[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks @ Toronto Maple Laffs | February 6, 2021 | 4 p.m. PT | NHLN, CBC, TVAS, SN, CITY

[oldnews]

7 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

You look at additions/subtractions to the roster- the result on the ice shouldnt be this bad. 

 

Although the Canucks arnt playing well as a group, their leaders clearly arnt playing well enough and they drive the bus.

 

Pointed to TOR, COL and TB and developing winning teams is a process.  Said TOR's young elite players are still learning how to play team D and until they win a playoff round, it's still a step they need to figure out.  COL/TB have had ups and downs in their process to where they are now.  PL says it has taken time (10 years in TB for example)/can be a long process.  IMO, that's how sports goes.

 

Canucks are one of his top 3 teams to watch

 

I think this is what was so attractive about going there for Malhotra - they've been a team with a glaring weakness, that his specific strengths can really address.

Matthews, for example, had no business being such a weak player without the puck with the size, speed and toolbox he has - and as a result they've been having to use Tavares as a rented mule in the postseason (and were to obstinate to add a legitimate hard minutes bottom six center). 

Malhotra is tonic to their circumstances imo.

 

As for the Canucks - to repeat - 18 x 25 and younger players on their roster, 13 who have already been in the lineup, 9 who have played 10 or more games, and only one of them has played less than half the games thus far.   That is an awfully young group for these circumstances - so I'm gonna remain patient regarding results.

 

 

[Angry Goose]

Someone mentioned the lack of practice time as being a significant factor.  Even if TG wanted to totally change his systems up, there would be no practice time to do it.  

 

I'm not putting this forth as an excuse but it could be a factor. 

 

Still, I think team defense is largely a personnel problem.  There are a few roster players I'd switch out if possible but that's not going to happen in a covid season.  

[-Vintage Canuck-]

If we get swept by the Leafs during our current series, I could see things accelerating where we see a change -- whether that is a trade or a firing. As for this game, I'm going to say we're going to lose this one as well.

[canuck2288]

28 minutes ago, Setyoureyesontheprize said:

You must be a really sought after NHL coach with your deep insights. 

 

What else you got in mind? 

Gallant would do just fine 

 

 

 

 

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Someone mentioned the lack of practice time as being a significant factor.  Even if TG wanted to totally change his systems up, there would be no practice time to do it.  

 

I'm not putting this forth as an excuse but it could be a factor. 

 

Still, I think team defense is largely a personnel problem.  There are a few roster players I'd switch out if possible but that's not going to happen in a covid season.  

Who? 

[Angry Goose]

Just now, oldnews said:

I think this is what was so attractive about going there for Malhotra - they've been a team with a glaring weakness, that his specific strengths can really address.

Matthews, for example, had no business being such a weak player without the puck with the size, speed and toolbox he has - and as a result they've been having to use Tavares as a rented mule in the postseason (and were to obstinate to add a legitimate hard minutes bottom six center). 

Malhotra is tonic to their circumstances imo.

 

As for the Canucks - to repeat - 18 x 25 and younger players on their roster, 13 who have already been in the lineup, 9 who have played 10 or more games, and only one of them has played less than half the games thus far.   That is an awfully young group for these circumstances - so I'm gonna remain patient regarding results.

 

 

And to add to that, people never seem to mention resume building.  Like it or not, Malhotra is in a corporate world-people leave jobs for new ones all the time

[Angry Goose]

Just now, PhillipBlunt said:

Who? 

In zone defense and defending in the neutral zone seems to be the real crutch, and I see it as a long term problem.  

 

Myers and Gaudette kind of stand out to me the most in those areas.  Roussel has been just OK given his inconsistent play. 

[Bure_Pavel]

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

And to add to that, people never seem to mention resume building.  Like it or not, Malhotra is in a corporate world-people leave jobs for new ones all the time

Exactly,  He's proven himself endlessly in Vancouver - as both a player - and a coach - and did wonders for this team.

