[PGT] Edmonton Oilers at Vancouver Canucks | Jan. 25, 2022

[VanCan2023]

Just now, N4ZZY said:

That’ll be the job for Allvin to do. 

 

Give the dead weight to Pheonix. 

But that extra 7-8 mil should be focused on the D, not the top 6. 

Not saying that the top 6 is ideal, but our defence is no.1 priority as it's... Much, much less then ideal. 

[DefCon1]

Just now, Coconuts said:

We basically have to win at a two to one clip to have a chance, and that's with winning most of our head to head games, getting lucky with injuries, and having the teams we're chasing lose. We're a long shot any way to spin it. Out of it? Nah, but a long shot. Anyone who can't at least admit that is likely wearing rose coloured glasses. 

 

Miller, Boeser, Schenn, Halak. Absolutely. Dickinson would probably cost us at this point. Pearson? I could go either way, he does some good things as a middle six tweener and he's solid defensively. 

 

Allvin's got a lot to do, I just hope they start making decisions sooner than later. Take too long and the teams interested in our players might go in another direction. If they're going to take this team in another direction they'll need to be decisive sooner than later. 

 

Boeser's tricky, because we'd probably be selling low. I think he's better than he's been this season, Pettersson too, but that's tough to quantify when he's due for a new contract. 

 

I'm alright with keeping Motte, though I do have concerns about his ability to stay healthy. He's missed a lottttt of time. Depends on what he wants and whether management things we can replace him internally or not. 

were you also concerned about Tanev staying healthy before we gave him the boot? I think his injuries were a result of some bad luck. He seems like a tough player.

[N4ZZY]

Just now, Vancan2021 said:

Give the dead weight to Pheonix. 

But that extra 7-8 mil should be focused on the D, not the top 6. 

Not saying that the top 6 is ideal, but our defence is no.1 priority as it's... Much, much less then ideal. 

I agree. I’m not sure who the free agents are for defenseman this summer. But I’m not really into FA. We tend to overpay for players to come here. I hope Emilie can help with some of those signings, so that they’re not so bad as they were under Benning’s tenure here. 

 

[iceman64]

26 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Having someone like Dickenson play in OT ks a huge mistake. He cant even score on clear breakaways. Dude has worst offense than Marek Malik or Alexander Daigle.

yeah I remember Malik from his OT highlight reel goal but past that? meh...

[N4ZZY]

1 minute ago, DefCon1 said:

were you also concerned about Tanev staying healthy before we gave him the boot? I think his injuries were a result of some bad luck. He seems like a tough player.

Tanev was guaranteed to miss some games every year. 

 

Has he been able to stay healthy with the Flames this season? 

 

 

[DefCon1]

2 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

They’re not girls. They’re ladies/women. Names are Emilie (got that one right), and Rachel. 

 

Yes I mean them, Rachel and Emilie seem really smart in terms of analytics. 

[Coconuts]

Just now, DefCon1 said:

were you also concerned about Tanev staying healthy before we gave him the boot? I think his injuries were a result of some bad luck. He seems like a tough player.

I absolutely was actually, I had no issue with allowing him to walk. He's held up pretty well in Calgary, but that's not what we'd typically get from him.

 

We were a better team with him in the lineup, when was in the lineup. Same can be said of Motte. 

 

Valuable players? Absolutely. If anything I fault Benning for not doing a well enough job constructing the team without them, though some of that absolutely is on how Green utilized players as well. What could have been with Schmidt? He wasn't a Tanev, but he's doing a helluva lot better in Winnipeg. 

 

 

[DefCon1]

Just now, N4ZZY said:

Tanev was guaranteed to miss some games every year. 

 

Has he been able to stay healthy with the Flames this season? 

 

 

Cmon bro, he was our best Dman and fans wanted him gone due to him being injury prone but the last season we had him, he was healthy all season playing with Hughes. Another dumb decision by Benning to not sign him. Now we have Mr. part time Hamonic who plays 5 games per season.

[DefCon1]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

I absolutely was actually, I had no issue with allowing him to walk. He's held up pretty well in Calgary, but that's not what we'd typically get from him.

 

We were a better team with him in the lineup, when was in the lineup. Same can be said of Motte. 

 

Valuable players? Absolutely. If anything I fault Benning for not doing a well enough job constructing the team without them, though some of that absolutely is on how Green utilized players as well. What could have been with Schmidt? He wasn't a Tanev, but he's doing a helluva lot better in Winnipeg. 

 

 

I was actually pissed we got rid of Tanev and foreshadowed a much worst defense without him. Looks like I was right. In the end I rather have  Tanev playing 65 games vs. Hunt or Poolman playing all the games.

[canuck73_3]

8 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

Tanev was guaranteed to miss some games every year. 

 

Has he been able to stay healthy with the Flames this season? 

 

 

He has not missed a game as a Flame. 

[N4ZZY]

3 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Cmon bro, he was our best Dman and fans wanted him gone due to him being injury prone but the last season we had him, he was healthy all season playing with Hughes. Another dumb decision by Benning to not sign him. Now we have Mr. part time Hamonic who plays 5 games per season.

I agree that Tanev should have been retained. Massive mistake by Benning, and it ultimately cost him. 

