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

[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Buffalo Sabres | Oct. 19, 2021

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Why is Dickinson talking about creating a culture of hard work and dedication? Shouldn't that already be in place or at least already being implemented in preseason? Lockwood was working hard and showed a lot of dedication to making McDavid lose his gourd. Where did that get him? Gadjovich showed massive improvement in his skating and positioning. Yet he was waived. 

 

One would think that there would already be a culture in place by now, seeing as how the coaching staff has been here for 3 years, minus Brown. 

Teams that actually have a culture of hard work and dedication don’t have to always have the GM, coach, and players talking about it. At the nhl level isn’t that kind of a basic minimum requirement?

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hopeful, but I really worry about the next game.

Chicago is winless, which makes them prime candidates to be a hard team to beat. It will probably be 5-1 , but could go either way. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Teams that actually have a culture of hard work and dedication don’t have to always have the GM, coach, and players talking about it. At the nhl level isn’t that kind of a basic minimum requirement?

That's what I'm thinking. I get that this team has seen a significant roster turnover in the last two seasons, and that losing long tenured veterans in Markstrom, Tanev, Edler took it's toll on the team.

 

Regardless of that fact, the leadership in the organization should be instituting a winning culture constantly. Hearing a new player talking about having to create a culture of hard work and dedication very simply says to me that he doesn't see there being one already in place that he slots into.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, grumpyone said:

I'm hopeful, but I really worry about the next game.

Chicago is winless, which makes them prime candidates to be a hard team to beat. It will probably be 5-1 , but could go either way. 

And their head coach was booed at their first home game. Toews and Kane won't be coasting out there, that's for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, tas said:

whether hunt is better than burroughs.

Are you actually not sure? 

 

I guess preseason and first 4 games was indeed a waste of time then. 

 

How long does it take to figure it out? 

 

That's too bad because we decided in Gadj's 9 minutes x 2 games and 2 pts that he wasn't good enough. 

 

Weird how we can judge that one so quickly hey? 

 

But errrr I dunno. Still need more time to figure out Hunt vs Burroughs. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Are you actually not sure? 

 

I guess preseason and first 4 games was indeed a waste of time then. 

 

How long does it take to figure it out? 

 

That's too bad because we decided in Gadj's 9 minutes x 2 games and 2 pts that he wasn't good enough. 

 

Weird how we can judge that one so quickly hey? 

 

But errrr I dunno. Still need more time to figure out Hunt vs Burroughs. 

 

 

nobody needs more time to figure out hunt vs. burroughs. it's figured out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Sorry I misunderstood. So why is he still in over Burroughs? 

Aren't you frustrated watching this as a fan? 

Hunt is only filling in as LD bottom pair replacement until Hughes is back in the lineup, It's Schenn and Burroughs competing for the 3rd pair RD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CanucksJay said:

Sorry I misunderstood. So why is he still in over Burroughs? 

Aren't you frustrated watching this as a fan? 

no, I'm not, because I'm capable of understanding and empathy.

 

a big part of the benefit of having depth throughout the lineup is the interchangeability it offers. burroughs has played really well so far, with rathbone. his performance on other pairings is so far mostly unknown. with hughes out, the team knew that rathbone would be elevated in the lineup, separating that pairing. since the pairing was being separated anyway, it made sense to put in both hunt and schenn, both to get them reps and see what they can do before results become critically important, and also because they've been playing as a pair together for the last two weeks, and that familiarity should make stepping into the lineup easier.

 

it won't hurt burroughs to sit for a game or 2. it's not punishment. it's not a reflection of what the coaching staff thinks of his play.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

I like Burroughs. I think we really need him. And I'd agree if it was a choice, most times I'd choose Burroughs at this point for a 5/6 R hand. But for some types of more physical games Schenn should go in.  