He's probably a grade A candidate to become a head coach in the NHL - and what better further evidence than to take a 'score-all-the-goals' failure and turn them into a two-way team capable of winning a playoff round.  They already look markedly improved in that sense (although it's early) - particularly inexcusably vacant players like Matthews - actually applying some attention to detail...  Not sure they'll be able to sustain it with their 'depth', but if they stay relatively healthy, who knows.

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

If we get swept by the Leafs during our current series, I could see things accelerating where we see a change -- whether that is a trade or a firing. As for this game, I'm going to say we're going to lose this one as well.

Same. A continued slide in the standings is one thing. It's not so much the losses, but how the team is losing that's concerning. They look lifeless and spineless out there. There's no unified team approach, merely individuals putting in individual efforts that don't amount to anything positive. 

 

To me a trade would be a rash decision, and one that would be under extreme scrutiny by ownership. I think determining why this team is playing the way it is, and what possibly led to it is more important, as it'll have much longer lasting effects overall than replacing one player with another on a team that is rudderless.

[Pickly]

16 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

You look at additions/subtractions to the roster- the result on the ice shouldnt be this bad. 

 

Although the Canucks arnt playing well as a group, their leaders clearly arnt playing well enough and they drive the bus.

 

Pointed to TOR, COL and TB and developing winning teams is a process.  Said TOR's young elite players are still learning how to play team D and until they win a playoff round, it's still a step they need to figure out.  COL/TB have had ups and downs in their process to where they are now.  PL says it has taken time (10 years in TB for example)/can be a long process.  IMO, that's how sports goes.

 

Canucks are one of his top 3 teams to watch

 

 

I caught his segment this morning, too. I for one am just as guilty as a lot of Canuck fans for emotional outbursts and untempered expectations when things aren’t going well. It’s easy to lose sight of the big picture here and very easy to forget that the last 3 cup winners took years and years of highs and lows. I think the taste of last seasons playoff run distracted us from the fact this is still a very young team who realistically is a couple years out from truly contending.
 

That being said, I just want to see a competitive effort every night and see the team playing for each other the way they did last season. I don’t even care if they lose a bulk of the games I can stomach losing if they put forth a full effort rather than the crap we have been witnessing so far this season. 

[DIBdaQUIB]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Same. A continued slide in the standings is one thing. It's not so much the losses, but how the team is losing that's concerning. They look lifeless and spineless out there. There's no unified team approach, merely individuals putting in individual efforts that don't amount to anything positive. 

 

To me a trade would be a rash decision, and one that would be under extreme scrutiny by ownership. I think determining why this team is playing the way it is, and what possibly led to it is more important, as it'll have much longer lasting effects overall than replacing one player with another on a team that is rudderless.

Regardless of how the team does, I have to wonder if Aquaman has seen enough of bad contracts and failed FA signings to not want JB in charge when all that cap space clears for next year.  We have some great young talent and mistakes made in the next year could waste their best window to compete for a cup. 

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

1 minute ago, canuck2288 said:

Gallant would do just fine 

 

 

 

 

Oh. I see now. You want Gallant to take over. So please tell us why you think gallant will have much more time ( practice time) to implement any meaningful changes during this condensed  season; I’m curious to know your thinking. 
 

As up  and down the early season has been, it is not as turbulent and destabilizing for a team , as firing a coach mid seasons would be in the scenario you are proposing.

 

why put that additional weight and negative spotlight on a young team? Before you know it this season will be over, either during the regular season or maybe the playoffs, we can make the necessary changes then. 
 

But I also have to ask you, will you be singing the same tune when we eventually turn the corner and re discover our team game and win some games? 
 

Do respond to all the above points raised, with a clear and succinct response. 

[Jack in the box]

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, DIBdaQUIB said:

Regardless of how the team does, I have to wonder if Aquaman has seen enough of bad contracts and failed FA signings to not want JB in charge when all that cap space clears for next year.  We have some great young talent and mistakes made in the next year could waste their best window to compete for a cup. 

