Is it now Time to Admit that HaLack's sub-par performance will be what killed our playoff chances?

[snucks]

The D is not very good, but the team is not gritty or tough enough. Recently Demko was bowled over and his mask removed. There was no response from the team. This has happened over and over. Where are the leaders ? Where is the captain ? How does the new coach let his star goalie get crashed into accidently on purpose with no response ?

Hopefully the new management will address this weakness or lack of gutts. Its probably no wonder JT Miller gets frustrated with his teammates. Quin Hughes has also been hit badly with no concern from teammates. Since the 2011 riot the Canucks have been weak about responding to bad hits on teammates.

 

[Fred65]

1 minute ago, snucks said:

The D is not very good, but the team is not gritty or tough enough. Recently Demko was bowled over and his mask removed. There was no response from the team. This has happened over and over. Where are the leaders ? Where is the captain ? How does the new coach let his star goalie get crashed into accidently on purpose with no response ?

Hopefully the new management will address this weakness or lack of gutts. Its probably no wonder JT Miller gets frustrated with his teammates. Quin Hughes has also been hit badly with no concern from teammates. Since the 2011 riot the Canucks have been weak about responding to bad hits on teammates.

 

Man that 2011 had toughness within it's ranks

[The Lock]

The thing is, we can't be putting the cart before the horse. I get 2011 had toughness and a bunch of other stuff, but that was when we were an actual contender. We're not at the moment. We're not even in the playoffs yet. There's hope for the playoffs, but we're not there yet.

 

I get that everyone likes to micromanage this team because people care. However, perhaps maybe we should become a playoff team before we start reminicing about "being like 2011". If we're going to get there, we need to be thinking about what things were like before Gillis came in, since that's when we were a borderline playoff team, sometimes making the playoffs while sometimes not.

 

So if we want to think like 2011, perhaps we should ask what moves were made to get there? I don't care for Gillis but let's go down what brought us to 2011 when Gillis 1st came in... he traded for Steve Bernier which doesn't exactly screams toughness. O'Brien was near the beginning, Hordichuk was meh, Alberts was also meh, but most of those trades and signings weren't exactly screaming toughness for the 1st couple of years.

Edited March 29, 2022 by The Lock

[Honky Cat]

Halak crapped the bed in about 4 games, but he is not the reason the Canucks are missing the post season

 

Halak played well enough to win a number of games in the first quarter of the season, but the team couldn't (didnt) score when he was in net.

 

Not getting any points from the Red Wings,Sabres and Blues (I believe ?) paints a bigger picture.

[RU SERIOUS]

So the season ends with Ha-Lack getting just 4 wins in 17 Games played.   Pathetic and certainly a major reason why we ended up missing the playoffs by a few points and one of the reasons why Uncle Jim was Fired!   

 

Worst Goalie signing in Canucks history - bar-none!   He should do the NHL a favor and retire.  He's well past his "past-due-date".

[Gollumpus]

Well, Halak certainly hasn't shown himself to be the best goalie Vancouver has ever had.

 

The above being said, he certainly hasn't had a lot of help some games, and he certainly has received a lot of undue criticism, taking as an example, the Ottawa game on April 16. Demko allowd 13 goals on 16 shots. Halak came in and stopped 12 of 12, only allowing a goal in the shoot-out. Was the loss because of Halak, or was it because of Demko, or was it because of the team defense that was playing in front of them?

 

                                                                 regards,  G.

 

EDIT: this was supposed to read "...3 goals on 16 shots." Late night, bleary eyes. W/e.

Edited May 1, 2022 by Gollumpus

[Barnstorm]

5 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Well, Halak certainly hasn't shown himself to be the best goalie Vancouver has ever had.

 

The above being said, he certainly hasn't had a lot of help some games, and he certainly has received a lot of undue criticism, taking as an example, the Ottawa game on April 16. Demko allowd 13 goals on 16 shots. Halak came in and stopped 12 of 12, only allowing a goal in the shoot-out. Was the loss because of Halak, or was it because of Demko, or was it because of the team defense that was playing in front of them?

 

                                                                 regards,  G.

Holy crap, 13 goals on 16 shots! 
Alf, can you crunch those numbers for us. 
Halak struggled at times however many nights he had next to no support from defence or offence.

[Gollumpus]

8 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

Holy crap, 13 goals on 16 shots! 
Alf, can you crunch those numbers for us. 
Halak struggled at times however many nights he had next to no support from defence or offence.

