Opposition goaltenders looking like superstars against us

[whcanuck]

Is there really something to it? Sure seems like it

 

Dating back as far as I can remember, the Canucks seem to have an uncanny ability to make almost any goaltender, a backup, a third-string, a 40 year-old journeyman, a guy on a terrible cold streak, look like late 90s Dominik Hasek. Why is that? We have guys who can score goals, why does it seem that almost any goaltender can flip a switch and suddenly become a brick wall against Vancouver?

 

Even Tim Thomas in 2011. Montreal, who was WAY less offensively potent than the powerhouse Canucks that year, scored 17 goals in a 7 game series with Boston, more than twice what Vancouver could get. The Habs finished 24th in goals for that year & Vancouver was the highest scoring team in the league.

[kanucks25]

Remember when Curtis freaking Sanford would shut us out vs the Blues every time so we gave up and signed him? :D

 

Seriously though, confirmation bias.

[Bure_Pavel]

If we just keep taking wide angle shots with no traffic, I'm sure out luck will change one day.

[Rick Blight]

We haven't made a zamboni driver look good yet though so we can't be as bad as the Leafs.....or can we?

[PhillipBlunt]

I think that the superstars on the Canucks need to rise to the occasion and impose their will on the opposing goalie. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Perimeter shots with no traffic and no rebound pressure have a way of doing that.

[wallstreetamigo]

The Canucks don’t have that killer instinct that the top teams have. As soon as they get a lead they try to sit on it rather than go for the jugular. Green overcoaches when they get a lead and the entire team gets away from what made them successful in the early part of the game.

[NUCKER67]

There are two main types of Canucks shots:

 

1) directly into the goalie's crest

2) glove high (which either hits a crossbar, misses the net or is an easy save)

 

 

[Danie_Canuck]

quality of shots is the key here.  as someone mentioned our shots are directly on logo or glove high.   And without traffic ya its gonna be hard to get one past. 

 

But alas, it is still every early in the season so for this year I am reserving from pushing my panic button just yet.   Though it would be great to see us start to light it up. 

[Ghostsof1915]

It would help if someone would crash the net once in a while. 

[wallstreetamigo]

4 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

It would help if someone would crash the net once in a while. 

The drive buys are infuriating.

[brownky]

1 hour ago, whcanuck said:

Is there really something to it? Sure seems like it

 

Dating back as far as I can remember, the Canucks seem to have an uncanny ability to make almost any goaltender, a backup, a third-string, a 40 year-old journeyman, a guy on a terrible cold streak, look like late 90s Dominik Hasek. Why is that? We have guys who can score goals, why does it seem that almost any goaltender can flip a switch and suddenly become a brick wall against Vancouver?

 

Even Tim Thomas in 2011. Montreal, who was WAY less offensively potent than the powerhouse Canucks that year, scored 17 goals in a 7 game series with Boston, more than twice what Vancouver could get. The Habs finished 24th in goals for that year & Vancouver was the highest scoring team in the league.

Canuck shooters make sure that the opposition goalies have the quickest chests in the league.

 

Often no traffic in front, no garbage collectors. Lots of outside shots with clear sight to shooter / puck. That sort of **** makes beer league goalies look good. So literally the opposite of what the Canucks do on defence to the other teams shooters.

[iinatcc]

Let's not forget John Gibson first start was a shutout against the Canucks 

[HKSR]

Carter Hart says hi.

[EdgarM]

Many have mentioned what the issues are and its funny its been like this for years. I just shake my head when our player shoots and then doesn't even follow up on the play. Its like the play is over because their shot didn't go in! We are constantly looking for that perfect shot, look no further then our PP for an example of that. 

No garbage goals and no one willing to pay the price in front of the net. Chiasson was something like we needed but still not a perfect fit. It did give our PP a different dimension though. 

The 2011 finals was a good example as well. We were too busy looking for penalties and not enough "fighting like our life depended on it" in front of the net. I don't think Vigneault was a fan of this type of play either. He was looking for the perfect plays too. 

We will continue to be like this unless we get more players who think outside the box like a Garland or a Motte. Too many "drive by's" and not enough players willing to go to the net and cause havoc. 

[wallstreetamigo]

6 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

Many have mentioned what the issues are and its funny its been like this for years. I just shake my head when our player shoots and then doesn't even follow up on the play. Its like the play is over because their shot didn't go in! We are constantly looking for that perfect shot, look no further then our PP for an example of that. 

No garbage goals and no one willing to pay the price in front of the net. Chiasson was something like we needed but still not a perfect fit. It did give our PP a different dimension though. 

The 2011 finals was a good example as well. We were too busy looking for penalties and not enough "fighting like our life depended on it" in front of the net. I don't think Vigneault was a fan of this type of play either. He was looking for the perfect plays too. 

We will continue to be like this unless we get more players who think outside the box like a Garland or a Motte. Too many "drive by's" and not enough players willing to go to the net and cause havoc. 

Exactly. Working hard doing the wrong things and competing hard doing the right things are very different.

 

The Canucks on the whole don’t want to do the things that make teams successful.

 

Changing the roster has not produced any difference. That points to coaching more than anything.

Edited October 21, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[EdgarM]

37 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Exactly. Working hard doing the wrong things and competing hard doing the right things are very different.

 

The Canucks on the whole don’t want to do the things that make teams successful.

 

Changing the roster has not produced any difference. That points to coaching more than anything.

When your team plays like a "drop in" , "non-contact" hockey league, or a ringette league, there's an issue. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, EdgarM said:

When your team plays like a "drop in" , "non-contact" hockey league, or a ringette league, there's an issue. 

When your coach rewards it that’s what you get though.

[EdgarM]

8 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

When your coach rewards it that’s what you get though.

So true, Petey and Hughes get crazy amount of minutes whether they are playing good or bad. On the other hand, it looks like Garland's minutes have diminished since his "run in" in Detroit. All the while hard workers like Podkolzin and Hoglander ride the pine. Frustrating.

[MikeyD]

Goalies don't look like superstars, it's just that we pad their stats with low chance shots. Goalies rarely "steal" games from us. We just look like we were the better team on the stat sheet.