Page 5 of 6

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:47 am
by SKYO
The proof of the pudding, Canucks scoring goals = we win.
Especially 3 goals per! :thumbs:

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:56 pm
by dbr
SKYO wrote:The proof of the pudding,
Hey you're right, the team has held the opposition to 1.5 goals per game over the last four and have won each game!

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:14 pm
by SKYO
This team has done the most damage when it was a high scoring team, if they can keep that up - we go farther in the playoffs.

I'm not trying to contradict, I agree with improving the defensive, but when this team is scoring goals it really makes them much more dominant!

imo we just need a willie mitchell type to solidify the defensive depth to tighten up our D.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:22 pm
by dbr
I think if the team gets better at defense and offense they will be really tough to beat.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:02 pm
by Meds
dbr wrote:I think if the team gets better at defense and offense they will be really tough to beat.
Very astute. Have you considered working for TSN, Sportsnet, or CBC? You're already more insightful than Kevin Weekes and Glenn Healy.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:03 am
by Cookie La Rue
The defensive insurance this season are Tanev and St. Anton.. the most valuable imo, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Garrison and Edler are supposed to, and they're not bad but they need this performances of the new kids...

We have a real strong D, believe.....

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:44 am
by sagebrush
The Canucks defense has been improving since the Nashville game.

The game where Edler was injured.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:01 pm
by SKYO
high octane offense beats out best defense today (Blackhawks over Kings), so that settles it Canucks need a top 6 winger for improved offense. :D

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:54 pm
by The Brown Knight
SKYO wrote:high octane offense beats out best defense today (Blackhawks over Kings), so that settles it Canucks need a top 6 winger for improved offense. :D
One interesting thing to note from this thread:

Shortly after I created this thread, the Canucks defensive play picked up quite substantially.

I would even go as far as saying that if these last 7 games are of any indication, then the Canucks might already be able to call themselves one of the Top 3 best defensive clubs in the league.

One area where I was wrong on however, was my argument that we should play similarly to our 2006/2007 style.

As we have proven lately, the Canucks can in fact, score prolifically under Torts 'aggressive forecheck' system, while also maintaining a solid defensive play. We'll see how this set-up translates against more elite teams and in the playoffs should we make it there.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:56 pm
by The Brown Knight
SKYO wrote:high octane offense beats out best defense today (Blackhawks over Kings), so that settles it Canucks need a top 6 winger for improved offense. :D
Chicago has a high octane offense, but they know how to tighten up defensively when it becomes necessary. Check out their play during the finals last year.

Don't let their relatively high GA this year fool you.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:26 pm
by The Brown Knight
sagebrush wrote:The Canucks defense has been improving since the Nashville game.

The game where Edler was injured.
Against the more elite teams, I'd still like to see them be tighter defensively on a consistent basis.

There's still too many high quality chances going our way (even if the quantity of shots going our way isn't as much as what we put towards the other goalie).

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:39 pm
by SKYO
The Brown Knight wrote:
SKYO wrote:high octane offense beats out best defense today (Blackhawks over Kings), so that settles it Canucks need a top 6 winger for improved offense. :D
Chicago has a high octane offense, but they know how to tighten up defensively when it becomes necessary. Check out their play during the finals last year.

Don't let their relatively high GA this year fool you.
Yup and just as DBR says the team has got to...
dbr wrote:I think if the team gets better at defense and offense they will be really tough to beat.
Thanks to our deep defense and top 10 goaltending, team can go out and try to land a scorer/sniper to help get a better killer instinct in the final minutes of a game/OT.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:55 pm
by The Brown Knight
SKYO wrote:Thanks to our deep defense and top 10 goaltending, team can go out and try to land a scorer/sniper to help get a better killer instinct in the final minutes of a game/OT.
I'm all for adding a Top 6 forward as long as we don't move a defenseman to obtain said Top 6 Forward.

The risk of being susceptible to a depleted defensive corps due to injury, far outweighs the benefits of adding a Top 6 Forward in my opinion.

If the Canucks are hell bent on moving a Top 4 d-man like Edler however, I'd much rather see them package Edler with draft picks and prospects to get a guy like Shea Weber.

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:53 pm
by Hockey Widow
The Brown Knight wrote:
SKYO wrote:Thanks to our deep defense and top 10 goaltending, team can go out and try to land a scorer/sniper to help get a better killer instinct in the final minutes of a game/OT.
I'm all for adding a Top 6 forward as long as we don't move a defenseman to obtain said Top 6 Forward.

The risk of being susceptible to a depleted defensive corps due to injury, far outweighs the benefits of adding a Top 6 Forward in my opinion.

If the Canucks are hell bent on moving a Top 4 d-man like Edler however, I'd much rather see them package Edler with draft picks and prospects to get a guy like Shea Weber.

We couldn't fit Weber under our cap with just trading Edler from the team. Going for a guy like him before the cap goes up and we have to lose a ton of coin first, or in the trade which would deplete us even further up front.

Edler for a goal scorer and bottom 5-6 stay at home D man

Re: Should the Canucks become a more DEFENSIVE team?

Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:31 pm
by givemeda411
Hockey Widow wrote:
The Brown Knight wrote:
SKYO wrote:Thanks to our deep defense and top 10 goaltending, team can go out and try to land a scorer/sniper to help get a better killer instinct in the final minutes of a game/OT.
I'm all for adding a Top 6 forward as long as we don't move a defenseman to obtain said Top 6 Forward.

The risk of being susceptible to a depleted defensive corps due to injury, far outweighs the benefits of adding a Top 6 Forward in my opinion.

If the Canucks are hell bent on moving a Top 4 d-man like Edler however, I'd much rather see them package Edler with draft picks and prospects to get a guy like Shea Weber.

We couldn't fit Weber under our cap with just trading Edler from the team. Going for a guy like him before the cap goes up and we have to lose a ton of coin first, or in the trade which would deplete us even further up front.

Edler for a goal scorer and bottom 5-6 stay at home D man
If Vancouver wanted to run a 22 man roster and have almost no cap space it could be done. It would be smarter to make that trade at the deadline as there would be room for another forward.
With that said, that is a front loaded contract and I doubt Nashville will trade him anytime soon.