Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[PGT] Colorado Avalanche at Vancouver Canucks | Mar. 06, 2020

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, 10pavelbure96 said:

Marky isnt that old. He has lots of good hockey left in him.

 

Marky should be kept no question

Depends on term and price.  He is peaking just at the time most goalies start to trail off.  Risky to pay too much and give term.  Could end up being another LE contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

That's probably the age when he was letting in softies with us

He was a slow developer.  I think he has been great and finally put it all together but goalies in their thirties usually start to fade a bit.  If he  were playing like this and was 27, no  brainer to lock him up for 6 years. At his age, it is risky to assume he will continue his current play that long.  

Edited by DIBdaQUIB
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

If only Marky was 27.

Meanwhile DiPietro is developing nicely in Utica.  Had a strong game last night (31/32 saves).  Like Demko, is adept at moving the puck - not Turco good, but better than Marky (who does make a few Luongo gaffes)

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

IMO Hasek was the best.  Guy was a competitive bastard.  

Yep.  Either him or Roy, maybe Sawchuk read enough about him to see he was better then the rest while around too.  Ridiculous shutout to game ratio and when GMs are saying you could throw a handful of rice at him and he'd stop every one ... Read a review once - a what if the Vezina was awarded the same way today how many would some of those guys have ... let's just say Sawchuk would have more then he did.   

 

Hasek ruined our Nagano aspirations.   And Roy was no slouch either.   Had to wait four more years for our first gold medal in a long time.  Not many goalies win Hart trophies.  Didn't he do it back to back?   Roy is legendary and most experts pick him for a what if scenario in game seven who would you take.    TEN out of sixteen wins to a cup won in OT.   That's a record that won't ever get broken.   That said for six or seven years I think only Sawchuk  would be in the conversation for best goalie in the world for the same amount of time.  Plus he was great his entire career adding a cup near then end. 

 

Hasek beat out Roy, Belfour, Cujo, Furh (he had one epic St Louis season under Keenan) and Brouduer and only Furh wasn't in his prime when he had his stretch of Vezinas.   If he didn't start so late one could make a reasonable argument he'd of added two or maybe three more trophies to his collection.   Like Sawchuk he won a cup when he was almost done too (ok Roy did too)....in the end of the day Hasek, Roy and Sawchuk are considered the top three all-time and one could debate who goes first and provide a lot of good reasons for it.  Broduer doesn't make the cut because Roy beat him in a game seven (and NJ had the top offense in the East that year) and because NJ invented the trap and used obstruction better then anyone.   

 

THN has made top hundred goalie mags for decades now.   One rule they have is once a player retires they can't move up on another that has also retired.  

It's Sawchuk, Roy, Broduer, Plante, Hasek.   They make arguments for the top five as to why they should be first.  Hasek loses ground because he started late.   But they also say only Sawchuk MAYBE was as good as Hasek for 6 years or so...and that really Hasek was the best ever all-time for half a decade or so.    Me I'm partial to Roy having watched every game in 93 that they played.   They really weren't much better then Buffalo was when they went to the final - and to this day consider it the most dominant goaltending ever when it matters the most.  LA could have been up 2-0 without the McSorely penalty.  Gretzky was also at the peak of his powers and just defeated the heavily favoured Gilmour TO squad with arguably his best playoff game ever.   The most deserving Conn Smythe ever. 

 

Hasek didn't ever get one of those, Roy had three, including one as a rookie in 86. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Yep.  Either him or Roy, maybe Sawchuk read enough about him to see he was better then the rest while around too.  Ridiculous shutout to game ratio and when GMs are saying you could throw a handful of rice at him and he'd stop every one ... Read a review once - a what if the Vezina was awarded the same way today how many would some of those guys have ... let's just say Sawchuk would have more then he did.   

 

Hasek ruined our Nagano aspirations.   And Roy was no slouch either.   Had to wait four more years for our first gold medal in a long time.  Not many goalies win Hart trophies.  Didn't he do it back to back?   Roy is legendary and most experts pick him for a what if scenario in game seven who would you take.    TEN out of sixteen wins to a cup won in OT.   That's a record that won't ever get broken.   That said for six or seven years I think only Sawchuk  would be in the conversation for best goalie in the world for the same amount of time.  Plus he was great his entire career adding a cup near then end. 

