• A. Nilsson - C+
  • Nilsson started the year on fire, but he’s shown extreme inconsistency since then. His strong start caused some to think he may steal Markstrom’s starting job, but his recent poor play (even poorer than Markstrom’s) has eliminated those notions.

How can everyone be marked with A's and B's and toss in a couple C's when we are near last place in the league? Lmao!

[Westcoasting]

5 hours ago, -AJ- said:

 

 

Depends on your standard. I based them on my expectations coming into the year. Because I expected our team to be a bottom feeder, my expectations were low, thus my grades are a bit higher. If I had counted on the team being full of stars to bring us to Cup contender status, you'd see way more Fs and Ds from me.

I should have read the whole thread first, i see others have covered my point.

[bloodycanuckleheads]

You guys need to start grading on a curve!

 

Just look at all those A's and B's!  Right now, we are the 2nd worst team in the Western Conference (who have lost 10 more games than we have won).  Yet, you are all rating our entire roster extremely high.  What would you rate everyone if we were actually good?  Nothing but A+++++ and A++++?

 

If nearly everyone on our team gets a better than average grade - then how come we suck so bad?  That would mean that our management is utterly incompetent.  Because, even with everyone playing better than expected, we are still god-awful and can't win to save our lives.

You can't have it both ways (amazing players AND amazing GM).  If almost all of our players are better than expected, then our GM sucks badly.  And, if our GM is great, then our players are pooping the bed right now.

[-AJ-]

18 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

You guys need to start grading on a curve!

 

Just look at all those A's and B's!  Right now, we are the 2nd worst team in the Western Conference (who have lost 10 more games than we have won).  Yet, you are all rating our entire roster extremely high.  What would you rate everyone if we were actually good?  Nothing but A+++++ and A++++?

 

If nearly everyone on our team gets a better than average grade - then how come we suck so bad?  That would mean that our management is utterly incompetent.  Because, even with everyone playing better than expected, we are still god-awful and can't win to save our lives.

You can't have it both ways (amazing players AND amazing GM).  If almost all of our players are better than expected, then our GM sucks badly.  And, if our GM is great, then our players are pooping the bed right now.

As I said in my original post and has been said multiple times already in this thread, it's relative to my expectations. I expected to be a bottom five feeder and my grades are based on that. If I expected our roster to be a top 5 roster, you'd see Ds and Fs. It's not relative to all players in the league, it's relative to our expectations of the Canucks, which weren't very high for most fans. If you expect poor play and get poor play, then your grades will be average, not poor.

[brokensticks]

On 2017-04-27 at 8:32 PM, erkayloomeh said:

Can he skate?. Speed? 

 

[brokensticks]

22 hours ago, c00kies said:

Forwards:

• S. Baertschi - B
• B. Boeser - A+
• A. Burmistrov - D
• D. Dorsett - A
• N. Dowd - C
• L. Eriksson - D
• S. Gagner - C
• B. Gaunce - C
• N. Goldobin - C
• M. Granlund - D
• B. Horvat - A
• D. Sedin - C
• H. Sedin - C
• T. Vanek - A
• J. Virtanen - C

 

Defensemen:

• A. Biega - C
• M. Del Zotto - C
• A. Edler - C
• E. Gudbranson - C
• B. Hutton - D+
• D. Pouliot - B
• T. Stecher - B-
• C. Tanev - B

Goaltenders:

• J. Markstrom - D+
• A. Nilsson - D+

This is much more realistic than the A's and B's given by other posters. It's unrealistic to give a 28th place team a lot of high ratings. Are the ratings meant to be a measure of effort or talent? If you are rating players based on playing to their potential and skill level, then guys like Biega should be rated higher (B) and Edler lower (D), for example. There are players who give their heart and soul every night (e.g. Gaunce) but don't have the skill level to play much better.

[RonMexico]

How about just giving them all participation ribbons for showing up.

