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

Defensive trends in the league, and the Canucks plan

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I'd do Hughes for Dahlin but I know alot of people on here wouldn't.  He had 44 points as an 18 year old.  Better than Hedman and Ekblad.  Hedman never even hit 40 points until he was 24.

 

Dahlin had a bad year this year but he's playing on Buffalo and the whole team sucked.  He could be the same size as Ohlund in a couple of years and still has huge upside as he is still a year younger than Hughes.  I predict he will win the Norris Trophy in the next 5 years.  Maybe even before Hughes.

Id do Dahlin for Hughes any day too.  Buffalo wouldnt.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

He is a much better defensive player than Hughes, attempts to minimize his defensive play aside. Not sure how anyone would try to debate that. Its not even close.

You make it sound like any time the opposition enters the zone quinn goes and hides in the corner and lets the other team have its way with demko.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Alflives said:

Loser Leafs :  Muzzin 220, Bogosian 220, Reilly 220, Holl 210, Brodie 190

The Loser Leaf’s D are big guys.  They should win the Cup with such a heavy D corpse, right?

This makes zero sense.  Bring up The knights, isles, habs and lightening d's.

Cant win with a d full of smurfs.  Its no big secret.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Alflives said:

Hawks won three Cups in the cap era, right?  (I think that’s right)

Their biggest D was Big ?Buff, who kind of played mostly wing for the.  After him in size was Seabrook, who played at 220.

Then they had a bunch of guys under 200. 

Maybe it’s having D with skill, character, and compete that creates winners?  The Hawks and Pens have six Cups in the last while, and their D were skilled, and high compete players, with the odd big guy in the group.  But being heavy wasn’t their make-up.  

I think we have Hughes, and Bone who are elite skilled, of high character, and super compete.  They are clearly keepers, and winners.  Myers is heavy, OJ will be heavier next season, Schmidt is solidly built, so is Hamonic.  And Woo is already playing big.  

Actually we are looking pretty good on the back end.

Rathbones played what, 5 games?   

Hughes cant compete in his own end... thats the issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Meh, McAvoy is two years older.  Just wait until Hughes is 23 and learns how to play defense, he will be unstoppable really...

 

We could always do a Rathbone for Carlo deal.  Kill two birds with one stone.  

While I agree Hughes will almost certainly improve his defensive play, McAvoy has always been better in that regard and will likewise, continue to improve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

You make it sound like any time the opposition enters the zone quinn goes and hides in the corner and lets the other team have its way with demko.

Actually, he has a lot of bad habits defensively. Some will improve just with time and experience, like making reads when to go and when not to. I have no doubt he will become a better defensive player. Some though, are pretty fundamental and are not as easily fixed. 

 

I would take a 50 point guy who can play on the top PP and PK units, can match up against top lines when needed, and can play a more physical style over a small offensive/pp specialist who is below average defensively. 

 

Hughes has a long way to go defensively and dont be too surprised if it impacts his offensive stats to some degree. He will be a more valuable player to the team for it though.

 

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, higgyfan said:

Hockeydb is the worst place to get players physical stats.  They don't update player stats very often.  The players you have listed have the same stats as they had at their draft as 17-18yr olds.  I think drafted players get serious about building up muscle and strength, once they have experienced a training camp.

 

Hughes: small frame who will probably weight in around 175-180lbs at prime. He will always be light and nimble.

Rathbone: larger frame than Hughes, coming in around 180-190lbs. Rathbone plays a more rugged game than Quinn.

Juolevi: OJ is a large framed man, who currently weight is 198lbs.  He is also committed himself to working on the physical game.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olli_Juolevi   or,       https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-top-10-prospects-olli-juolevi-aims-to-prove-he-was-worth-the-lengthy-wait 

 

 

He just might turn into the Edler replacement.

 

I like OJ.  He shown that he can throw some nice hits, play the body, and has soms ruggedness to his game.  

There is nothing in Rathbones game that is rugged.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

This makes zero sense.  Bring up The knights, isles, habs and lightening d's.

Cant win with a d full of smurfs.  Its no big secret.

I swear this place is getting dumber

Someone says you need big D-men and 1/2 the place says "So we need a Sumo wrestler in goal and 18 Dana Murzyns"

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, drummerboy said:

What’s been weird about the playoffs?   Pretty much the same format.  
same amount of teams and games being played

Not to mention it's the same 3/4 teams ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

I like OJ.  He shown that he can throw some nice hits, play the body, and has soms ruggedness to his game.  

There is nothing in Rathbones game that is rugged.

We haven't watched him play much either.   Prospect reports says he does have an edge to his game which at least is encouraging.    But as far as the op goes i agree that come playoff time and the war of attrition starts, it's sure nice to have some fast. skilled heavy bodies out there - both on D and the forward group.   This is one of Vegas strengths.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, drummerboy said:

 

Just to show I’m not pulling this out of my ass, even though I know we have all heard the idea that the league is starting to lean towards smaller faster puck movers...

These are all first page google responses.  Some are a couple years old some are more recent. 
it took all of 15 seconds to google and be able to get an idea of what I’m talking about.  

