[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Vegas Golden Knights | Aug. 23, 2020 | Golden Knights lead series 1-0

[WHL rocks]

15 hours ago, canuck2288 said:

Anyone who thinks Green is a great coach ask yourself if there is any rationalization of putting Loui in the top 6. This comes after we had success getting him off the top 6. 

 

Ask yourself if we play a great d and o structure 

 

he is NOT the coach that will make this team get to the next level.

Green just coached this team to beat Minny in a 4 games out of a 5 game series and then beat the reigning Stanley Cup Champions in 6 games. 

 

A young team that has 10 plus players who had never played a playoff game coming into the bubble.....

 

Lose 1 game to the team that's likely going to win the Stanley Cup this year and fire Green posts pop up on CDC. Unbelievable...

 

 

[189lb enforcers?]

1 hour ago, spook007 said:

Hmmmm.... 

Maybe yes maybe no.... I do believe the joy and emotions of winning their first proper play offs series will have had an effect, just like I believe the hammering yesterday will have been a wake up call... whether they will be able to deal with Vegas remains to be seen, but I expect a far better showing next game.

 

If not, at least Benning will know or have to find out, what needs to be changed, if anything in order to cope with a team like Vegas.

 

Regardless as long as the boys come out with a spring in their step, I will be pleased. This is the young pretender entering the ring against the favourite... as long as they don't thrown the towel, I'm happy... We have a few more years to polish this line up.

I agree with all of that. 

I have one irritation though, its that word, *young, being used to soften the landing by those commenting on the team. Maybe it’s just a rant too and I’m due for one, so here it is, sir. 
 

As for being young, are the Canucks really that young though, like throughout the lineup, are they actually young and inexperienced? I don’t like using it as an excuse. 

 

I think you can argue yes, but... outside of a few obvious young”er” players, there is a lot of experience there too. A lot. 
 

I mean to say that, as a generality being thrown around here concerning the ‘youthful Canucks’, I don’t think it’s really the case depending on how you chalk it up. Besides QH and EP, only Brock is eating up prime minutes. The Young core is, what, 3 kids, all over 20? What of the rest then? Are they young?
 

The D isn’t young, nor the net position, nor is the bottom 6. 
 

Sure, show us how they are younger than Vegas, but so?
 

It’s not like they have a bunch of 18 or 19 year-olds, these guys are 20+, with most of the playing Dcore being 30+, with Stetch being a tender 26, Fanta 28 and young QH, 20. - Since when is that a “young” Dcore?

 

Same with net position. Marky is 30, TD is 24. 

 

Jake is 24. 
Brock is 23.

AG is 23.

BH is 25.
 

That is the youth? Meh, I’m splitting hairs because I don’t buy the excuse that this is a young group. A few are, very few to be more accurate. 

 

Then there are the “foundational”, older players, who play most of the important minutes. 
 

IMO, the whole *young thing is not going to be used for many more months, let alone years. 
 

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by 189lb enforcers?

[HockeyHarry]

Game 1 vs Wild = Game 1 Golden Knights.
its just history repeating. Canucks will figure it out. Huggy bear will figure it out. He now knows what to expect from the GKs. 
im sure today is all Team reviewing game video and a setting a game plan.

 

[73 Percent]

2 hours ago, mll said:

 

The players were trying to make the rules more favourable.  Burrows was on the player side.  He even revealed that they wanted to give them 1st overall and guarantee a top pick for several years.  The players were worried that hockey in Vegas would not work.  They were concerned about revenue sharing and how it would impact escrow to add a struggling team in the league.

McPhee talked of a 4 to 5 year timeline before being competitive ahead of the draft.  They probably never expected that teams were going to give up that much to protect players and/or that some players were far better than expected.

Hey that's fair. I get that they're trying to iron out all the kinks. However if seattle comes in like vegas I think there needs to be some changes made.

