[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Edmonton Oilers | Oct. 12, 2022

[DefCon1]

Just now, gottalovethosenucks said:

Brock boeser before bo ….. 

I agree with you that Brock goes before anyone else. Brock and Pearson trade will allows us to add a top 4D and open up more cap space. We have surplus of wingers now with Mikheyev and Kuzmenko. Hoglander and Podkolzin being cheap options and Garland. Not to mention upcoming prospects at wing in Danila and Linus Karlsson. Its time to trade wingers for D.

[EP Phone Home]

11 hours ago, Petey Castiglione said:

We literally played with 4 #6/7 Dmen plus OEL for the 2nd period.  Hughes/OEL 20+ min.  Rest of the defense just couldn't hold on long enough.  While it was a great effort, it's obvious we need to upgrade the Defense.  

Yup, it’s no longer a surprise and I really feel for Demko. Guy is going to be counted on to save our evening on most nights. He won’t be a Venzina nominee until we fix the freaking blueline.

 

I get it, it’s a beating a dead horse topic so if it’s such a repetitive glaring message the fan base continues to regurgitate then why hasn’t the organization done anything on the right side? We all know how hard it is to obtain a RSD. Yet did we manage to draft one in this past draft? Nope, how about in a trade? Nope too expensive for us with no assets to give up. How about free agency? No we spent the cap we had to improve our forwards. 

 

I hear you Petey and I will continue to beat on this dead horse until it gets addressed. It’s not going away anytime soon and it’s going to be a loooong year if we don’t stop ignoring it. We need 2/4 right side D and eventually a replacement on the left side for OEL.
 

These are the facts for us to get into serious contender contention not consistent pretender status that we seem to be stuck in.
 

We were never going to go 82-0 but having a 3 goal lead and conceding 5 to lose doesn’t scream good team defence. 
 

Onto Philly. Time to come together as preseason is over.  

Edited October 13, 2022 by EP Phone Home

[Ghostsof1915]

6 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Boeser don't have trade value to get us the needed D. 

Don't think either one has the trade value to get an elite D.

[DefCon1]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

I would literally take a 7-0 loss at home if someone puts nurse through the freakin glass - absolutely hate that guy this year.  Remember when Bo actually fought him, musta been like his 1-2 year i think. Not sure what happened to the Bo that seemed to care consistently as a captain. 

Anyway i turned that game off after the 2nd - was too pissed off, and after the PP miss on hughes and the the Nurse leveler - you knew how it was gonna go, make up PP's and McDrai were gonna find a way to score in the 3rd and we were gonna turtle like we always do - which i assume from the score sheet is what happened. 

Coil are truely a terrible team with 2 absolute superstars and a PP that is designed to utilize them well. Outside of that they are absolute guff. 

 

For the first 2 periods we did play some really good hockey, and kept them contained.  The top 3 lines all look dangerous and the 4th looked tough. 

Problem is still D Core, special teams and mental toughness again. Hopefully we can work through the first two as the season progresses but its been a habitual problem of the core.  The D core really do get exposed by McDrai always. Hughes isn't strong enough to stay with them and the rest are all too slow and turn like a super tanker.  Right hand D of Schenn, Poolman, Burr isn't gonna get us to the play offs.. No idea how we ever fix this, but our F group has to be a lot more clinical to out score that deficiency. 

Problem is that half brain Benning got rid of our only defensive d and best PKer in Tanev thinking he was outsmarting other teams. The dude was asking for only 4 million dollars but Benning decided Poolman was better for that money 

 

Am still pissed at that decision and his excuse of running out of time. Not sure if Alvin can find us another Tanev but we badly need one.

[DefCon1]

7 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Boeser don't have trade value to get us the needed D. 

Boeser has some value around the league to get us a top 4D. Wont be that elite D but it would be much betger than our current top 4. Maybe Brandon Carlo or Severson could be had for Boeser and Boeser is considered a top 6 and can still put 25 to 30 goals so his value is still decent 

[24K PureCool]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Don't think either one has the trade value to get an elite D.

Bo has it. All we need a good defensive 2nd pair preferably rhd. 

 

Bo for whatever reason is highly regarded across the league. 

 

Now the more we hold onto him the more his value and standing across the league may tank. 