 

Hasek beat out Roy, Belfour, Cujo, Furh (he had one epic St Louis season under Keenan) and Brouduer and only Furh wasn't in his prime when he had his stretch of Vezinas.   If he didn't start so late one could make a reasonable argument he'd of added two or maybe three more trophies to his collection.   Like Sawchuk he won a cup when he was almost done too (ok Roy did too)....in the end of the day Hasek, Roy and Sawchuk are considered the top three all-time and one could debate who goes first and provide a lot of good reasons for it.  Broduer doesn't make the cut because Roy beat him in a game seven (and NJ had the top offense in the East that year) and because NJ invented the trap and used obstruction better then anyone.   

 

THN has made top hundred goalie mags for decades now.   One rule they have is once a player retires they can't move up on another that has also retired.  

It's Sawchuk, Roy, Broduer, Plante, Hasek.   They make arguments for the top five as to why they should be first.  Hasek loses ground because he started late.   But they also say only Sawchuk MAYBE was as good as Hasek for 6 years or so...and that really Hasek was the best ever all-time for half a decade or so.    Me I'm partial to Roy having watched every game in 93 that they played.   They really weren't much better then Buffalo was when they went to the final - and to this day consider it the most dominant goaltending ever when it matters the most.  LA could have been up 2-0 without the McSorely penalty.  Gretzky was also at the peak of his powers and just defeated the heavily favoured Gilmour TO squad with arguably his best playoff game ever.   The most deserving Conn Smythe ever. 

 

Hasek didn't ever get one of those, Roy had three, including one as a rookie in 86. 

You mentioned Sawchuk.  He too was a prickly bastard.  Roy is a bugger too.  Maybe that’s a trait the truly great goalies need to have?  

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NHTyrany said:

He's bang on to point out the inconsistency with the retaliation/instigator penalty. The league is all over the map as to when it's called. It's essentially another game management tool for Bettman's business agenda and it leaves players confused. He also points out the issue of team justice vs. officiating. It appears he feels that teams should be free to police dirty plays; well, Boston gets away with it, why not his team. We all know only some teams get to do it and others are penalized when they try. That cali swing with Sestito [sp?] comes to mind. Lastly, he gives the Nucks credit for a good game.

You mean the "owners agenda"!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked last nights game because we were down Markstrom and Boeser and still pulled it off. I thought in general, we all played a playoff style game, and finished things off, all night long...…..

 

This game for some reason, has me thinking to the next couple of years. Why? Because we played heavier, which had a lot to do with MacEwen. So, as I go into my Faux GM mode...….

 

I see this...……….

 

Tryamkin...………..big, heavy, hits like thunder...………...huge improvement over what we have now

Podkolzin………….young, aggressive, high energy player, with a none stop motor

Lind...……………...NHL body, speed, with an edge...……….I hope he continues his improvements!

Hoglander………...Question mark?. Can he apply his high energy, physical play to an NHL game? Is he Galagher or is he Goldobin? Big, big difference!

Bailey...……………Does he understand his only route into the NHL is through full out, balls to the walls, physical play? His choice! Do or die!

 

To me, the only question is other than Woo???? where is another big physical Dman in the system? I would like to see that as I am taken back to last night, and a response

by Myers, on a player going into Demko. Myers response was decent, but I really want to see that guy with a mean edge to his game, with a memory, who when the guy is down, puts 3 or 4 shots into his head. I am not an advocate of this every game, but like Lucic, a guy that is known for a harsh reaction, does not have to do it every game, as well, guys just don't want to have to answer that kind of punishment......aka Lucic does not have to fight every game, but even the big guys know not will not be fun.

 

So, as I watched this game, enjoying most moments, that is what came to mind, as I see our team coming of age, and being able to play a playoff style game. Because...sure, they can play that way for 1 game, but can they maintain it? IMO, we are not there yet.....

 

Great game......with holes

  • Like 2
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

Depends on term and price.  He is peaking just at the time most goalies start to trail off.  Risky to pay too much and give term.  Could end up being another LE contract.

You sure about that?  
 

It seems that goalies don’t drop off much until well into their 30s . 
 

