[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at San Jose Sharks | Nov. 02, 2019

[wesley]

Canucks finally get some backhanded compliment from the NHL. 

[-DLC-]

51 minutes ago, bree2 said:

 you are saying Calgary and Anaheim are better teams, but when I look at the standings I see Canucks doing better than they are. and Washington barely beat us, some of these  "playoff teams" , to me sounds ridiculous, because not one team is a playoff team in the beginning of November. 

The other thing is this:  the Oilers and Flames were our first two games (losses).   But we hadn't really even had time to practice together as a team.  Brock coming in late and other things that, over time, have worked themselves out.  This team is playing like a solid group and, as Stech touched on last night, "playing the right way" as a team and not individuals trying to win the game.  As the Oilers have done at times.

Back then, they were just in the throwing things together stage to see what would stick. Our team now is not the disjointed, right out of the gates team it was in the first week of play.  And I feel you miss that they've addressed things quite nicely.

 

We also went WAY up on the Capitals even if it was a lost game that we should have won.  Washington also beat Calgary.

 

So, in one breath someone who says "we're not really going to know until...." and dismisses the current success as rather meaningless  is also using earlier failures to determine things.  Seems a little unfair.  If the current wins can't be used to gauge things, why are we including early losses as part of it?

 

My message is:  time will tell but, in the here and now, we're fantastic and that can't be ignored.

[Rabbit]

Happy To-night.

Canucks got 5 of 6 points in this road trip.

 

4 lines continuous to contribute

Demko looks quite solid.

Petty scored twice, Jake and Sutton scored again.

Guad presented he is a nhl level player.

 

Best wishes to Hughes, Saunter, Fenland.

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Not to be a party pooper, but I'm still a bit worried about our ability to go up against the better teams in the league. Our record is awesome and the games are for the most part very enjoyable right now, but it needs to be mentioned that a lot of our wins are against bottomfeeders so far this year. We've feasted on the likes of Detroit, LA, San Jose and Philly, and the times we have gone up against better teams the results have been....mixed. Wins against Florida and St Louis, but losses against Edmonton, Calgary, Washington and Anaheim. We're really not going to know where we stand until we start facing playoff teams with more regularity. 

 

That said, if you're going to be a good team, you have to be able to feast on the lesser teams, and we're certainly doing that, which at the very least proves that we're a tier above where they are.  

I don't think Canuck fans should get super stoked as it is a long season. There will be some tough times ahead which always happens. I always remember Scotty Bowman with his all powerfull Habs teams. There always seemed to be a flat line in February and Scotty would sit players out. Terry Harper was a favorite for this. The the team would start rebuilding towards playoffs and hit stride perfectly. I always wondered if Scotty did this on purpose. 

 

  I will be in town on Feb 8th and got tickets for the Calgary game! That has to be a big win!!! While I think this roster has not peaked yet, will make playoffs, I do not think they are serious CUP contenders yet. Amazing how well a team can play when the confidence hits big highs like now. Yes, there a couple of players, Petey and Hughes, that could make me look foolish. That said I view the season as a maturing process that lets these young pros gain the experience that will make them serious CUP contenders in 2 - 3 years. Love Benning's vision. 

 

I found Burkie's comments about JT Miller interesting. Great skill but no willingness to take criticism of his game.    They passed on him in the draft. Burke was quick to say that Miller had adjusted his attitude since then. Love Miller's play on offence but he has been caught a few times on the back check. 

[EdgarM]

50 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Just wanted to add here that while team speed may have improved this season, what we are seeing is a willingness to use it as being the biggest change. 

 

The team wants its, so they take it. 

The desire this group shows is impressive.

I still think that mainly comes from EP, the skinny, gutsy, never-quit skill guy who leads by example, but that’s just an opinion and an aside. 

 

The battle level is finally like it used to be a very long time ago. 

 

For those of you who never witnessed the 94' team, this is how they played! Every shift had the team fighting hard for the puck, INCLUDING THE SKILLED PLAYERS. We have the speed, size and skill that if we really want the puck, we are going to get it. SJ was a good example of the opposite. Not much fight.

We started out a bit slow but we seemed to have found our groove now this season, a good balance but I think we need our gritty guys(Roussel/Ferlund) back to be fully effective.

Speed is not killing us anymore as is size/aggression or highly skilled teams, we are holding are own with what anyone throws at us and we will only get better.

[Brad Marchand]

The 'beating bad teams' argument would hold more credence if the Canucks were squeaking out close wins against them, but so far the Canucks have been drilling those teams. Their possession metrics are also near the top of the entire league (the tweet is part of a long thread that shows the Canucks near the top of the NHL in several possession metrics):

 

TLDR is that the Canucks are outshooting and outchancing their opponents, which is obviously key to sustainable success. They're much better this season compared to last season in this regard.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

Gretzky, with modern equipment, training and rules would still be a 150-200 point guy.  He's was the most dominant athlete in an era of dominant athletes.  

