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

[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Philadelphia Flyers | Oct. 15, 2021

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

Just now, CanucksJay said:

We need Loui for the empty netters.

 

I agree, at game speed, the high stick was a tough call. What's ridiculous though is they realized after it wasn't a high stick and changed the call to slashing. Who calls a slashing penalty on a play like that? 

And then even worse was the icing call. What were the linesmen doing? We clearly won the race. 

 

At the end of the day, our guys needed to bear down and finish it. Didn't like how we crumbled in 3 minutes and let in 2 goals but loved that we dominated OT and shootout

 

Referees don’t typically nullify a penalty call after they have called it. If you are waving your stick in another players face for any reason you have to know there is a chance you are getting called. It was a mistake by OEL to be careless with his stick that unfortunately he paid the price for.

 

The icing could have gone either way really. It was pretty close. Had the puck not bounced so far out off the end boards it’s likely not called. I personally thought the Philly player still had the front position on Highmore when the whistle went. Was pissed as a Canuck fan but realistically it was too close to suggest it was a botched call. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

We need Loui for the empty netters.

 

I agree, at game speed, the high stick was a tough call. What's ridiculous though is they realized after it wasn't a high stick and changed the call to slashing. Who calls a slashing penalty on a play like that? 

And then even worse was the icing call. What were the linesmen doing? We clearly won the race. 

 

At the end of the day, our guys needed to bear down and finish it. Didn't like how we crumbled in 3 minutes and let in 2 goals but loved that we dominated OT and shootout

 

Good response from the players after the Flyers tied it up late.  With the re vamp roster hopefully they can continue to develope chemistry and learn to close these games out.

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Petey_BOI said:

hahahahahaha your the one that accuse me of not having any sports history.  keep being you you silly man

I didn’t accuse you. I asked you a serious question. I didn’t assume.

 

Yeah, I’m a silly man. At least I’m not pathetically looking for self-validation on a message board. I’m embarrassed for you, and what you consider “winning”:

 

 

66DF75E1-A01E-4172-AC85-47EC88779D12.png.72b64f28f46c8657b39e7ba001f816de.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Good response from the players after the Flyers tied it up late.  With the re vamp roster hopefully they can continue to develope chemistry and learn to close these games out.

My only concern is the lack of confidence by Green to use his 4th line or 3rd D pairing a bit more. I am not going to be surprised to see some injuries if we are only a 3 line, 2 pairing team for long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SilentSam said:

Was at work,  but am watching the last 2 periods of replay..

One of the biggest differences I’m noticing with the Canucks is how we quickly exit our own zone , there are no gambled passes in our own end,  and very little giveaways .

Its almost a “2 pass system” and on to a forward accelerating into or thru the neutral zone.

I used to get so frustrated watching Tanev and Edler blind pass and give away possessions in our own zone so many times.

our attacks are calmly developed from the rear.  
It’s sweet to watch

Totally! And having offense minded D like we have is a real boon for our top 9. It’s just trying to get that future 3rd pairing sorted out and once we do (with or without Hamonic) it should be a nice balance. Poolman’s playing great positionally which is an ideal complement to QH. It’s exciting. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

Was at work,  but am watching the last 2 periods of replay..

One of the biggest differences I’m noticing with the Canucks is how we quickly exit our own zone , there are no gambled passes in our own end,  and very little giveaways .

Its almost a “2 pass system” and on to a forward accelerating into or thru the neutral zone.

I used to get so frustrated watching Tanev and Edler blind pass and give away possessions in our own zone so many times.

our attacks are calmly developed from the rear.  
It’s sweet to watch

It wasn’t all on the D though. Through the last few years our forwards in general have been terrible at giving the D options for a quick transition. Usually standing still in the neutral zone or just not being where they needed to be. I saw tons of double clutches by all our D as they frantically looked for an outlet.

  • Cheers 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Referees don’t typically nullify a penalty call after they have called it. If you are waving your stick in another players face for any reason you have to know there is a chance you are getting called. It was a mistake by OEL to be careless with his stick that unfortunately he paid the price for.