Im thinking Ryan Miller, Luongo, Craig Anderson , Roy, Hasek, Brodeur... didn’t most of them play well into their late 30s? 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good post @janisahockeynut

I liked that our system of forecheck changed after last night’s first period.  We gave up 18 shots and way too much in our zone possession in P1.  Then we stopped the two (three sometimes) men deep forecheck on their D, when they had clear head up puck on stick possession.  We only pressured with one guy, so we could better control the neutral zone.  I’m hoping this is how Green will want the guys to play from now on.  We have a young, and nervous looking goalie.  We need to support him.  

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

You sure about that?  
 

It seems that goalies don’t drop off much until well into their 30s . 
 

Im thinking Ryan Miller, Luongo, Craig Anderson , Roy, Hasek, Brodeur... didn’t most of them play well into their late 30s? 

Yes, they did.  Is Marky one of those guys though?  Five of those guys you listed are HHOF goalies.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

Unfortunately we don't have a prime Kesler at our disposal. My point was that Bo is a better matchup for for Mackinnon than either one of Sutter or Beagle. Now if we are facing Vegas, Calgary, Dallas, Winnipeg etc then I think Sutter and Beagle are better suited to match those top lines to open up offensive opportunities for Bo. Because those teams don't have players with the game breaking speed and agility of Mackinnon and McDavid.

Your thought process makes sense, in fact, when Sedins were in their peak years, AV used them against the opposition's top line because Sedins could do exactly what you describe, kill time in the offensive zone against almost anyone in the league once they have control of the puck. 

 

I think that Bo is a great offensive player that can feast on a weaker match up but not sure if Bo is someone that can spend much time in the offensive zone against the opposition's first line and first pairing D. Using Bo against Mac and Mc is a bit of a waste of Bo's abilities since he would just be generating offensive opportunities off of a counter attack rather than spending extended time in the offensive zone as the Sedins could against Crosby's, Thornton's, and Ovechkin's of the NHL.

 

I'd say for the time being, Motte-Beagle-Sutter (when Beagle is back) would be better utilized against the MacKinnon and McDavid's of the NHL. Motte and Beagle bring feistiness and physical play and Sutter blocks passing lanes and checks sticks. 

 

Bo does provide us with secondary scoring that we lacked so much during much of the Sedin era (save for brief years when Samuelsson was here and Kesler, Raymond, and even Higgins were playing at 20+ goal rate) and all of WCE era (basically no secondary scoring during WCE era, Sedins were just starting out).

 

If say AV was our coach (a coach known for line matching), then I bet he would utilize Bo for offensive match up and Bo will probably get 30 goals.

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iBlueGreen said:

Bo is good enough offensively to keep the other teams top line in the defensive zone, which counts as much as, if not more than playing defense in your zone.  He keeps the best player farther away from our net.  Simple as that.  The other defensive centers get locked down in our zone, a more dangerous situation if they are deployed against top lines.

This logic does make sense because Bo is great counter attacker so he will have a chance to score whereas our defensive forwards will just defend but not be able to score.

 

But it seems like Bo is not as great defensive forward as Sutter and Beagle (someone posted some stat showing this in this thread but I can't find it).

 

So his scoring rate against the first line must be far greater than Beagle and Sutter to make up for the difference.

 

Bo hasn't demonstrated his ability to maintain sustained pressure in the offensive zone against anyone in my opinion, let alone the 1st pairing defence and 1st line forwards. That's just not his repertoire yet. So against the opposition's first line, Bo will end up spending much of his time in the D zone like Sutter and Beagle anyways whilst giving up more of these high danger chances than Sutter and Beagle. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

You sure about that?  
 

It seems that goalies don’t drop off much until well into their 30s . 
 

Im thinking Ryan Miller, Luongo, Craig Anderson , Roy, Hasek, Brodeur... didn’t most of them play well into their late 30s? 

Thats a small percentage of the total number of goalies that have played and I said "most" not all.  Those goalies were all much better at a younger age as well. Marky's stellar play has only come about recently and is a pretty small percenrage of his overall career.  To me it is a gamble to commit big dollars long term.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, khay said:

Your thought process makes sense, in fact, when Sedins were in their peak years, AV used them against the opposition's top line because Sedins could do exactly what you describe, kill time in the offensive zone against almost anyone in the league once they have control of the puck. 

 

I think that Bo is a great offensive player that can feast on a weaker match up but not sure if Bo is someone that can spend much time in the offensive zone against the opposition's first line and first pairing D. Using Bo against Mac and Mc is a bit of a waste of Bo's abilities since he would just be generating offensive opportunities off of a counter attack rather than spending extended time in the offensive zone as the Sedins could against Crosby's, Thornton's, and Ovechkin's of the NHL.

