We would be a playoff team if even we won 1/2 our games against non playoff teams

[Let it Be 1970]

I checked today our record against the non playoff teams and we just gave up too many points to teams worse than us.

Benning and Green really ruined what  was playoff team once those points would be added to the total.

[Let it Be 1970]

Just now, Let it Be 1970 said:

I checked today our record against the non playoff teams and we just gave up too many points to teams worse than us.

Benning and Green really ruined what  was playoff team once those points would be added to the total.

I know this a pretty obvious point but our record against the good teams is actually pretty good in comparison

[Phil_314]

Yeah, still remember all those games where none of the big-ticket guys really showed up and our only offense was from guys on the Motte-Lammikko-Highmore line.
Clearly we weren't good enough, and even with our recent wins against non-playoff teams, it might be too little, too late for this season.

[DownUndaCanuck]

Weirdly seems to be common amongst a lot of playoff teams. Must be something to do with them not getting up for small games and the bad teams getting really excited about beating a top team.

[IBatch]

We'd also be very close or in the show if loser points weren't weighted so high.   Teams do the exact same thing they used to do which the league tried to stop - that is sit back and play it safe at some point in the third or even the entire third and get the one point (especially if you out gunned).   Now teams do it too, there is no incentive to finish a game in regulation, go for the guaranteed point in OT etc.    Feel they need to give .5 a point if you lose and the winner 1.5.   At least then there aren't any 3 point games.   Or 3-2-1 system.    Or just get rid of it all together.     Playoffs shouldn't be determined by a skills competition (shoot-out), or what looks like keep away  drills (3 x 3 OT).    Know it would throw away 100 years of record keeping, but they kind of did that already since the lockout.    Goals like Lundqvist with 80 plus OT and shoot-out wins, wouldn't even have 400ish wins really would they?   At least put those games in the same column as ties.    Dallas has a crap ton of OT points like 32 of 36 possible points lol.   And ANA would have a better pick too lol. 

Edited April 12, 2022 by IBatch

[IBatch]

5 hours ago, Let it Be 1970 said:

I know this a pretty obvious point but our record against the good teams is actually pretty good in comparison

And our road record is very decent.    A lot better then where we should be in the standings really.    This team definitely has some fight in it... LA is in trouble...Dallas i think if we didn't play them still would be impossible to catch - instead improbable - and their massive stack of OT games keeps them ahead of us. 

[YEGCanuck]

Hey man I hear ya, but the would've, should've, could've train has left the station.

[Sativika]

We.......would've, could've, if only, if we, blah, blah, blah........ 

Sure. Of course. But as mentioned, we're not the only team that has performance issues against non playoff teams. Whatever reasons for such, I dunno. Perhaps it's a mindset that said non playoff team is an easy mark and so stronger teams go into it thinking it'll be a win. Or perhaps it's the mindset that a non playoff team figures their playoff team opponent think they've got an easy win against them and  so the non playoff team prepares harder. 

 

In our Canucks case.....who knows. Is it the resign of TG? Honestly, I wasn't stoked when JB extended TG. But it's history now, and we all know the outcome of that.

Would Bruce B at the outset of this current season guarantee a playoff birth? Hmmm....hard to say. Yea. Probably. I'd like to think so. But that didn't happen did it.

 

Getting to the OP's topic........I agree. We would be in a better playoff state of things if we did win 1/2 the games we shoulda'.

[jatylo]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

We'd also be very close or in the show if loser points weren't weighted so high.   Teams do the exact same thing they used to do which the league tried to stop - that is sit back and play it safe at some point in the third or even the entire third and get the one point (especially if you out gunned).   Now teams do it too, there is no incentive to finish a game in regulation, go for the guaranteed point in OT etc.    Feel they need to give .5 a point if you lose and the winner 1.5.   At least then there aren't any 3 point games.   Or 3-2-1 system.    Or just get rid of it all together.     Playoffs shouldn't be determined by a skills competition (shoot-out), or what looks like keep away  drills (3 x 3 OT).    Know it would throw away 100 years of record keeping, but they kind of did that already since the lockout.    Goals like Lundqvist with 80 plus OT and shoot-out wins, wouldn't even have 400ish wins really would they?   At least put those games in the same column as ties.    Dallas has a crap ton of OT points like 32 of 36 possible points lol.   And ANA would have a better pick too lol. 