 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/puckprose.com/2020/04/20/new-age-nhl-defenseman-taken-league-storm/amp/
 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/theathletic.com/218997/2018/01/24/mirtle-nhls-rise-of-the-small-defenceman-continues-with-samuel-girard-and-joe-hicketts/%3famp


https://www.flohockey.tv/articles/6293291-chase-priskie-quinn-hughes-more-5-ncaa-to-nhl-defensemen

 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.huffingtonpost.ca/amp/entry/nhl-preview-league-is-trending-towards-smaller-faster-and-quicker_n_8253988/


 

1. none of those articles/blogs quote any decision maker from any teams let alone the canucks. "we keep hearing from the canucks and a couple other teams" is what you said, and yet we haven't heard from any of them in those articles.

 

2. you said we can't use the penguins winning  back to back cups in 16/17 as evidence that smaller defence can win because you're talking about current trends and that isn't current, and then you post articles from 2015-18 to try to backup your own point.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

You make it sound like any time the opposition enters the zone quinn goes and hides in the corner and lets the other team have its way with demko.

He might as well.  There isnt a dman in the league that has been outmuscled and burned more than Hughes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, tas said:

1. none of those articles/blogs quote any decision maker from any teams let alone the canucks. "we keep hearing from the canucks and a couple other teams" is what you said, and yet we haven't heard from any of them in those articles.

 

2. you said we can't use the penguins winning  back to back cups in 16/17 as evidence that smaller defence can win because you're talking about current trends and that isn't current, and then you post articles from 2015-18 to try to backup your own point.

Like I said, these are the first ones that came up.     
This isn’t a new topic and we both know it.  
I’m not the only one in this thread that has heard this.   
You love to pick people’s $&!# apart to sound knowledgeable. Zero real opinions of your own, but a total hero ‘calling people out’. 
A quick search proved I wasn’t just making up an opinion.  
Other than that, I don’t know what you are looking for.  

I posted a fact about the current D lines left in the playoffs, then a simple question.  
 

Got an opinion you add?   Or are you just here to $&!# talk?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, drummerboy said:

Like I said, these are the first ones that came up.     
This isn’t a new topic and we both know it.  
I’m not the only one in this thread that has heard this.   
You love to pick people’s $&!# apart to sound knowledgeable. Zero real opinions of your own, but a total hero ‘calling people out’. 
A quick search proved I wasn’t just making up an opinion.  
Other than that, I don’t know what you are looking for.  

I posted a fact about the current D lines left in the playoffs, then a simple question.  
 

Got an opinion you add?   Or are you just here to $&!# talk?

the whole premise of your thread was based on the statement that we keep hearing this from the canucks, which is implying that it is their stated philosophy for assembling their defence. my opinion is that we DON'T keep hearing that from the canucks, which invalidates your whole point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, tas said:

the whole premise of your thread was based on the statement that we keep hearing this from the canucks, which is implying that it is their stated philosophy for assembling their defence. my opinion is that we DON'T keep hearing that from the canucks, which invalidates your whole point.

So, like I’ve said, you seem to be one of the only ones denying this trend, which has already been discussed and proven in my very minimal efforts for you. (More than I said I’d do).  

Let’s see what else is right in front of your brilliant face….

Stetcher, Hughes, Rathbone, Jett Woo, Tony Utunen, Matthew Brassard. 
 

Picks and players in the last couple years. 
Quit being so daft. 
We don’t see eye to eye.  Cool. 
Right now you are acting blind

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, drummerboy said:

So, like I’ve said, you seem to be one of the only ones denying this trend, which has already been discussed and proven in my very minimal efforts for you. (More than I said I’d do).  

Let’s see what else is right in front of your brilliant face….

Stetcher, Hughes, Rathbone, Jett Woo, Tony Utunen, Matthew Brassard. 
 

Picks and players in the last couple years. 
Quit being so daft. 
We don’t see eye to eye.  Cool. 
Right now you are acting blind

no, I'm not, I'm just arguing a different part of your post. if you had said "some people think the league is moving in this direction ..." and posted it in general hockey discussion I wouldn't have a beef. instead, you contrived a false, anti-benning narrative, and then constructed an argument against the narrative that you yourself had just created.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tas said:

no, I'm not, I'm just arguing a different part of your post. if you had said "some people think the league is moving in this direction ..." and posted it in general hockey discussion I wouldn't have a beef. instead, you contrived a false, anti-benning narrative, and then constructed an argument against the narrative that you yourself had just created.

That’s all your assumptions there cowboy.  
Im a Benning fan.  Lol.  
You have created my narrative. 
Benning himself has spoken about the league going to puckmovers more so.   It can be found if you choose to.  
 

I simply posted facts about this years final 4 line ups, then questioned if our smaller line is the right thing to do.   
 

Do you have an opinion on that, or are you just going to continue with your bs?   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, drummerboy said:

That’s all your assumptions there cowboy.  
Im a Benning fan.  Lol.  
You have created my narrative. 
Benning himself has spoken about the league going to puckmovers more so.   It can be found if you choose to.  
 

I simply posted facts about this years final 4 line ups, then questioned if our smaller line is the right thing to do.   
 

Do you have an opinion on that, or are you just going to continue with your bs?   

 

I'm going to continue pointing out any time I see people making unsubstantiated claims. I'm on a mission to civilize. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tas said:

I'm going to continue pointing out any time I see people making unsubstantiated claims. I'm on a mission to civilize. 

Cool.  
you are like a totally ignorant Batman. 
I’m gonna go ahead and block you.  
Cheers!

Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...