 

I'd say for the time being, Motte-Beagle-Sutter (when Beagle is back) would be better utilized against the MacKinnon and McDavid's of the NHL. Motte and Beagle bring feistiness and physical play and Sutter blocks passing lanes and checks sticks. 

 

Bo does provide us with secondary scoring that we lacked so much during much of the Sedin era (save for brief years when Samuelsson was here and Kesler, Raymond, and even Higgins were playing at 20+ goal rate) and all of WCE era (basically no secondary scoring during WCE era, Sedins were just starting out).

 

If say AV was our coach (a coach known for line matching), then I bet he would utilize Bo for offensive match up and Bo will probably get 30 goals.

 

Love Bo.  I think he’s really good.  He would be great though if he added meanness to his game.  Bo is a big, strong guy, who is super fast.  He can keep up (over the full ice surface) with any centre in the league.  If he would just use his body/stick to get under the opposing centres’ skin, he’d be even more effective.  Show Bo some Bobby Clarke video.  Petey is our elite skilled centre.  Bo IMO needs to become the mean, dirty, one. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Love Bo.  I think he’s really good.  He would be great though if he added meanness to his game.  Bo is a big, strong guy, who is super fast.  He can keep up (over the full ice surface) with any centre in the league.  If he would just use his body/stick to get under the opposing centres’ skin, he’d be even more effective.  Show Bo some Bobby Clarke video.  Petey is our elite skilled centre.  Bo IMO needs to become the mean, dirty, one. 

The day Bo becomes physical and EP's body and strength matures is when we will be contending for the cup year in and year out.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

 

This game for some reason, has me thinking to the next couple of years. Why? Because we played heavier, which had a lot to do with MacEwen. So, as I go into my Faux GM mode...….

 

Bailey...……………Does he understand his only route into the NHL is through full out, balls to the walls, physical play? His choice! Do or die!

 

To me, the only question is other than Woo???? where is another big physical Dman in the system? I would like to see that as I am taken back to last night, and a response

by Myers

Me too Jan, seeing MacEwen play Big got me excited for the future!  
 

I like that him, Edler and Myers set the tone early that there would be no messing around in any area remotely close to our net.  
 

Bailey is not a physical player at all. He is trying to be a scorer and that’s all there is to it.  
 

Vincent Arsenault is the closest we got in our system IMO but even he’s not what you’re describing. 
 

Little side note: I don’t like having a dman with that role. Going down to 5 dmen is tough! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Yes, they did.  Is Marky one of those guys though?  Five of those guys you listed are HHOF goalies.  

I agree with you Alf...…….(Nice to see you on your meds this morning!)

 

The question is...….is Marky at the apex/crest of his assent or will he level off and play like that for 4 or 5 years? Yes, Marky is better today, but what about tomorrow? IMO, Marky improvements did not come that early and he has found his abilities improve rather late...…..are you going to sign him for 5/6 years at 6 Million, to have him sit on the bench, because he has regressed...……………..that is my concern.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Me too Jan, seeing MacEwen play Big got me excited for the future!  
 

I like that him, Edler and Myers set the tone early that there would be no messing around in any area remotely close to our net.  
 

Bailey is not a physical player at all. He is trying to be a scorer and that’s all there is to it.  
 

Vincent Arsenault is the closest we got in our system IMO but even he’s not what you’re describing. 
 

Little side note: I don’t like having a dman with that role. Going down to 5 dmen is tough! 

On the side note...……...I am talking about a player that can play....aka Dillion type

Big, decent, with a snarl

I would like the Canucks to have one more

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, janisahockeynut said:

I agree with you Alf...…….(Nice to see you on your meds this morning!)

 

The question is...….is Marky at the apex/crest of his assent or will he level off and play like that for 4 or 5 years? Yes, Marky is better today, but what about tomorrow? IMO, Marky improvements did not come that early and he has found his abilities improve rather late...…..are you going to sign him for 5/6 years at 6 Million, to have him sit on the bench, because he has regressed...……………..that is my concern.

It’s almost a blessing Marky is injured during this really difficult stretch of games.  If Demko can prove he can be a starter then we can let Marky walk.  That six million could be used to resign Tanev, and (maybe?) help sign Tofu.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...