[John.Tallhouse]

2 hours ago, WHL rocks said:

Green just coached this team to beat Minny in a 4 games out of a 5 game series and then beat the reigning Stanley Cup Champions in 6 games. 

 

A young team that has 10 plus players who had never played a playoff game coming into the bubble.....

 

Lose 1 game to the team that's likely going to win the Stanley Cup this year and fire Green posts pop up on CDC. Unbelievable...

 

 

I’ve seen “fire green” posts for much less lol

Edited August 24, 2020 by John.Tallhouse

[Pete M]

1 hour ago, nux4lyfe said:

Kill em' with speed and cut out the trash talk.

Yeah agreed...I find that trash talking only wakes up the enemy and gives them purpose....it's always better to play between the whistles and beat them with speed and skill.

[apollo]

1 hour ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

"You can’t get too high and you can’t get too low. Win a game and move on as fast as possible, same with losing a game. The next game is a new game and the last one doesn’t really matter." - Pearson

What a character response. 

 

Love it. 

 

This team is 2020 Champs already if u ask me. Now let's finish off Vegas in 5! 

[John.Tallhouse]

4 minutes ago, apollo said:

What a character response. 

 

Love it. 

 

This team is 2020 Champs already if u ask me. Now let's finish off Vegas in 5! 

I had Nucks in 5 

[189lb enforcers?]

1 minute ago, John.Tallhouse said:

I had Nucks in 5 

Same 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

3 minutes ago, John.Tallhouse said:

I had Nucks in 5 

I had the Canucks in three.  I obviously have more faith in the club than you.

[73 Percent]

1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

I had the Canucks in three.  I obviously have more faith in the club than you.

Troll. I had canucks in 2.

[Pete M]

14 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I agree with all of that. 

I have one irritation though, its that word, *young, being used to soften the landing by those commenting on the team. Maybe it’s just a rant too and I’m due for one, so here it is, sir. 
 

As for being young, are the Canucks really that young though, like throughout the lineup, are they actually young and inexperienced? I don’t like using it as an excuse. 

 

I think you can argue yes, but... outside of a few obvious young”er” players, there is a lot of experience there too. A lot. 
 

I mean to say that, as a generality being thrown around here concerning the ‘youthful Canucks’, I don’t think it’s really the case depending on how you chalk it up. Besides QH and EP, only Brock is eating up prime minutes. The Young core is, what, 3 kids, all over 20? What of the rest then? Are they young?
 

The D isn’t young, nor the net position, nor is the bottom 6. 
 

Sure, show us how they are younger than Vegas, but so?
 

It’s not like they have a bunch of 18 or 19 year-olds, these guys are 20+, with most of the playing Dcore being 30+, with Stetch being a tender 26, Fanta 28 and young QH, 20. - Since when is that a “young” Dcore?

 

Same with net position. Marky is 30, TD is 24. 

 

Jake is 24. 
Brock is 23.

AG is 23.

BH is 25.
 

That is the youth? Meh, I’m splitting hairs because I don’t buy the excuse that this is a young group. A few are, very few to be more accurate. 

 

Then there are the “foundational”, older players, who play most of the important minutes. 
 

IMO, the whole *young thing is not going to be used for many more months, let alone years. 
 

 

consider the Sedins only came into being who they are when they were 24 years old, then I would say our core is young...in comparison, Vegas core with Patches, Stone, Marchessault, Karlsson etc. are in their prime 27 to 31 years old.

 

The difference is our young guys are our core guys, which will bode well for years to come...once the old not so talented old guys (3rd and 4th liners) have moved on and are replaced with energy guys like Vegas has in their bottom six....Canucks are maybe two years away from being what Vegas is today, which isn't that far away.

[DeNiro]

23 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

Green just coached this team to beat Minny in a 4 games out of a 5 game series and then beat the reigning Stanley Cup Champions in 6 games. 

 

A young team that has 10 plus players who had never played a playoff game coming into the bubble.....

 

Lose 1 game to the team that's likely going to win the Stanley Cup this year and fire Green posts pop up on CDC. Unbelievable...

