Competitive and/or Contending

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
UWSaint
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by UWSaint » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:56 pm

ESQ wrote:
UWSaint wrote:... 220 is more of the magic number for the playoffs.
They are on pace to score 221...
So you're saying there's a chance!
I wish. The point of the quoted post was that changes might, if lucky, get the Canucks to 220 goals for, but that's only half the equation and the Canucks had no chance of improving their defense enough. To get in the playoffs, most teams score more than 220 and give up less. (Again, that # will be different this year because for whatever reason goal scoring is higher).

The Canucks rebuild is all about improving the anemic offense. And we are seeing payoff with the plan. But defense/goaltending was as bad as the scoring and has received far less attention. We are seeing the results of that, too. There's hope (Juolevi, Demko), but there is a lot of uncertainty with both and not enough quantity for a miss.
Hono_rary Canadian

User avatar
Uncle dans leg
CC Legend
Posts: 4832
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Uncle dans leg » Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:10 pm

Ill take shitty team defense but goals goals goals over the conservative oatmeal-like endurance test rebuild we've been suffering through for the past 5 years thank you very much.

I can enjoy a losing season if i can see the light
nobody forks...with the jesus

ESQ
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by ESQ » Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:43 pm

I'm with ya, UDL.

And UW, I take your point, just trying to cherry-pick the bright side!

I don't know if you can blame the wheels coming off in December on Tanev's absence. His last 4 games were all losses where the Canucks gave up 4-7 goals.

Prior to the game in NJ where Sutter was hurt, the Canucks were 11-8-3.

Since Sutter went down, they are 4-8-2.

Without Bo, they've gone 1-6-1.

The issue, to my mind, is less the defensive depth as the center depth being totally depleted. The Canucks have had a beaten-up blue line all season, but it was the rash of injuries to the forwards that led to the slump.

User avatar
Aaronp18
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2886
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:36 pm

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Aaronp18 » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:10 pm

ESQ wrote: The issue, to my mind, is less the defensive depth as the center depth being totally depleted. The Canucks have had a beaten-up blue line all season, but it was the rash of injuries to the forwards that led to the slump.
Well these really go hand in hand though! The most defensively responsible forward has to be the centre, from faceoffs to backchecking to taking care of the centre of the ice. So a depleted defense and centre will naturally lead to far worse team defense and more goals against.

The centre is so key to providing puck support in our own end, and when that isn't there is just makes the defenseman's job that much tougher.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17150
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Strangelove » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:28 pm

ESQ wrote:just trying to cherry-pick the bright side!
8-) :thumbs: 8-)
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17150
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Strangelove » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:31 pm

Aaronp18 wrote:
ESQ wrote: The issue, to my mind, is less the defensive depth as the center depth being totally depleted. The Canucks have had a beaten-up blue line all season, but it was the rash of injuries to the forwards that led to the slump.
Well these really go hand in hand though! The most defensively responsible forward has to be the centre, from faceoffs to backchecking to taking care of the centre of the ice. So a depleted defense and centre will naturally lead to far worse team defense and more goals against.

The centre is so key to providing puck support in our own end, and when that isn't there is just makes the defenseman's job that much tougher.
True, but it can't be understated how valuable Horvat + Sutter have been to team defense.

Those two are GIANTS defensively.

And the drop-off after those two as far as defensive centres on your Vancouver Canucks is massive...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 10777
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:58 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:56 pm
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty. :eh:

(time-frame, how good the team will be, how big of a role young players will play)

I can't help but suspect you're being purposely obtuse...
The question of projecting has been raised, but no, I will just admit that my hockey knowledge pales before yours and I need extra guidance.
Hmmm... purposely obtuse, passively aggressive, and a patently insincere praiser!

This is quite a case!!! :)
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:As for "what round of the playoffs"... that is not relevant.

What is relevant is where I said:

"My Canucks will look good enough (in said playoffs) to give us all plenty of hope for the future".

("We will all be talking about how far they will go the next playoffs and how long the window will be open")

You dogs are not going to get a more quantified prediction than this on a fucking Canucks message board.
Playoff performance is not relevant ? Well, that certainly gets full points for a bold assertion.
Well I most certainly did indicate 'playoff performance is relevant'. :eh:

What round they make it to in their first taste of playoff action... is what I called irrelevant.

Purposely obtuse Cliffy?
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty. :eh:

(time-frame, how good the team will be, how big of a role young players will play)
1) Time frame: 2018-2019 -- check
2) How good the team will be:
a) good enough to make the playoffs -- well, that establishes a minimum
b) "look good" -- not so quantifiable
3) how big a role young players will play -- sorry, I seem to have missed that one. Would the Master of the Archives care to provide a link ?
2a) :roll:

2b) How about "look good enough to get everyone on this board excited about the future"? :hmmm:

3) I've said it many times and I'm not on trial... try re-reading my last dozen posts in this thread. :scowl:

(also it should be obvious that young players would play a huge role in any success in that timeframe)
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:They may accuse you of making your prediction only because you want to brag about being right one day.
Now please be fair. I acknowledged that your motives were pure (and, more importantly, relevant); that is, you mean to address the question of how we will assess the success of Jim Benning's rebuild. As do I.
True, but you also seemed to (twice) lend credence some of 5thhorseman's accusations.

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:In that case Cliffy, would you kindly stop nipping at my heels like some deranged chihuahua? :D
If my questions annoy you, you needn't respond...
Tried that.

You persisted.

And you continued to complain to others that I hadn't answered your questions to your satisfaction.

*swats Cliffy with rolled-up newspaper* :D
You swatted Ronnings gunt with a newspaper, while he went to town on your dome with a pipe
TRY TO FOCUS ON HOW MY ASS TASTES IN ONE YEAR

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17150
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Competitive and/or Contending

Post by Strangelove » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:40 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:58 pm
You swatted Ronnings gunt with a newspaper, while he went to town on your dome with a pipe
Riiiiiiiiiight... and Bobby Farnham is 145 lbs! :santa:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Post Reply