Thanks Stawns - I feel the same way.  What he did in LA was just as amazing as what he did with a loaded squad in EDM.   The only athlete that came close to him was Mario -  the 1987 World Cup will probably never be beat as far as overall hockey talent together in one place.  Best Red Army team ever / against the best group of Canadians ever assembled.    Scoring a hat trick in game seven against the Maple Leafs might have been his best game - without him LA wouldn’t have gone to the final, or likely got that far either, and that was his 14th pro season.   Have an old VHS from the early 90’s called Gretzky’s 50 Best Goals.    He could snipe from anywhere and through multiple legs and bodies, or deke and score like he was playing at an entirely different level.  

 

He was the most dominant athlete in the history of all pro sports history - I have no doubt that prime Gretzky would get 150 points centering OTTs first line in his prime (and his non-prime last year was still ok in the heart of the dead puck era), BT would be over a PPG, and Chabot would probably be a Norris finalist.    

 

Feel pretty blessed to have witnessed history in that way, he’s a huge reason the league expanded and EDM had a dynasty.   If they kept that team together permanently they’d have added five or six more cups. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

 

13 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Actually....no.   A more telling picture of things is at the end of it all because, on a month by month basis, no team will just sail through unscathed and sustain a winning roll without hitting some bumps/losses.  So if November isn't great, I don't want people going "aha - see?  told ya" because, after that, comes December - March.  Have patience and know that what we've seen so far is real.  That, even if it wanes at times, it can (and likely will) return.  So don't throw the baby out with the bathwater stuff. 

 

We tend to scream "good" or "bad" constantly.  How about if we'll have good periods and bad ones but the only thing that counts is how that translate overall in points and then carries over into playoffs.  A November assessment is as good as an October one and they can offset each other if they vastly differ.

 

While some hold their breath waiting for the bubble to burst and others have us hoisting the cup, somewhere in between where we watch it play out is likely the best course of action.  Because so much rides on health/being injury free and goaltending and that can't be foreseen.  We're scoring tons of goals and if that continues, we certainly have a fighting chance.  Our goaltending's been superb...once again, there will be glitches but it's an overall assessment that determines "good" and "bad".

 

Right now, we're in 5th overall.  Which is an actual in where the team stands.  All that counts.

I'm sorry, but this just reads as defensive because I'm calling into question the level of our competition thus far. An attempt to frame things in a way where anyone that questions whether our record and place in the standings is indicative of where the team actually stands is characterized as a 'hater' or 'troll', even when these 'trolls' are actually super stoked the team is doing well and only wants to bring to light a legitimate concern that they have. 

 

The fact is that we've feasted on Detroit twice in these first 14 games. Same with LA. Both of these teams were near the bottom of the league last season, and aren't projected to be any better this season. We creamed San Jose last night, which is great, but San Jose is the worst team in the conference so far this year. Florida has been a legit good team so far this year, but it also needs to be mentioned that we were catching them on a back-to-back. The Rangers have been pretty poor this year as well, and the Flyers are only slightly better and, on paper, aren't projected to do much this season. 

 

This isn't to put an asterisk next to our wins. Only to state the fact that we've had a pretty kushy schedule thus far. Yes, you still need to take advantage of those types of opportunities and pile up the points, which we've accomplished, but let's not go nuts and say that pummeling LA and Detroit are the same as beating Colorado or Nashville. That's just not the case, and anyone with a trace of intellectual honesty will admit as much. 

 

The FACT is we'll be facing much stiffer competition in November. No Detroits are LAs to feast on this time. That's why I say this month will be more telling than last month. We'll be up against some legitimate playoff contenders in the coming weeks, and we'll have a better idea of where we stand in comparison to some of the better teams in the league after facing them. 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

[-DLC-]

14 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

 

I'm sorry, but this just reads as defensive because I'm calling into question the level of our competition thus far. An attempt to frame things in a way where anyone that questions whether our record and place in the standings is indicative of where the team actually stands is characterized as a 'hater' or 'troll', even when these 'trolls' are actually super stoked the team is doing well and only wants to bring to light a legitimate concern that they have. 

 

The fact is that we've feasted on Detroit twice in these first 14 games. Same with LA. Both of these teams were near the bottom of the league last season, and aren't projected to be any better this season. We creamed San Jose last night, which is great, but San Jose is the worst team in the conference so far this year. Florida has been a legit good team so far this year, but it also needs to be mentioned that we were catching them on a back-to-back. The Rangers have been pretty poor this year as well, and the Flyers are only slightly better and, on paper, aren't projected to do much this season. 