Yeah, typos, the curse of late night posting...That was supposed to read, "3 goals on 16 shots". Still pretty bad for a goalie of Demko's caliber, and an indication of how the team periodically took periods off (or even entire games). Demko would get a pass in such games, Halak would get roasted by the folks here.

 

                                                       regards,  G.

[Hairy Kneel]

On 3/23/2022 at 10:16 AM, higgyfan said:

Halak would have sucked far less if the Canucks (entire team) defence was better.  So much time

stumbling around in the d-zone.  Bad passes, give aways and allowing the opposition players

access to the net, seems to be the standard routine.

Broken leg, covid, Hamonic's whatever that was, our defense was never at a full compliment for Boudreau. Then he fell in love with Hunt? It's been cray cray. I can't wait to see everyone back. 

I don't even mind Poolman +2 in 40 games. Most of those under Green. 

 

 

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

Yeah, typos, the curse of late night posting...That was supposed to read, "3 goals on 16 shots". Still pretty bad for a goalie of Demko's caliber, and an indication of how the team periodically took periods off (or even entire games). Demko would get a pass in such games, Halak would get roasted by the folks here.

 

                                                       regards,  G.

Demko was playing cold and with injury in that Ottawa game.

Halak’s job, as a backup, was to make sure Demko got the full night off.  On too many occasions Demko had to come in, so he didn’t get much needed rest.  Halak not only cost us games he played in, but he also cost us games that Demko had to play without proper rest.  Halak cost us 4-6 points for sure.  

[Barnstorm]

22 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

Yeah, typos, the curse of late night posting...That was supposed to read, "3 goals on 16 shots". Still pretty bad for a goalie of Demko's caliber, and an indication of how the team periodically took periods off (or even entire games). Demko would get a pass in such games, Halak would get roasted by the folks here.

 

                                                       regards,  G.

I knew it was a typo. Haha, was poking at Alf.

I agree about Halak getting no leeway.

[Gollumpus]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Demko was playing cold and with injury in that Ottawa game.

Halak’s job, as a backup, was to make sure Demko got the full night off.  On too many occasions Demko had to come in, so he didn’t get much needed rest.  Halak not only cost us games he played in, but he also cost us games that Demko had to play without proper rest.  Halak cost us 4-6 points for sure.  

.... or, there's the often noted problem of how some backups don't get enough time in net (in practice or in game) to stay sharp. If I recall, this was used as an excuse for Demko having a bad game while Markstrom was still here.

 

                                                                     regards,  G.

[Hairy Kneel]

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Demko was playing cold and with injury in that Ottawa game.

Halak’s job, as a backup, was to make sure Demko got the full night off.  On too many occasions Demko had to come in, so he didn’t get much needed rest.  Halak not only cost us games he played in, but he also cost us games that Demko had to play without proper rest.  Halak cost us 4-6 points for sure.  

I don't know why they waited to bring up Spencer? 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

.... or, there's the often noted problem of how some backups don't get enough time in net (in practice or in game) to stay sharp. If I recall, this was used as an excuse for Demko having a bad game while Markstrom was still here.

 

                                                                     regards,  G.

Which is why backups are often older guys, especially if the starter is going to play 60 games.  

Next year we are still paying way too much for our goaltending.  Demko + Martin + Halak bonus + Holtby buyout.

Hopefully Martin can fill the backup role, and play well (as you point out is hard to do when not playing much) in his role.

[Alflives]

Just now, Hairy Kneel said:

I don't know why they waited to bring up Spencer? 

After he proved himself in his first call-up (was it three games?) I was surprised we didn’t send Halak down and keep Martin up.  

[Hairy Kneel]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

After he proved himself in his first call-up (was it three games?) I was surprised we didn’t send Halak down and keep Martin up.  

Exactly! I would have left Halak so fast, like that kid in home alone. 

[higgyfan]

4 hours ago, Alflives said:

After he proved himself in his first call-up (was it three games?) I was surprised we didn’t send Halak down and keep Martin up.  

NMC.  They could only call up Martin if Halak was injured. 

[Gollumpus]

4 hours ago, Barnstorm said:

I knew it was a typo. Haha, was poking at Alf.

I agree about Halak getting no leeway.

Yup. We're good. 

 

                           regards,  G.