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

(Prediction) Under Brad Shaw Poolman will be better than Tanev

Rate this topic


Arrow 1983
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

Well, I believe almost everyone had Demko as No 1. We couldn’t agree on wich year though.

Primarerly becuse he was younger and therefore suited Petey and the others better.

 

But this prediction about Poolman is bold.

Especially since Hamonic is closer experience wise. Hamonic had good reputation before Covid and the fall out with the Flames.

Tanev is a beast and Bennings worst mistake when he let him walk.

Think play off last season. With Tanev we probably would have had a fun ending. 
So if Poolman can take on the pressure Tanev could we’re set to go. B)

I said let Demko be starter in the beginning of the season. I said Hotlby was far past his prime and people where all your crazy Demkos still pretty much a backup. I think I will keep with my gut and advance stats.

The advance stats clearly shows he is a pure defensive defenseman and his second season showed he has a scoring touch to his game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I said let Demko be starter in the beginning of the season. I said Hotlby was far past his prime and people where all your crazy Demkos still pretty much a backup. I think I will keep with my gut and advance stats.

The advance stats clearly shows he is a pure defensive defenseman and his second season showed he has a scoring touch to his game. 

? What? Holtby was just a backup in case Demko blew it. 
That is the reason why I and others complained about how expensive backup we had.

we should have got a backup for 1,5 mill but Benning likes to spend… Until know. 
Demko was destined to be No1 for a long time. It was just a matter of when Marky should hand over the command. 
 

Great if Poolman becomes a new Tanev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Provost said:

Yep, the reports are that he is a good team guy.  
 

A tough guy not so much.  The folks who posted suggesting they are expecting a truculent physical guy like Mitchell or Bieksa are probably going to be disappointed.  He was an offensive D who is trying to fit into a different role as an NHLer to carve out a career.

 

We can hope tor him to be like Hamhuis… a guy who is OK at a lot of things but not noticeably great at any… those guys can be really useful.

I didn't say he was going to be a tough guy or anything like that I said he would bring more grit than Tanev. 

I am realistic about what he brings. Some not tons of offense. Some but not tons of grit and a solid defensive game. With tons of heart and a team player. Tanev was the last 3 but had little grit and little if any offense.

Poolman is bringing a more complete game. Tanev is one dimensional. He just does it really good.

Edited by Arrow 1983
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

? What? Holtby was just a backup in case Demko blew it. 
That is the reason why I and others complained about how expensive backup we had.

we should have got a backup for 1,5 mill but Benning likes to spend… Until know. 
Demko was destined to be No1 for a long time. It was just a matter of when Marky should hand over the command. 
 

Great if Poolman becomes a new Tanev.

There are literally treads and treads of people making fun of me for calling Demko a number 1. I said start him in the first game people laughed. I said sign a cheaper back up people laughed. Most people liked the Holtby signing I said it lost us one of Tanev or Toffoli.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

There are literally treads and treads of people making fun of me for calling Demko a number 1. I said start him in the first game people laughed. I said sign a cheaper back up people laughed. Most people liked the Holtby signing I said it lost us one of Tanev or Toffoli.

Well, if so you and I thought alike.

But those who defended the signing of Holtby was the classic Benning fan club. Not the Canucks fan club. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timråfan said:

Well, if so you and I thought alike.

But those who defended the signing of Holtby was the classic Benning fan club. Not the Canucks fan club. 

I like most moves that Benning has made. I think the Holtby one was the worse one.

Even the Eriksson one made sense at the time of his signing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I like most moves that Benning has made. I think the Holtby one was the worse one.

Even the Eriksson one made sense at the time of his signing 

I think most just liked Holtby simply due to who he was. As for the highlighted part I’ll keep saying this: If you say you saw Eriksson falling off a cliff like he did after we signed him you’re lying. He just came off a 30 goal, 60+ point season and the expectation was he‘d give the Sedins a few more good-elite years. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Pears said:

I think most just liked Holtby simply due to who he was. As for the highlighted part I’ll keep saying this: If you say you saw Eriksson falling off a cliff like he did after we signed him you’re lying. He just came off a 30 goal, 60+ point season and the expectation was he‘d give the Sedins a few more good-elite years. 

Total agree 

 

Even today if Eriksson was 30 and a ufa and put up those numbers teams would want him for 6×6

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

Also all reports from Jets fans say he's a great #5-#6 guy but play him more minutes than that against top talent and the guy won't earn his cap. 

Yes take the word of people who just lose him.

Have you seen his advance stats or more importantly without playing with his terrible jet d-partner.

There is a reason a coach put him with Morrissey. Morrissey can't play defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Arrow 1983 said:

Yes take the word of people who just lose him.

Have you seen his advance stats or more importantly without playing with his terrible jet d-partner.

There is a reason a coach put him with Morrissey. Morrissey can't play defense.

I'd take the word of people who have watched full seasons of the kid play over somebody on a Canucks forum claiming he will be better than one of the best defensemen this team has ever had. 

 

Also all those advanced stats are cherry picked anyways. You'd be a fool to believe 99% of them. Remember Nate Schmidt's advanced stats? Guy was a #1 dman before coming to our team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MikeyD said:

I'd take the word of people who have watched full seasons of the kid play over somebody on a Canucks forum claiming he will be better than one of the best defensemen this team has ever had. 

 

Also all those advanced stats are cherry picked anyways. You'd be a fool to believe 99% of them. Remember Nate Schmidt's advanced stats? Guy was a #1 dman before coming to our team. 

No one ever called Schmidt a number #1.