I think a 3-2-1 point system is the way to go.

Gives teams an incentive to win in regulation instead of shutting it down in the 3rd to rest key players. OTW will be 2 points and OTL worth one point.

[Eddie]

Gotta hate that league parity thing 

[Locke Lamora]

Lots of teams, even the good ones, play stinkers against the lesser lights of the league.

[Biff Tannen]

10 hours ago, Let it Be 1970 said:

I checked today our record against the non playoff teams and we just gave up too many points to teams worse than us.

Benning and Green really ruined what  was playoff team once those points would be added to the total.

Seems weird to blame Benning for ruining the team given that everyone but Dermott is ultimately his signing. Very unlikely they'll make the playoffs this year but there should be big changes in the off-season to look forward to. Feels like you're hung up on the past and you probably need to put these thoughts to one side and move on with your life. I'm sure there's a three word phrase that would more succinctly make this point, but I can't think what it is.

[Locke Lamora]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Seems weird to blame Benning for ruining the team given that everyone but Dermott is ultimately his signing. Very unlikely they'll make the playoffs this year but there should be big changes in the off-season to look forward to. Feels like you're hung up on the past and you probably need to put these thoughts to one side and move on with your life. I'm sure there's a three word phrase that would more succinctly make this point, but I can't think what it is.

 

Yeah, I think a lot of folks don’t, or don’t want to, think about the fact that this is the team Benning built we are watching right now.

 

I defended him for quite a while but in hindsight a ton of the blame has to be put on Green and his coaching staff for the miserable start. Hope the story of what the hell happened at the start of the year emerges one day. Seems to me like the team either flat out quit on Green…or his coaching strategy was an absolute disaster. Maybe the first relates to the second?

[FijianCanuck]

Our team has always been like that. We would beat elite teams then play down to the lottery teams.  

[Chris12345]

On 4/11/2022 at 10:49 PM, Let it Be 1970 said:

I checked today our record against the non playoff teams and we just gave up too many points to teams worse than us.

Benning and Green really ruined what  was playoff team once those points would be added to the total.

I'd be an actor if I could act.

[iceman64]

14 hours ago, Locke Lamora said:

 

Yeah, I think a lot of folks don’t, or don’t want to, think about the fact that this is the team Benning built we are watching right now.

 

I defended him for quite a while but in hindsight a ton of the blame has to be put on Green and his coaching staff for the miserable start. Hope the story of what the hell happened at the start of the year emerges one day. Seems to me like the team either flat out quit on Green…or his coaching strategy was an absolute disaster. Maybe the first relates to the second?

Well lots of people and here on the boards were on about that we needed a coach that was good with younger guys as our plan was to shed all the old contracts. 

Green did ok with some of his players under his watch then he got out team to over perform in the bubble and then fans were even more boisterous about extending him and we're happy it happened. 

Then our team with a lot of new players needed time to settle in BUT all Green had to do is keep a simple set of systems and nothing complicated and make it easier but not only did he over complicate systems to the point some didn't have a clue as JT Miller expressed and then poor asset management from the bench on top of it all but it's on JB for not firing Green or telling Green to just let the team play and keep it simple. 

But because of the bubble and I wish that'd never happened in a way because of Green. Finally someone was trying to build a team and retool it until all the old guard were gone and a roster that would be cap compliant as kids like Hogs n Podz, klim and others trying to crack the roster to balance out having to resign Petey Hughes etc but Green just couldn't get it through his head to mix and match but keep it SIMPLE. 

If BB was coach from preseason onward we wouldn't be having this conversation I don't think. As much as people don't like it, JB did put together a fairly decent roster and grabbed us some pretty decent picks, no he wasn't perfect but we're at least a really good step in that direction.

[CanucksFan8353]

52 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

Well lots of people and here on the boards were on about that we needed a coach that was good with younger guys as our plan was to shed all the old contracts. 