 

 

Well the Canucks did beat themselves last night so you’re right, we did lose to the future champs. 

[canuck2288]

21 minutes ago, RomanP said:

It has nothing to do with "crapped bed effort" or "focusing frustration". I'm not frustrated with the game yesterday. It's part of the learning curve for this team. What I'm frustrated with is precisely your constant complaining about the coaching, no matter what really happens.

 

At this point your so called "criticism" is nothing more than bitching of a petulant child who didn't get his favorite toy. Every criticism can be provided in constructive or destructive manner. Shall I spell it out for you which manner your criticism always is in? Also, there's a good old tale of "cry wolf". In case you don't know it - google it, it's very informative. Majority of your "criticisms" are completely misplaced and irrelevant. So, whenever you have a somewhat bright idea, it gets lost in the overall noise of your repeating "criticism". At which point the only response to anything that you are trying to say is exactly a one liner I used in my initial reply - "shut the &^@# up".

 

Enough explanation for you? Did I analyze you "real issues" sufficiently?

I back my “criticism” up with facts and examples and I offer potential alternatives so it’s hardly “whining” . That is an easy box to put people into when they disagree with your thoughts. 

 

Or you could simply reply in a childish manner  like you chose to do in your original post 
 

I don’t buy the learning curve argument at all. These are professional athletes and many with multiple years playoff experience. 
 

the greatest issue in the learning curve theory is we actually need a system to learn. When games like yesterday show the serious flaws in our system that’s a fundamental issue that needs to be addressed in order to compete at a high level. 

 

if you want to read some constructive criticism I suggest you go back and read my posts 

True winners and a winning culture are built by never accepting or rationalizing losses. It’s built by analyzing in painful detail what failed and making it better until the ultimate win is achieved. Nothing is ever written off as “the other team played well”,  “we are young” , “it’s a learning curve” 

 

 

[John.Tallhouse]

8 minutes ago, 73 Percent said:

Troll. I had canucks in 2.

 

9 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

I had the Canucks in three.  I obviously have more faith in the club than you.

I just HAD the Canucks 

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

Well, if it makes any difference, I thought they were done when MIN went up 1 game to 0. lol

So, maybe they'll surprise in Game 2

 

 

Some of this fanbase thinks we're done after we lose game 1 of preseason.

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Some of this fanbase thinks we're done after we lose game 1 of preseason.

Lol so true.

 

This fan base cannot handle adversity. If we don’t win 16 straight we might as well blow it up.
 

Edited August 24, 2020 by DeNiro

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Pete M said:

consider the Sedins only came into being who they are when they were 24 years old, then I would say our core is young...in comparison, Vegas core with Patches, Stone, Marchessault, Karlsson etc. are in their prime 27 to 31 years old.

 

The difference is our young guys are our core guys, which will bode well for years to come...once the old not so talented old guys (3rd and 4th liners) have moved on and are replaced with energy guys like Vegas has in their bottom six....Canucks are maybe two years away from being what Vegas is today, which isn't that far away.

True, true...  I do have a big worry though...  you don't just get random youngsters to come in and be the next Jay Beagle, Brandon Sutter, Alex Edler and Chris Tanev.  Replacing those four won't be as straight forward.  I'm quietly optimistic that Gaudette will keep on improving, and that we'll have another prospect center pan out.  I'm loving our wingers, but I'm not sold on Adam as a center and don't see much coming, just long shots to make the NHL.  Our D situation is very sketchy too...  Stecher is not going to all of a sudden transition into being the next Tanev/Edler.  

[Me_]

Man. Hughes, Pettersson, Miller, Horvat and the rest of the team are figuring it out as we speak.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Me_

[DeNiro]

10 minutes ago, Me_ said:

Man. Hughes, Pettersson, Miller, Horvat and the rest of the team are figuring it out as we speak.

 

 

They’ve done nothing but adapt and overcome all playoffs.

 

I expect nothing less going forward.