 

The icing could have gone either way really. It was pretty close. Had the puck not bounced so far out off the end boards it’s likely not called. I personally thought the Philly player still had the front position on Highmore when the whistle went. Was pissed as a Canuck fan but realistically it was too close to suggest it was a botched call. 

Kerry Fraser. -  is this you?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I was entertained tonight a little slow beginning but man. Love OEL and Garland trade so far. 

For the most part our system was on display and can only get better with the addition of Brock and Travis. Maybe Podz needs a bit more minutes down  in Abbotsford but only to fire him up , he's a  keeper. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Totally! And having offense minded D like we have is a real boon for our top 9. It’s just trying to get that future 3rd pairing sorted out and once we do (with or without Hamonic) it should be a nice balance. Poolman’s playing great positionally which is an ideal complement to QH. It’s exciting. 

It’s early in the year of course,  but I do think some chemistry might happen within this roster that way..

Burroughs,.  Some great shut downs on the cycle carrier.

I do think if Hamonic comes back , we could be looking pretty dynamic on our back end.…. 
and yes, Poolman is only going to get even better too.

it’s a great mix of experience and enthusiasm back there.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BillfromVan said:

I must say I was entertained tonight a little slow beginning but man. Love OEL and Garland trade so far. 

For the most part our system was on display and can only get better with the addition of Brock and Travis. Maybe Podz needs a bit more minutes down  in Abbotsford but only to fire him up , he's a  keeper. 

Travis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Googlie said:

Kerry Fraser. -  is this you?

Kerry Fraser was an awesome referee. One of the last great ones really.

 

Refs have the hardest job in hockey. No matter what they call or don’t, one side hates it and their fans whine about the fix being in.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

My only concern is the lack of confidence by Green to use his 4th line or 3rd D pairing a bit more. I am not going to be surprised to see some injuries if we are only a 3 line, 2 pairing team for long.

I agree: that shortening the bench do have major disadvantages: a less engaged roster (especially, from the bottom 6) and the minute eaters will be prone to making a mistake (due to fatigue) at a crucial time of the game.  As fans, we had seen this scenario play out season after season; and after the major roster tweaking this offseason the team seems to be built with more depth that Green can role all the lines consistently.   Imo, the inability to protect a lead or close out games reflects on Greens flawed  decisions making process at crucial points of the game (reminds of Montoyo & the Jays blowing games late) and it has cost the teams alot of points during these past few seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demko kept the Canucks in a game they had no business being in in the 1st. Let’s be honest. And even though his stats don’t pop out as very good by the end of the game his stellar play in the first shouldn’t be forgotten.  Canucks dominated after they got a few bounces go their way.   Love Miller’s confidence in the post game presser. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Was at work,  but am watching the last 2 periods of replay..

One of the biggest differences I’m noticing with the Canucks is how we quickly exit our own zone , there are no gambled passes in our own end,  and very little giveaways .

Its almost a “2 pass system” and on to a forward accelerating into or thru the neutral zone.

I used to get so frustrated watching Tanev and Edler blind pass and give away possessions in our own zone so many times.

our attacks are calmly developed from the rear.  
It’s sweet to watch

Brad Shaws' influence ?

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

Demko kept the Canucks in a game they had no business being in in the 1st. Let’s be honest. And even though his stats don’t pop out as very good by the end of the game his stellar play in the first shouldn’t be forgotten.  Canucks dominated after they got a few bounces go their way.   Love Miller’s confidence in the post game presser. 

Good take but he needs to realize that the last 5 mins is Demmer time - he needs to be the closer to close these games out.  

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RWJC said:

I didn’t accuse you. I asked you a serious question. I didn’t assume.

 

Yeah, I’m a silly man. At least I’m not pathetically looking for self-validation on a message board. I’m embarrassed for you, and what you consider “winning”:

 

 

66DF75E1-A01E-4172-AC85-47EC88779D12.png.72b64f28f46c8657b39e7ba001f816de.png

just utter trash, when i accuse you you its assumptions when you do it its a honest question. go fly a kite you miserable crank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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