[HC20.0]

Forwards:

Baertschi B+

Boeser A+

Burmistrov F

Dorsett A+

Dowd C

Eriksson D+

Gagner C+

Gaunce C-

Goldobin C

Granlund C

Horvat A

Daniel B-

Henrik B-

Vanek A-

Virtanen C

 

Defense:

Biega C+

Del Zotto C

Edler C

Gudbranson C-

Hutton D

Pouliot B

Stecher C

Tanev B+

 

Goalies:

Markstrom D

Nilsson D

 

Maybe a bit harsh, but as a whole, we've been a pretty poor team this year minus our first line. The only reason why the Sedin's got B- ratings is because they've really vamped up their games since Horvat's been out, so credit where it's due. Our defense is just killing us though. Sadly this is what a rebuild looks like though. 

[oldnews]

For me, it's

 

'Surprises'

Vanek

Pouliot

 

'disappointments'

Gagner

Hutton.

 

(not going to do grades - not a fan of the grading system lol).

 

Boeser has burst into the NHL, but we knew he was a highly intelligent player with an elite release, so I don't consider him as much of a surprise as the bargain signing Vanek whose work ethic is one of the biggest bonuses of the season.  I think Dowd is a secondary consideration - he's playing really strong hard minutes in the absence of Horvat/Sutter, with some outstanding underlying numbers.   On D, Pouliot is more solid without the puck than I'd expected - he also trails only Edler with 63 blocked shots and has commanded bigger minutes faster than I would have anticipated.  His production is ok but imo to be expected on a depleted team - I'm not expecting a great deal more than the 20 pt pace he's on, which is not bad when combined with his commitment to playing defense.

 

I'm not really disappointed in Gagner - his production is good, he's stepping up well and isn't really a top6 C imo but finds himself in the 1C role - however what 'disappoints' me about him is his inconsistency in our end of the ice.  We knew he was a streaky scorer - but some nights I watch him and he's really engaged defensively, others he just looks vacant and doesn't appear aware of where the opposition is on the ice or where he should be.   Last night in Montreal highlighted this for me once again, after a few good performances recently.   Some people might look at Virtanen or Gaunce's production and name them, but they're playing very difficult D zone weighted minutes for such young players and handling them very well.  I think Green has a good relationship with Virtanen and sees him as a future impact player that he's not going to rush on any level - and I really like Virtanen's response to his role and his body language throughout - he looks like he's really engaged and accepts his role and him minutes, likely due to the respect he probably has for Green and trust that TG is doing what he thinks is best for Virtanen's development.  No concern or disappointment for me personally where these big young forwards are concerned - I've been very impressed with their attention to detail without the puck

 

Hutton - likewise - not really 'disappointed' in him, but he is being outcompeted for a job, perhaps understandably by a guy with pretty good upside in Pouliot.  Hutton's confidence just doesn't appear to be what it was as a rookie even,, and his puck moving decisions seem effected. 

Overall however, imo if Gagner and Hutton are our biggest 'disappointments' (aside of course from another M.A.S.H. season) - then there's not a lot to be disappointed about in terms of individual performances.  

[Father Ryan]

A+ - Boeser, Dorsett (so sad!)

A   - (until injured) Horvat

 

B+ - Poulliot (so far, but slipping), Vanek

B   - Baer, Tanev

 

C+ - Dowd, MDZ (but slipping fast), Markstrom

C   - Virt, Guddy, Biega, Edler, Nilsson, Gagner (climbing slightly)

C-  - The twins, Sutter, Gaunce, Granlund, Hutton

 

D+ - Eriksson (a small stretch of good games keeps him from an F)

 

I (incomplete) - Boucher, Chaput

 

Once everyone is healthy, and everyone is playing where they should...I could see MDZ regaining his early season form and Poulliot regaining his also. That said, Markie could recover a little.

All things considered, mainly that we really weren't supposed to be all that good this year, we've done OK. But going forward, anyone at the C- level or below should be looked at for trading, if possible...except the Twins. Give them the respect they deserve. I'm not saying we can get rid of all of those players, just that those are the ones with the big targets on their backs.