 

I don't get all the Schenn hate on here.  No he's not the fleetest of foot. But he's not a pylon. He can skate. More importantly, he is one of, if not the only one on the team, that can put a little fear into opponents. He hits, and clears the front of the net well with his size.  

 

I know plus minus is not a complete indicator of a defenseman's value or reliability, as the top pairings will get the tougher assignments, but still, this is our D plus minus stats now for this season;

 

Bowey  . can’t find it. But a -19 career average.
Myers  -3
Hunt  -3
OEL  -2
Burroughs   -1
Hughes   -1
Rathbone 0
Poolman  0

Schenn  0

 

From my eye test he's looked fine. I don't know what others are looking at.  And its great to see that rare event when a Canuck defenseman pastes an opponent into the boards. And I love how he is always primed to step in if any Canuck on the ice is mistreated by an opponent.  I am a fan of Luke Schenn.  I think if enough other players can remain healthy, and Green can use him more sparingly through the season, he'll be fresher, and invaluable in the post season.  I could even see a Hughes / Schenn rematchup in the physical intensity of NHL playoffs.

 

 

I like Schenn but if we were to pick the top 6 defensemen for the team, he's not good enough. 

I would say that our entire team is a good skating team. Schenn is not. His style of play does not suit our team makeup. 

Myers for example can come down and light up Keith but he's fast enough to go back and play defense. 

Schenn seems more like a stationary guy playing set defence in his zone while the rest of our team are fluid, good skating players. 

Seems counterintuitive to what we are trying to do. 

 

Although, with green's style, maybe 6 Luke Schenn’s would work out better 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

I like Schenn but if we were to pick the top 6 defensemen for the team, he's not good enough. 

I would say that our entire team is a good skating team. Schenn is not. His style of play does not suit our team makeup. 

Myers for example can come down and light up Keith but he's fast enough to go back and play defense. 

Schenn seems more like a stationary guy playing set defence in his zone while the rest of our team are fluid, good skating players. 

Seems counterintuitive to what we are trying to do. 

 

Although, with green's style, maybe 6 Luke Schenn’s would work out better 

 

Green read this and instantly ran into Benning’s office to tell him to make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

The lack of accountability throughout the Canucks from Benning to Green to the supposed veteran leaders like Horvat, Miller, and Pearson is very telling. 
 

If I was coaching Pearson would have been benched for his lazy penalty that was 100% related to his usual habit of not skating anymore after he gets a point.

what kind of accountability are you looking for? do you want them to call a press conference and announce that the team will be collectively donating their pay from last night's game to canucks place as a penance for their heinous crime of not meeting the absurd expectations of their mindless fans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tas said:

no, I'm not, because I'm capable of understanding and empathy.

 

a big part of the benefit of having depth throughout the lineup is the interchangeability it offers. burroughs has played really well so far, with rathbone. his performance on other pairings is so far mostly unknown. with hughes out, the team knew that rathbone would be elevated in the lineup, separating that pairing. since the pairing was being separated anyway, it made sense to put in both hunt and schenn, both to get them reps and see what they can do before results become critically important, and also because they've been playing as a pair together for the last two weeks, and that familiarity should make stepping into the lineup easier.

 

it won't hurt burroughs to sit for a game or 2. it's not punishment. it's not a reflection of what the coaching staff thinks of his play.

I liked what you wrote. 

Maybe the familiarity between Schenn and Hunt (from all that practice) was worth a try. 

Now that we see it failed, what next? 

 

My preseason ranking was

 

OEL

Myers

Hughes 

Poolman

Juolevi

Rathbone

Bowey

Hunt 

Burroughs 

Schenn

 

We got rid of Juolevi 

Burroughs has been a pleasant surprise and surpassed Hunt. 

I think if Hughes is out

 

Our best 6 should be

 

OEL Myers 

Rathbone Poolman 

Burroughs Bowey 

 

One of Hunt and Schenn should be demoted. 

 

What we really should have done was keep Juolevi... 

 

 

 

 

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...