 

This isn't to put an asterisk next to our wins. Only to state the fact that we've had a pretty kushy schedule thus far. Yes, you still need to take advantage of those types of opportunities and pile up the points, which we've accomplished, but let's not go nuts and say that pummeling LA and Detroit are the same as beating Colorado or Nashville. That's just not the case, and anyone with a trace of intellectual honesty will admit as much. 

 

The FACT is we'll be facing much stiffer competition in November. No Detroits are LAs to feast on this time. That's why I say this month will be more telling than last month. We'll be up against some legitimate playoff contenders in the coming weeks, and we'll have a better idea of where we stand in comparison to some of the better teams in the league after facing them. 

It is defensive, so before I read more of your ideas I'd like to here you respond to the first two games (losses) of the year stuff instead of piling on more of the same.  

 

Also, you have to consider momentum and confidence and how that can factor in.  On paper's never really impressed me much.

 

Edmonton hasn't played the Av's (we beat them in a thrilling game last year - I was there) or the Preds either?

 

And Calgary lost to the Avs 5-2.

 

You've made "back to back" excuses to work with your ideas in games we did win handily but how about when we play back to back games in the early morning?

 

Not sure what your point actually is.  At this point, don't care because it's all just throwing shade in my sunshine.  I'm loving what this team's doing right now and don't really care about what if's and the future because it's out of my control.  Just enjoying the ride.

 

They may falter at times (most teams do), but I don't see "waiting" for that to happen with an "aha, told you so" ready to go.  That doesn't seem like much fun to me...I like my way of doing it.

 

Our level of competition?    This team has a will to win and I see that.  They learn from mistakes (like a blown lead to the Caps) and use the information to improve upon.  I don't see how you can question their level of competition when they're in there, competing hard each night.  I've seen no let down in that.

 

While I agree with tempering things, I just wonder why you're not enjoying the wins rather than analyzing them to make them count less.  The points are awarded and the standings don't care.

 

How about we worry about losses to "better" teams if and when they happen?  Not project them?

[Gaudette Celly]

42 minutes ago, bree2 said:

 you are saying Calgary and Anaheim are better teams, but when I look at the standings I see Canucks doing better than they are. and Washington barely beat us, some of these  "playoff teams" , to me sounds ridiculous, because not one team is a playoff team in the beginning of November. 

We literally took it to Florida, Washington, and in the comeback against the cup champs in their own building, putting them all on their heels and lighting them up.  The lesser teams even moreso.  What does this mean, as a baseline?  That we can compete against ANY team in the league, and what does that ultimately make us?  Pretty simple to figure out.

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, milk and honey said:

Place your bets boys. 

 

Bet your house bet everything. It's happening 

 

 

 

 

Ps for legal reasons.. My Opinion is my opinion and that of my own views. To follow anything I say is by your discretion. The outcome of your dicision is your liability and I am free from all legal action. 

 

 

Thank you

MH

Have you run your disclaimer past a lawyer yet?  Paging @Jimmy McGill.

[Gaudette Celly]

8 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

They may falter at times (most teams do), but I don't see "waiting" for that to happen with an "aha, told you so" ready to go.  That doesn't seem like much fun to me...I like my way of doing it.

There is one thing that is absolutely certain in Canuck fandom -- there will always ALWAYS be those who look for brown stains on blue skies.  Frankly, I really don't understand how they find following the team enjoyable, as it's negativity whether they win or lose, just in matter of degrees.

[TheRick]

2 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

I hope this isn't a bad omen?

-2005-2006 season we missed the playoffs after the lockout season!

-2003-2004 season was the Todd Bertuzzi / Steve Moore incident!

-2014-2015 was the first Willie D season where we made the playoffs but lost in the 1st Rd to Calgary and didn't make it back to the playoffs since!

[Gaudette Celly]

1 minute ago, TheRick said:

I hope this isn't a bad omen?

-2005-2006 season we missed the playoffs after the lockout season!

-2003-2004 season was the Todd Bertuzzi / Steve Moore incident!

-2014-2015 was the first Willie D season where we made the playoffs but lost in the 1st Rd to Calgary and didn't make it back to the playoffs since!

4 minutes ago, Gaudette Celly said:

There is one thing that is absolutely certain in Canuck fandom -- there will always ALWAYS be those who look for brown stains on blue skies.  

lol, that didn't take long...

[spook007]

2 hours ago, Gaudette Celly said:

Larger, clearer clip from reddit:

 

 

Cheers Celly.... Appreciated. One of these plays you can watch over and over again...