 

Hamonic in my opinion was also another mistake of a signing. Benning just not GM material. The way he managed this team was horrible. His drafting was decent, for a “super scout” - but I’d take any of the scouts that Tampa Bay has over Benning. He’s good, but they’re better. When you can unearth a player like Brayden Point in the third round who becomes your leading scorer. I want those executives from Tampa Bay! 

 

Hamonic has been such a mess. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t play the rest of this season. Need to get him off the books. 

 

[N4ZZY]

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

He has not missed a game as a Flame. 

I’m glad for Tanev. He’s deserving of the contract he got. Wish he would still be in blue and green, though. We could have really used him. 

 

[canuck73_3]

Just now, N4ZZY said:

I’m glad for Tanev. He’s deserving of the contract he got. Wish he would still be in blue and green, though. We could have really used him. 

 

I would have preferred to keep him but also understand moving on, hindsight makes the move look worse though. 

[Darius]

8 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Cmon bro, he was our best Dman and fans wanted him gone due to him being injury prone but the last season we had him, he was healthy all season playing with Hughes. Another dumb decision by Benning to not sign him. Now we have Mr. part time Hamonic who plays 5 games per season.

I don’t think he’s missed a game with Calgary. If he has its very few.  I think Greens teams sat back and were far too passive.  If you are a shot blocking shutdown d man who Plays in such a context I bet the chances of injury are higher…  not to mention the teams Tanev played on here were down right bad during some years… chasing the play more often than not was prob hard on his body lol 

 

would have been interesting to see him play under Bruce 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Darius

[N4ZZY]

7 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I absolutely was actually, I had no issue with allowing him to walk. He's held up pretty well in Calgary, but that's not what we'd typically get from him.

 

We were a better team with him in the lineup, when was in the lineup. Same can be said of Motte. 

 

Valuable players? Absolutely. If anything I fault Benning for not doing a well enough job constructing the team without them, though some of that absolutely is on how Green utilized players as well. What could have been with Schmidt? He wasn't a Tanev, but he's doing a helluva lot better in Winnipeg. 

 

 

The culture of the organization under Benning was horrible. Players reflected that, looking back now. Change was inevitable and was necessary, to clear that culture, and implement a new one under JR, which is unfolding before our eyes. 

 

I’ll be more intrigued to hear and see what conversations take place with the players, to inspire them that this current management team will do everything in their power to make this club the club it needs to be to be a contending organization from top to bottom. 

 

With that being said. I wonder who else JR is going to bring in to work with Allvin, and Emilie? 

 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

1 minute ago, Darius said:

I don’t think he’s missed a game with Calgary. If he has its very few.  I think Greens teams sat back and were far too passive.  If you are a shot blocking shutdown d man who Plays in such a context I bet the chances of injury are higher…  not to mention the teams Tanev played on here were down right bad during some years… chasing the play more often than not was prob hard on his body lol 

 

would have been interesting to see him play under Brice 

Tanev even looked ok under that disaster of a coach Torts.  He would likely be just fine under Bruce.

[N4ZZY]

2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

I would have preferred to keep him but also understand moving on, hindsight makes the move look worse though. 

Yeah. Benning could have totally offered Tanev what Calgary offered him. 

 

 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, DefCon1 said:

I was actually pissed we got rid of Tanev and foreshadowed a much worst defense without him. Looks like I was right. In the end I rather have  Tanev playing 65 games vs. Hunt or Poolman playing all the games.

Let's be real, even with Tanev in the lineup our defense was questionable and had been for years. Edler and Tanev soldiered on as members of several mediocre Canucks teams, carrying far more weight than any two D should have had to. Go back and look at some of the rosters we had from Torts onwards. 

 

Did we miss Tanev? Of course. Do we miss what he brought currently? Yes and no. We could certainly use a D who's bread and butter is his defense, we were supposed to have a guy like that in Hamonic but that's another story. But was he a break or break it piece for a team of questionable quality? I don't think so. 

 

I wasn't keen on the idea of signing him because of his injury history and because I had concerns about how he'd hold up physically as he got older. One could argue the systems we had in place probably contributed to his injuries, dude took a lot of punishment via shot blocking or otherwise. It was simply a gamble I wasn't keen on having us make. 

 

Our defense has been an issue for years, this isn't new. Though you expect that from a team that's been rebuilding/retooling/at the bottom for a good stretch. 

 

Tanev is a top 4D for Calgary, Poolman is a bottom 6 guy for us and Hunt is a depth piece. Apples and oranges. 

[Coconuts]

8 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

He has not missed a game as a Flame. 

And I'm glad to hear that, if he'd had that sort of good fortune in Vancouver he'd probably still be a Canuck. 

 

But he had a rough go of it with injuries here, hence the concerns about his durability. I certainly wouldn't have guessed he'd be this healthy going forward. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

Just now, Coconuts said:

And I'm glad to hear that, if he'd had that sort of good fortune in Vancouver he'd probably still be a Canuck. 

 

But he had a rough go of it with injuries here, hence the concerns about his durability. I certainly wouldn't have guessed he'd be this healthy going forward. 

Weird thing is, in his last season as a Canuck, he also didn’t miss a single game.  Granted part of that might be that the season was shortened (69 games only).