[AnthonyG]

Any circumstances where blood is drawn should be reviewed after the play. If it was the result of a high stick, a penalty should be awarded after review. If a goal occurred it shall be called back if it was an attacking player who high stuck a defending player. If an attacking player is high stuck by a defending player, that draws blood, and a goal happens on the same play, the double minor penalty is reduced to a 2 minute penalty.

 

problem solved

[Chickenspear]

48 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

NHL should consider adjusting Rule 8.1:

 

“When a player is injured so that he cannot continue play or go to his bench, the play shall not be stopped until the injured player’s team has secured control of the puck. If the player’s team is in control of the puck at the time of injury, play shall be stopped immediately unless his team is in a scoring position. 

In the case where it is obvious that a player has sustained a serious injury, the referee and/or linesman may stop the play immediately.”

 

Possibly the last paragraph (where I’ve added the underlines) should be changed from “may” to “must.” 

 

Or at least add a tweak that mandates a stoppage, whenever there’s an obvious serious injury, immediately after the conclusion of a scoring chance (regardless of whether or not the defending team has “secured control of the puck”).
 

Even under the current rule, with no changes or tweaks, the officials have the discretion and they could (should) have stopped the play.
 

From the moment Hughes went down, with what was IMO an obvious injury, they had the option to stop play. But the Oilers were in the middle of a scoring chance, so I can somewhat understand the refs not wanting to blow it dead, at first. However, once the Oilers failed to score on that initial net front scramble, and the puck was passed back, away from any high danger scoring areas, there was no good reason to allow the play to continue, with Hughes clearly injured. A stoppage at that point would have been fair to both teams. When the puck went back up to the point, there was a natural “break” in the action, and the refs could have easily blown the whistle.

If they were really looking to protect players, while not disrupting the game action, by taking away a scoring chance, they would have stopped the play at that exact moment.

 

In the refs’ defence (somewhat), it’s a that moment Hughes gets up and tries to return to the play. He’s still clearly shaken up, but I have to wonder if the play gets blown dead if Hughes had stayed down for a second or two longer. 
 

Even still, it’s clear to anyone watching that Hughes is hurt and bleeding and even when he’s back up on his feet, it’s obvious that he’s not okay, he’s clearly injured, and he’s not really able to effectively get back into the play. From the moment he went down, the refs should have been looking for a suitable moment to stop play, without impacting the game action. When the puck went back up top again, it was basically a “reset” in the offence and a natural break in the action where the whistle could be blown, without being unfair to the Oilers or disrupting an active scoring chance. Allowing the play to continue from that point was unfair to the Canucks, and a IMO compete failure by the on-ice officials to protect the players on the ice.

Maybe they can bring the linesman in on these types of situations as well. Just like they can call too many men penalties, maybe on plays where a player is obviously injured by a high stick, and the 2 refs don't see the infraction, they can call the penalty.

[24K PureCool]

1 minute ago, DefCon1 said:

Boeser has some value around the league to get us a top 4D. Wont be that elite D but it would be much betger than our current top 4. Maybe Brandon Carlo or Severson could be had for Boeser and Boeser is considered a top 6 and can still put 25 to 30 goals so his value is still decent 

Maybe after 20 games if he scores at a good rate. 

 

Don't think he has that at this moment after the last disastrous season. 

[DefCon1]

4 minutes ago, EP Phone Home said:

Yup, it’s no longer a surprise and I really feel for Demko. Guy is going to be counted on to save our evening on most nights. He won’t be a Venzina nominee until we fix the freaking blueline.

 

I get it, it’s a beating a dead horse topic so if it’s such a repetitive glaring message the fan base continues to regurgitate then why hasn’t the organization done anything on the right side? We all know how hard it is to obtain a RSD. Yet did we manage to draft one in this past draft? Nope, how about in a trade? Nope too expensive for us with no assets to give up. How about free agency? No we spent the cap we had to improve our forwards. 

 

I hear you Petey and I will continue to beat on this dead horse until it gets addressed. It’s not going away anytime soon and it’s going to be a loooong year if we don’t stop ignoring it. We need 2/4 right side D and eventually a replacement on the left side for OEL.
 