[10pavelbure96]

12 minutes ago, TheRick said:

I hope this isn't a bad omen?

-2005-2006 season we missed the playoffs after the lockout season!

-2003-2004 season was the Todd Bertuzzi / Steve Moore incident!

-2014-2015 was the first Willie D season where we made the playoffs but lost in the 1st Rd to Calgary and didn't make it back to the playoffs since!

I bet those years our special teams and team scoring stats and team ga stats were a lot different than this season.

 

We look legit right now.

[48MPHSlapShot]

17 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

It is defensive, so before I read more of your ideas I'd like to here you respond to the first two games (losses) of the year stuff instead of piling on more of the same.  

 

Also, you have to consider momentum and confidence and how that can factor in.  On paper's never really impressed me much.

 

Edmonton hasn't played the Av's (we beat them in a thrilling game last year - I was there) or the Preds either?

 

And Calgary lost to the Avs 5-2.

 

You've made "back to back" excuses to work with your ideas in games we did win handily but how about when we play back to back games in the early morning?

 

Not sure what your point actually is.  At this point, don't care because it's all just throwing shade in my sunshine.  I'm loving what this team's doing right now and don't really care about what if's and the future because it's out of my control.  Just enjoying the ride.

 

They may falter at times (most teams do), but I don't see "waiting" for that to happen with an "aha, told you so" ready to go.  That doesn't seem like much fun to me...I like my way of doing it.

 

Our level of competition?    This team has a will to win and I see that.  They learn from mistakes (like a blown lead to the Caps) and use the information to improve upon.  I don't see how you can question their level of competition when they're in there, competing hard each night.  I've seen no let down in that.

 

While I agree with tempering things, I just wonder why you're not enjoying the wins rather than analyzing them to make them count less.  The points are awarded and the standings don't care.

 

How about we worry about losses to "better" teams if and when they happen?  Not project them?

All of the metrics certainly indicate that what the team is doing right now is somewhat sustainable (as opposed to Edmonton). But it also warrants mentioning that this is a young team, and there will be growing pains. Washington was a good example of that, and that one stung. As we go up against the Colorados and Nashvilles of the world, some of thee growing pains might become more apparent. I also think it's worth mentioning that our record may be somewhat...inflated by playing so many games against less than stellar teams so early on. The problem with getting too high is that the fall can hurt that much more. 

 

With that said, this team is still growing. Even if we do struggle in November, which is a distinct possibility, the season doesn't end there, and any setbacks we may face will only help the team grow, just as the Washington game likely did. I would just hate to see people jump off the bandwagon if the team fails to accomplish in November what they were able to do in October. 

 

At the end of the day the team is playing the right way right now. They're outworking their opponents, and that's going to be key to beating some of the better teams we'll be up against down the road. They can't take their foot off the gas though. 

[Jester13]

44 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Thanks Stawns - I feel the same way.  What he did in LA was just as amazing as what he did with a loaded squad in EDM.   The only athlete that came close to him was Mario -  the 1987 World Cup will probably never be beat as far as overall hockey talent together in one place.  Best Red Army team ever / against the best group of Canadians ever assembled.    Scoring a hat trick in game seven against the Maple Leafs might have been his best game - without him LA wouldn’t have gone to the final, or likely got that far either, and that was his 14th pro season.   Have an old VHS from the early 90’s called Gretzky’s 50 Best Goals.    He could snipe from anywhere and through multiple legs and bodies, or deke and score like he was playing at an entirely different level.  

 

He was the most dominant athlete in the history of all pro sports history - I have no doubt that prime Gretzky would get 150 points centering OTTs first line in his prime (and his non-prime last year was still ok in the heart of the dead puck era), BT would be over a PPG, and Chabot would probably be a Norris finalist.    

 

Feel pretty blessed to have witnessed history in that way, he’s a huge reason the league expanded and EDM had a dynasty.   If they kept that team together permanently they’d have added five or six more cups. 

Not to derail the thread, but I would argue Tiger, especially due to being in an individual sport over team, was the most dominant in sports history. Anyways, back to the topic at hand.

[spook007]

3 hours ago, sonoman said:

Much later than the infamous “Rome” hit.  I guess when it happens to a call up rather than a Bruin, it doesn’t count?

Was thinking this exact same thing... 4 games suspension in the play offs finals for a late hit causing injury...

Yet here we have same situation, with an even later hit, and silence.... not even a call during the game... At the time I thought, here we go again with the one sided refereeing, but hat off to the officials... Its the first time, I can remember, where we weren't really short-changed by the refs... although Jakes slashing was very weak...

 

Thought there were a tweet posted during the game that the NHL DOPS would look into the hit... Can anyone confirm this?