He is and always has been top 4 d-man.

Are you serious going to judge him on his play last season on this team.

What Schmidt isn't is a team player like Vegas fans where saying otherwise he wouldn't have given up on his Canuck team mates. Thankfully, JB got rid of the Cancer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said:

That's right I am predicting Tucker Poolman will be better than Tanev. He will bring the same defensive game as Tanev but bring more grit and offensive side than Tanev ever did. I predict That Poolman will play in the top 4 as a partner either with Hughes or OEL with Myers on the third pairing with Rathbone.

I make this predicting because I simply ask myself who is going to be the defensemen on the PK.

Hughes, no.

Myers, no

OEL and Poolman yes

Rathbone and Hamonic yes

 

Poolman will have to play top PK mins and this will make him better defensively. I fully expect that Shaw will be running the PK and in extension the defense. This signing screams Shaw all over it. Poolman is a player who will give a team everything because it took everything from him to get here and under the guidance of Shaw he will even become better. If Ian Clark is the top goalie coach I would call Shaw a top 3 defensive coach. Poolman will be our next Burrows but just on defense. The guy making 2.5 mill who deserves 5 mill.

Great post,  Poolman 28. 6'2 will be very good in Vancouver, good skater and hockey smarts will play 18--21 mins PK and #4 or #5 guy...

Hamonic 6'2 , 210 - will be very good also and can play PK...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said:

That's right I am predicting Tucker Poolman will be better than Tanev. He will bring the same defensive game as Tanev but bring more grit and offensive side than Tanev ever did. I predict That Poolman will play in the top 4 as a partner either with Hughes or OEL with Myers on the third pairing with Rathbone.

I make this predicting because I simply ask myself who is going to be the defensemen on the PK.

Hughes, no.

Myers, no

OEL and Poolman yes

Rathbone and Hamonic yes

 

Poolman will have to play top PK mins and this will make him better defensively. I fully expect that Shaw will be running the PK and in extension the defense. This signing screams Shaw all over it. Poolman is a player who will give a team everything because it took everything from him to get here and under the guidance of Shaw he will even become better. If Ian Clark is the top goalie coach I would call Shaw a top 3 defensive coach. Poolman will be our next Burrows but just on defense. The guy making 2.5 mill who deserves 5 mill.

I really hope you're right but I will respectfully have to disagree based on what I've seen of Poolman.  To me, Poolman is a very good 3rd pairing defenseman.  I will be more than happy to congratulate you however if you end up being right.   Love where your optimism is at but I'm just not seeing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patel Bure said:

I really hope you're right but I will respectfully have to disagree based on what I've seen of Poolman.  To me, Poolman is a very good 3rd pairing defenseman.  I will be more than happy to congratulate you however if you end up being right.   Love where your optimism is at but I'm just not seeing it.

I am mostly being a Homer on this one. His trade thread was getting brutal I wanted to show him some true Canadian Canuck love

  • Hydration 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Poolman will ever do what Tanev did for the Canucks, but I believe Shaw will tighten things up, the team should play better defensively. 

 

I also think Schmidt and Holtby were a negative addition to the team, the wrong attitude and energy I'm guessing. I'm expecting a big year form Miller now that those two are gone, get back to winning games and fighting for your team mates.

 

I keep forgetting that Eriksson, Roussel and Beagle aren't on the team anymore and this makes me very happy. Yes, we have OEL for 6 more years, but at least he's good and should have lots left in the tank.

 

OEL could play inspired in VAN, with the Sedins in the fold overlooking things, and eventually real hockey fans in a packed arena again. For once in his NHL career, his home team fans will give a s***. I'm sure he's excited to get going.

 

 

Edited by NUCKER67
  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

Yes take the word of people who just lose him.

Have you seen his advance stats or more importantly without playing with his terrible jet d-partner.

There is a reason a coach put him with Morrissey. Morrissey can't play defense.

So we should not trust the fans that were sad Garland left them?

There are actually real fans in clubs, not biased, dumb, spoiled assholes only

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

11 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

So we should not trust the fans that were sad Garland left them?

There are actually real fans in clubs, not biased, dumb, spoiled assholes only

We could go on forever. Instead I'm just going to say check the title it is a prediction may come true may not. Or am I wrong did I call it a fact give me a second I will check...........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nope prediction is what I wrote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

No one ever called Schmidt a number #1.

He is and always has been top 4 d-man.

Are you serious going to judge him on his play last season on this team.

What Schmidt isn't is a team player like Vegas fans where saying otherwise he wouldn't have given up on his Canuck team mates. Thankfully, JB got rid of the Cancer.

Lots of people here did. His advanced stats had shown at the time he was in the top 2% for allowing controlled rushes against on Vegas and he was in the top 2% on zone entries as well or something close to that regard. It was stats like this that had people saying he was a #1 dman. 

 

There you can see the advanced stats people pulled for him and also many people putting him as our #1 or #2 dman. He was at the top of the league in playing against heavy competition, had good possession metrics, etc. 

 

Now obviously most rational people didn't peg him as a #1 dman. But many thought he'd be our top guy considering Hughes was still developing. 

 

With that said, I agree with your post. Schmidt is far better than this team got from him. Our structure didn't fit with his strengths. Winnepeg is gonna have more success with him than we did. 

 

I actually disagree with Schmidt being a team player. The guy is just loud and clearly our team isn't like that. Most of our room is quiet guys and he sticks out like a sore thumb. The first mic'd up he had he was trying to keep the atmosphere light and fun and you can tell the guys weren't really into that. 

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   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...