These are the facts for us to get into serious contender contention not consistent pretender status that we seem to be stuck in.
 

We were never going to go 82-0 but having a 3 goal lead and conceding 5 to lose doesn’t scream good team defence. 
 

Onto Philly. Time to come together as preseason is over.  

Trade Boeser for Carlo, Trade Horvat for Byram since Colorado has lots of D but needs a good 2nd/3rd line center.

 

Hughes-Byram

OEL-Carlo

Myers-Schenn

poolman

 

 

[drofssalg]

I was at the game. From a fan watching perspective (no benefit of replays). (And I told my wife at 3 nothing - worst lead in hockey...)

 

Pettersson looked great. Other than the bad play leading to the short handed goal. 

Podkolzin looked great. Smart player. Never takes a shift off.

Miller looked awful. Poor puck decisions. Poor positioning throughout the game. He got two points but he was hard to watch the rest of the game. I definitely noticed him for all the wrong reasons. 

Horvat looked disinterested. Not sure what else to say about him. 

Boeser - smart player, too slow.

Garland handles the puck well, skates well but just did not make a difference. 

Hughes is trying to do too much. Schenn is actually a bad partner for him - forces Quinn to do too much against a better skating team like the Oilers. 

Pearson - he is tough to watch. Just seems to be off by a stride or two - almost in the right position but never quite there. Plays die on his stick.

Hoglander - just can't finish. Made a few good defensive plays (which stood out to me). But poor passing decisions in offensive zone (especially on PP2).

Kuzmenko played well. Not sure what he is yet. But he is not a liability on the ice. 

Lazar for his role and minutes, he looked good. 

Aman looked ok.

Joshua looked overwhelmed.

Schenn is too slow. Smart player but no speed.

OEL looked ok.

Stillman looked meh.

Poolman is awful.

 

Curious to see what happens when Mikheyev is back. Forward group just did not seem as engaged as I was hoping for. I would have thought after the first two goals that they would be fired up for more but it just seemed to stop. Great work by Pettersson, beautiful shot by Miller and then it just died. Line combos did not seem correct to me. I don't think Boeser and Pearson are great wingers for Miller and I don't think Garland is a great winger for Horvat. Hoglander - not sure what to say - good player but just does not seem to fit with system. 4th line (small sample size but) did not seem effective.

 

Reffing was bad on both sides (at least consistent in the bad calls). But the missed call on Hughes was huge (should not be an excuse to lose the momentum and game). 

 

Power play and Penalty kill felt exactly like last year. I get it's game one but still, I expected better from both. McDavid and Draisaitl - they move the puck so well and that is tough to defend... but the first PK was just a mess when Hughes got hurt, Demko dropping the stick and getting scored on. It just seemed to not get better for any future PK. The power play was predictable. I know it will get goals through the season but the Oilers had it figured. 

 

Canucks cannot handle faster players. They make up for it by playing positionally sound 5v5 but it can cause breakdown issues in their own zone. Team speed is still an issue - Boeser, Schenn and Pearson really stood out as slow. 

 

The defense is still the Canucks weakest area. I was on board the trade Miller train because of the "give to get" perspective. Now that Miller is signed we know he is staying. But the Canucks still need to give to get. A forward needs to go to get a D. But given most teams are in tough with D that is not an easy trade to make (too many teams not enough good D available especially right side).

 

Fun game to be at until Hughes got hurt... I could feel the change in the building after that goal went in.

 

I have been to many Canucks/Oilers games - first game where other fans tried to pick a fight because I was wearing a Canucks jersey. (And yes the other guys were drunk - not sure how people can afford to get drunk at a hockey game). Just glad I drove into downtown and did not have to take the LRT home. 

 

 

 

 

[Gawdzukes]

54 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

NHL should consider adjusting Rule 8.1:

 

“When a player is injured so that he cannot continue play or go to his bench, the play shall not be stopped until the injured player’s team has secured control of the puck. If the player’s team is in control of the puck at the time of injury, play shall be stopped immediately unless his team is in a scoring position. 

In the case where it is obvious that a player has sustained a serious injury, the referee and/or linesman may stop the play immediately.”

 

Possibly the last paragraph (where I’ve added the underlines) should be changed from “may” to “must.” 