[kingofsurrey]

From deep in the heart of surrey....

Teachers grades from the old skool time when everyone did not automatically get a ribbon for participation......

Brutal yes,  maybe....  but  it  should be a wakeup call for some players to man up and put more effort into their game.

I can not believe some posters give almost the whole team B and A's...   Get real, the club is in 27th overall and pushing for 28th overall.

That is not acceptable and show poor contributions from too many team members...

Time for Canuck fans to get real and expect more from their club's players. 

 

Forwards:

• S. Baertschi - B
• B. Boeser - A+
• A. Burmistrov - D
• D. Dorsett - A
• N. Dowd - C+
• L. Eriksson - F
• S. Gagner - F
• B. Gaunce - C
• N. Goldobin - F
• M. Granlund - F
• B. Horvat - A
• D. Sedin - C-
• H. Sedin - C-
• T. Vanek - B
• J. Virtanen - C+

 

Defensemen:

• A. Biega - C+
• M. Del Zotto - F
• A. Edler - C
• E. Gudbranson - F
• B. Hutton - F
• D. Pouliot - F
• T. Stecher - C
• C. Tanev - B

Goaltenders:

• J. Markstrom - F
• A. Nilsson - F

[CanadianRugby]

All A's & B's from the OP.  How do we have any losses?

[wildcam]

On January 7, 2018 at 4:05 AM, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

Baertschi - A-
Boeser - A+
Burmistrov - D
Dorsett - A
Dowd - C+
Eriksson - C
Gagner - B
Gaunce - B-
Goldobin B
Granlund - C
Horvat A+
D. Sedin - B+
H. Sedin - B+
Vanek - A
Virtanen - B

Defensemen:

Biega - B
Del Zotto - B
Edler - B-
Gudbranson - C+
Hutton - C
Pouliot - B+
Stecher - C
Tanev - A

Goaltenders:

Markstrom - C+
Nilsson - C+

 

Boeser = A

Horvat = Bt

Beartchi = B

Vanek = B

H Sedin= Ct

D. Sedin = Ct

Gagner = C

Grandlund = C

Virtanen = C.. Lots of potential if he uses his speed and drives the net..Like his future

Gaunce = C

Dowd = C

Goldobin = C ..has some skill need to be patient...

 

 

[Team Bagues]

On 01/07/2018 at 1:19 AM, xereau said:

I am pretty much just watching for The Calder at this point.

Agreed for the most part... for interest sake I'm watching the Calder race.

From an expectation stand-point, I'm waiting for our two best all-round centers to return.

This team was doing pretty well with Bo and Sutter in the line-up. It's a big blow to any team losing 2 out of 3 top centers.

On a small side note, I've been suprised at how crappy the D has been this year - I thought it would be a lot better.

Hopefully Benning et al. draft many, many D in June; or craft many, many swash-buckling trades for good d-men.

[BlackRedYellow]

I guess most of you are looking at each players potential when grading, and not comparing them with other players in the league. Otherwise there should be a lot of D's and F's...

 

So it's really up to the definition here: How have they faired compared to their own potential vs how do they fair compared to other players in the league.

 

Example: Pouliot has been a positive surprise, hence all the B's... but if we'd compare him to other d-men in the league, he's no way near a B.

 

Huuuuge difference...

 

[Baggins]

On 1/7/2018 at 12:28 AM, -AJ- said:

• B. Gaunce - B
  • I’m disappointed he hasn’t been getting more points, but his defensive game is still great and he does create some chances. Average grade.

A 'B' is average grade? I always thought 'C' was average. But by your grades I'd think pretty much everybody has exceeded your expectations. By a lot.

 

That aside if you're putting a letter grade to players as rating for what you expected I would think a 'C' would be meeting your expectations. An 'A' far exceeding your expectations and an 'E' for not even coming close to your expectations. So for me most of the team would be getting C's, meeting my expectations for them. Some would have higher grades and a couple lower. Looking at your grades you must not have been expecting much of anything from anybody this season.