Green did ok with some of his players under his watch then he got out team to over perform in the bubble and then fans were even more boisterous about extending him and we're happy it happened. 

Then our team with a lot of new players needed time to settle in BUT all Green had to do is keep a simple set of systems and nothing complicated and make it easier but not only did he over complicate systems to the point some didn't have a clue as JT Miller expressed and then poor asset management from the bench on top of it all but it's on JB for not firing Green or telling Green to just let the team play and keep it simple. 

But because of the bubble and I wish that'd never happened in a way because of Green. Finally someone was trying to build a team and retool it until all the old guard were gone and a roster that would be cap compliant as kids like Hogs n Podz, klim and others trying to crack the roster to balance out having to resign Petey Hughes etc but Green just couldn't get it through his head to mix and match but keep it SIMPLE. 

If BB was coach from preseason onward we wouldn't be having this conversation I don't think. As much as people don't like it, JB did put together a fairly decent roster and grabbed us some pretty decent picks, no he wasn't perfect but we're at least a really good step in that direction.

Maybe Green and Benning made the players extremely angry with something they did during the first '21 COVID outbreak.  I think the outbreak in the spring shattered the team and made them lose all respect for the management and coaches.

[Rabbit]

I still think Benning is not a good GM, but not a bad one. His biggest mistake is hiring Green and extended his contract.

Green and his coach staff made the lineup worse and worse, especially PP and PK team.

If Bruce was hired one month earlier, the whole picture should be totally difference.

[Kevin Biestra]

21 hours ago, jatylo said:

I think a 3-2-1 point system is the way to go.

Gives teams an incentive to win in regulation instead of shutting it down in the 3rd to rest key players. OTW will be 2 points and OTL worth one point.

 

It's the logical choice especially in terms of game theory and competition...I just wish we had never started down this road in the first place.  Life with ties really wasn't all that unbearable.

[Kevin Biestra]

10 hours ago, iceman64 said:

But because of the bubble and I wish that'd never happened in a way because of Green. Finally someone was trying to build a team and retool it until all the old guard were gone and a roster that would be cap compliant as kids like Hogs n Podz, klim and others trying to crack the roster to balance out having to resign Petey Hughes etc but Green just couldn't get it through his head to mix and match but keep it SIMPLE.

 

The bubble reminded me a fair bit of the 1989 Canucks.  Big coming out party with their new rookie (Linden) and their new goalie (McLean) and even their new tandem (McLean and Weeks).

 

1989 was substantially more veteran laden but the same thing happened in general...they were awesome for the playoffs while they were in it, and then the very next year they were bottom feeding garbage.  In fact they turned into bottom feeding garbage while ADDING Larionov and Krutov.  And then they weren't much to write home about the next year either.  But 1989 + 3 seasons they were division champs back to back and then Cup finalists...and as much as I didn't want to see any of the players go, during those years from the 1989 playoffs to the 1991-92 season (first division banner) they moved on from all of the following...ALL players that I held in very high regard and had been long serving NHLers and many of them long serving Canucks...

 

Stan Smyl

Harold Snepsts

Petri Skriko

Tony Tanti

Barry Pederson

Garth Butcher

Mel Bridgman

Paul Reinhart

 

That's probably eight of my 100 favorite hockey players of all time gone in one fell swoop.

 

Plus other players that I liked...Rich Sutter, Steve Weeks, Jim Sandlak, Brian Bradley, Steve Bozek and even Jim Benning.

 

And Tanti / Skriko / Pederson WAS the Canucks offense for the second half of the 80s.  Without those three guys the Canucks would have gone something like 5 wins and 75 losses every year.

 

This was just in the year or two immediately following the 1989 Game 7 OT series with the Cup champion Flames...something roughly on par with the bubble run in terms of showing promise.  But by the 1994 run (only five years later) the only players left were Linden, Adams and McLean.  I think anyway.  That's it...three players.

 

And guys like Skriko, Pederson, Tanti...were no older than JT Miller is now.

 

I guess the point is they traded or moved on from everybody except two forwards and a goalie...and it worked out.  Maybe the bubble did get people too attached to some players...but fans and management were starved for just a tiny bit of success.

 

 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Kevin Biestra