I'm thinking so. Benning has been the general manager for over 6 years (7 as of this May 23rd), and has had more than enough time and opportunity to get this team to a place where they're consistently competitive. He's drafted extremely well in comparison to his predecessor. However, as you and others have mentioned, he has handcuffed the team's cap situation with some really poorly thought out FA signings and trades.

 

Based on his record, I have a hard time seeing another team taking a flyer on Jim as a general manager. I can see the majority wanting to have him as the director of scouting though, including Vancouver. If he'd take a demotion and stay on to manage the scouting department, that would be the best case scenario. 

 

All the same though, I think he's close to the end of his tenure here, and I truly hope that when they look for the next GM, that an experienced GM (not named Chiarelli) is considered for the job. No more newbies! 

[Mackcanuck]

IMHO, The team is exhausted, no more the 1 or 2 days without a game or a travel day

every road game is in another time zone

No Training Camp, No practice and an exhausting schedule (14 games in 23 days with only 6 games at home)

We won't see 3 days off without it being a travel day until March 25th

Hughes is exhausted, Edler too! Exhausted players make errors.

Give them a maintenance day

[canuck2288]

5 minutes ago, Setyoureyesontheprize said:

Oh. I see now. You want Gallant to take over. So please tell us why you think gallant will have much more time ( practice time) to implement any meaningful changes during this condensed  season; I’m curious to know your thinking. 
 

As up  and down the early season has been, it is not as turbulent and destabilizing for a team , as firing a coach mid seasons would be in the scenario you are proposing.

 

why put that additional weight and negative spotlight on a young team? Before you know it this season will be over, either during the regular season or maybe the playoffs, we can make the necessary changes then. 
 

But I also have to ask you, will you be singing the same tune when we eventually turn the corner and re discover our team game and win some games? 
 

Do respond to all the above points raised, with a clear and succinct response. 

Because no coach has ever taken over mid season without success 

 

lets see.... hmmmm ..... yup never happened 

 

Oh and because what we are doing is so much better  

 

if nothing else it allows gallant to evaluate what he has and what he needs to do next season to hit the ground running

 

Then again we can just endure this tire fire all season because its just too darn inconvenient to change things out ... we will just hope for different results 

 

jb will be fired soon, new guy will be a hockey guy that will clear out the incompetent coaches 

 

 

[aznmonk]

There's gonna be another canuck killer on every Canadian team.  We should of picked up Spezza on the wire waver or we could of won that game.  Another 3 goal game I assume lol.  

[aznmonk]

1 minute ago, canuck2288 said:

Because no coach has ever taken over mid season without success 

 

lets see.... hmmmm ..... yup never happened 

 

Oh and because what we are doing is so much better  

 

if nothing else it allows gallant to evaluate what he has and what he needs to do next season to hit the ground running

 

Then again we can just endure this tire fire all season because its just too darn inconvenient to change things out ... we will just hope for different results 

 

jb will be fired soon, new guy will be a hockey guy that will clear out the incompetent coaches 

 

 

It's not the coaches fault we gave away Marky that is all.  He covers up the Canucks mistakes and he is so big at 6.6 he xan practically cover the entire net 

[24K PureCool]

7 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I'm thinking so. Benning has been the general manager for over 6 years (7 as of this May 23rd), and has had more than enough time and opportunity to get this team to a place where they're consistently competitive. He's drafted extremely well in comparison to his predecessor. However, as you and others have mentioned, he has handcuffed the team's cap situation with some really poorly thought out FA signings and trades.

 

Based on his record, I have a hard time seeing another team taking a flyer on Jim as a general manager. I can see the majority wanting to have him as the director of scouting though, including Vancouver. If he'd take a demotion and stay on to manage the scouting department, that would be the best case scenario. 

 

All the same though, I think he's close to the end of his tenure here, and I truly hope that when they look for the next GM, that an experienced GM (not named Chiarelli) is considered for the job. No more newbies! 

I can see JB gets 'promoted' to President of Hockey Ops with full control over scouting and drafting while we bring in a new GM which is either gonna be a newbie again or a disgraced one like Hextal.