 

Or at least add a tweak that mandates a stoppage, whenever there’s an obvious serious injury, immediately after the conclusion of a scoring chance (regardless of whether or not the defending team has “secured control of the puck”).
 

Even under the current rule, with no changes or tweaks, the officials have the discretion and they could (should) have stopped the play.
 

From the moment Hughes went down, with what was IMO an obvious injury, they had the option to stop play. But the Oilers were in the middle of a scoring chance, so I can somewhat understand the refs not wanting to blow it dead, at first. However, once the Oilers failed to score on that initial net front scramble, and the puck was passed back, away from any high danger scoring areas, there was no good reason to allow the play to continue, with Hughes clearly injured. A stoppage at that point would have been fair to both teams. When the puck went back up to the point, there was a natural “break” in the action, and the refs could have easily blown the whistle.

If they were really looking to protect players, while not disrupting the game action, by taking away a scoring chance, they would have stopped the play at that exact moment.

 

In the refs’ defence (somewhat), it’s a that moment Hughes gets up and tries to return to the play. He’s still clearly shaken up, but I have to wonder if the play gets blown dead if Hughes had stayed down for a second or two longer. 
 

Even still, it’s clear to anyone watching that Hughes is hurt and bleeding and even when he’s back up on his feet, it’s obvious that he’s not okay, he’s clearly injured, and he’s not really able to effectively get back into the play. From the moment he went down, the refs should have been looking for a suitable moment to stop play, without impacting the game action. When the puck went back up top again, it was basically a “reset” in the offence and a natural break in the action where the whistle could be blown, without being unfair to the Oilers or disrupting an active scoring chance. Allowing the play to continue from that point was unfair to the Canucks, and a IMO compete failure by the on-ice officials to protect the players on the ice.

Yes it was a tough call as you say. Hughes coming back into the play probably stopped them from blowing it dead. Unfortunately his bravery backfired and I agree another second or two on the ice and it would have been blown dead.

 

Great summary of the situation. I don't think they should automatically call it though or you would see a lot of faking eventually. The refs just blew it all around on that play and the timing was unlucky. It happens.

[AnthonyG]

3 minutes ago, Chickenspear said:

Maybe they can bring the linesman in on these types of situations as well. Just like they can call too many men penalties, maybe on plays where a player is obviously injured by a high stick, and the 2 refs don't see the infraction, they can call the penalty.

All they need to do is automatically review any instances where blood is drawn to see if it was an opposing player, their own player or the puck. From there, either wave the goal off and send someone to the box, or if its an attacking player that gets highstuck and is bleeding, the goal counts and the double minor gets reduced. These sorts of things dont happen that often so its not going to delay games much. Plus its an obvious call when they look and see it on an ipad and see the stick clearly contacting the face.

[DefCon1]

1 minute ago, 24K PureCool said:

Maybe after 20 games if he scores at a good rate. 

 

Don't think he has that at this moment after the last disastrous season. 

I see Boeser traded for sure  if not soon then maybe later due to Kuzmenko and Mikheyev signing. I mean Alvin is definitely thinking about this scenario. No other way to improve the D. Horvat will be traded only if we can get a young top 4D with high potential like Byram. Colorado needs more center depth after losing Nazem Kadri which is a huge loss for them and also losing Burakovsky. Canucks can take a small cap dump and Byram for Horvat. Horvat would require 7 mil max to re-sign and would fit Avs cap structure while being a better in playoffs compared to Newhook.

[Goal:thecup]

1 minute ago, AnthonyG said:

Any circumstances where blood is drawn should be reviewed after the play. If it was the result of a high stick, a penalty should be awarded after review. If a goal occurred it shall be called back if it was an attacking player who high stuck a defending player. If an attacking player is high stuck by a defending player, that draws blood, and a goal happens on the same play, the double minor penalty is reduced to a 2 minute penalty.

 

problem solved

Not if there's no blood; e.g. crosscheck to the neck.

 

They need to get rid of the Refs' Get Out of Jail Free card.

 

Their lying, "we didn't see it" BS just covers up for them whether they saw it or not if it is not reviewed.

 

Like someone else said, if they can take 5 - 15 minutes to decide a frickin offside, they can see why a player is on the ice bleeding while a goal is scored.

 

(And Nurse's fine should be a suspension, he hit Burroughs while he was being held against the boards, in other words, while he was defenseless and he hit him in the head.)

 

Corruption rules the NHL.

 

Fire away "can't make excuses, etc" posters; I've got most of you on "Ignore" anyway.

 

[AnthonyG]

1 minute ago, Goal:thecup said:

Not if there's no blood; e.g. crosscheck to the neck.

 

They need to get rid of the Refs' Get Out of Jail Free card.

 

Their lying, "we didn't see it" BS just covers up for them whether they saw it or not if it is not reviewed.

 

Like someone else said, if they can take 5 - 15 minutes to decide a frickin offside, they can see why a player is on the ice bleeding while a goal is scored.

 

(And Nurse's fine should be a suspension, he hit Burroughs while he was being held against the boards, in other words, while he was defenseless and he hit him in the head.)

 

Corruption rules the NHL.

 

Fire away "can't make excuses, etc" posters; I've got most of you on "Ignore" anyway.

 

Reviewing everything that causes a player to go down will only promote diving. You can’t fake blood unless you are in the WWE. You can however exaggerate the pain of questionable hits, crosschecks etc. There does have to be a line drawn where they stop at a certain point of what IS to be reviewed and what ISN’T. Some calls do get missed and that is just human error. If a major injury is caused, there should be a review, but even then, it becomes up to ones interpretation and you’ll never see consistency. 

[EP Phone Home]

12 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Trade Boeser for Carlo, Trade Horvat for Byram since Colorado has lots of D but needs a good 2nd/3rd line center.

 

Hughes-Byram

OEL-Carlo

Myers-Schenn

poolman

 

 

At some point something has to give with having to give more money for Peter’s next deal and Kuz. We still have to upgrade our D. this seems like the only logical way aside from adding Garland to your trade offers. 

[Goal:thecup]

3 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Reviewing everything that causes a player to go down will only promote diving. You can’t fake blood unless you are in the WWE. You can however exaggerate the pain of questionable hits, crosschecks etc. There does have to be a line drawn where they stop at a certain point of what IS to be reviewed and what ISN’T. Some calls do get missed and that is just human error. If a major injury is caused, there should be a review, but even then, it becomes up to ones interpretation and you’ll never see consistency. 

Diving is a penalty too; call that if it is discovered to be the case.

It does not take long for coaches to adapt to rule changes if they are called fairly and consistently (which of course, corrupt NHL officials have no interest in doing).

[Maginator]

10 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Reviewing everything that causes a player to go down will only promote diving. You can’t fake blood unless you are in the WWE. You can however exaggerate the pain of questionable hits, crosschecks etc. There does have to be a line drawn where they stop at a certain point of what IS to be reviewed and what ISN’T. Some calls do get missed and that is just human error. If a major injury is caused, there should be a review, but even then, it becomes up to ones interpretation and you’ll never see consistency. 

Agreed.

 

Even our fans have a losers mentality. We had 8 powerplays FFS. Mentally weak team blows a 3-0 lead. Nothing else to see here. Hopefully it's just early season jitters but last night felt way too familiar.

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, DefCon1 said:

They can change up the PP. Remove Miller or Horvat and put in Podkolzin in for net presence and add OEL for shot from the point. I think Our PP is very slow in moving the puck and they always look for Petersson for that one timer which is predictable. Having a one timer from the blueline will keep other teams guessing. We are not using OEL's biggest strength which is his shot from the blueline on the PP. 

100% agree. We have way too much talent to let our PP be a weakness. Our PP is so predictable. Play around with the puck ad nauseum forgoing multitudes of great shot opportunities until we try to force a bad pass that goes for an odd man situation the other way. As someone mentioned earlier Edmonton's PP is successful and so hard to stop because they don't just stand in the same spot for 2 minutes.

 

A more traditional PP that gets shots and reacts would be more wise and would also stop being a game-changer for the other team. OEL is so good at controlling the blueline and knowing when and how to shoot the puck from back there. If only Hughes had a howitzer he could get 20 though. Way too many hotdogs out there and not enough serious direction. It's fine to pass the puck around and make nice plays once in a while but when you get 8 PP's you have to be able to bear down when it counts.