Shannon to Manitoba

Bret H · Post by **Bret H** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:34 pm

Hmmm... didn't expect that. After all, he leads the Canucks in scoring. I have only seen the Flames game but he looked OK to me. What do you say, you that have seen him in all games so far?

Linden Is God · Post by **Linden Is God** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Yeah this doesn't make sense to me either. Is Nonis up to something or is AV just not happy with Shannon?

mattola · Post by **mattola** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:52 pm

jchockey · Post by **jchockey** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:58 pm

mattola wrote:-7

Expected from a player who is quite one-dimensional, but as a whole the team hasn't been doing well. Linden leads the team in +/- (even) and he's played one less game than everybody else.

If someone were to take the fall, I wouldn't expect it to be Shannon.

I'm very surprised by this move - I thought Shannon gave us an offensive dynamic we didn't have last year. Shannon is third on our team in ATOI at 16:58, behind only the Sedins.

Badfish · Post by **Badfish** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 2:05 pm

jchockey wrote:I'm very surprised by this move - I thought Shannon gave us an offensive dynamic we didn't have last year. Shannon is third on our team in ATOI at 16:58, behind only the Sedins.

I'm very surprised too, but then again -7 playing mostly with the twins... those two goals of his I could have scored, gaping cage to shoot at both times (and a couple times he didn't convert). Seems either they think anyone could score with the twins, and his -7 wasn't good enough, DN has a move planned or else he didn't fit into AV's plans and would rather go with the slightly bigger Raymond...? Who knows, it's a strange one.

levelheaded · Post by **levelheaded** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 2:09 pm

Shannon isn't the problem. At all... I don't mind if he's -7, anyone who plays top minutes in an 8-2 blowout should expect to be a minus player. I hope AV knows what he is doing.

Maybe Forsberg is about to take his spot

hoopsjunky · Post by **hoopsjunky** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 2:35 pm

He has to clear waivers after 60 games in the NHL. He's played in 56 so far. I'm sure that's part of the reason he was sent down.

whistler · Post by **whistler** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 3:44 pm

His two goals represent almost 30% of the team's total tally so far, he's tied for third in total points and he hustles when he's on the ice.

It doesn't make sense to send down your top offensive threat without a damn good reason.

Is he being punished for something ?

He may be minus 7 but I don't recall any goals caused by Shannon's miscue or where Shannon's check was left open .

Our defense has been porous so far this year so it's hard to lay the blame on a rookie forward for his plus/minus.

...unless he's getting cocky in the dressing room when the team is expected to be mortified.

Maybe Vigneault just wants to emphasise defence first and is sending the goal scorers down until the team gets back on the right track.

Baffling

mattola · Post by **mattola** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 3:55 pm

whistler wrote: Maybe Vigneault just wants to emphasise defence first and is sending the goal scorers down until the team gets back on the right track.

Baffling

so is -6 Naslund next to go down

DonCherry4PM · Post by **DonCherry4PM** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 4:17 pm

whistler wrote: Maybe Vigneault just wants to emphasise defence first and is sending the goal scorers down until the team gets back on the right track.

Kudos. After seeing the heading of this post I was going to make a sarcastic remark such as this but you beat me to it.

I really don't get AV and never have. While I can't argue that he did get the job done last year, and well, I have never been a fan of how he does it. Almost reminds me of Crow in the sense that he won't give legitimate chances to anyone or anything that is not already in his head as being what he wants. He gets a set idea in his head of who should be playing and what their role should be and he sees anything departing from that as untenable. He does switch up lines a lot during games but he never gives a line other than those already set in his head the chance of actually playing together long enough to actually develop some chemistry.

Barring the Sedins and Nasulnd (possibly Morrison as well) we are pretty short on top 6 forwards. When other players are put into such a position (that of the top 6) they need some time to adapt to their surroundings and to create a chemistry that doesn't immediately appear. We do not have the players to automatically get another WCE or Legion of Doom etc. And given that our resources are limited maybe AV should actually give a legitimate and reasonable amount of time to players that are not superstars to try to fill the holes instead of switching them up like a game of musical chairs every time a shift ends.

Another thought - maybe he should through down on some of the veterans that are ilking their jobs and making insufficient contributions instead of disciplining someone who is actually producing. It's not as if he doesn't have a plethora of options in the category of impotent veteran slouches.

Okay, I am done my rant.

ClamRussel · Post by **ClamRussel** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:59 pm

The fact that Shannon & the boys are pretty much all in the minus dept should come as no surprise as the Canucks have only scored one even strength goal and you don't get a + for a PP marker. If Shannon had any puck luck he could have scored a pair against the Sharks and have 4 on the season. I think this move is clearly because Nonis doesn't feel he's quite ready and wants him to play some time on the farm.....he can clear waivers so he's down. He's on a 2-way contract.....he's definitely outplayed Isbister & Ritchie not to mention several other vets. He's also outplayed Raymond who looks to me like he could also use some time in the Peg. He probably stays because he's bigger & can clear waivers anytime.

You'd think 2 goals in 3 games would be enough to stick especially since our PP struggled last year. That said, the small time that Linden got on the PP w/ the Twins he looked great again.....for whatever reason, like last year, Trev starts the season on AV's 4th line & needs to re-prove himself over & over again. He was by FAR our best forward last night and was very effective as the right shot w/ the Twins last year....all he's doing is earning more & more icetime and it looks like Vigneault is reluctantly starting to give it back to him. He definitely wouldn't be top 6 on most teams but Trevor Linden is DEFINITELY top 6 on the Canucks whether AV likes it or not.

Reason? Our team is weighted down w/ Nazzy & Morrison's bloated contracts and we've loaded up on our back end w/ huge contracts in goal & on our defence overall. We're left w/ 3 legitimate top 6 forwards and 11 or so 3rd & 4th line guys. So far Trevor just happens to be the best of the bunch of 'em.

Jyrki21 · Post by **Jyrki21** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:06 pm

Power-play specialists aren't really going to be plus players, anyway, since they don't get pluses for goals scored.

In any event:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=220416&hubname=

"I'll give you an honest answer," said coach Alain Vigneault, explaining the move to reporters as he stood with his back to a wall at the Pacific Coliseum. "He doesn't need waivers and we need to move some guys."

ClamRussel · Post by **ClamRussel** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:09 pm

Jyrki21 wrote:http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=220416&hubname=

"I'll give you an honest answer," said coach Alain Vigneault, explaining the move to reporters as he stood with his back to a wall at the Pacific Coliseum. "He doesn't need waivers and we need to move some guys."

Why do the "need to move" players, trade or signing coming?

RC51 · Post by **RC51** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:11 pm

Very much a surprise - I would have expected, if anyone, that Mason Raymond would be sent down (after he's actually sat out a couple of games). I guess Vigneault and Nonis don't want to risk sending down Isbister or Ritchie (both of whom have contributed far less than Shannon), but then (1) they'd risk waivers; and (2) how would it look to have your "big" off season signings sent down to the minors?

Make you a bet - this is really just a way for Vingeault to bring up his favourite, Rypien. Although AV isn't anywhere near Crawford in playing favourites, he definitely does have favourites. I'm not saying it's not a good idea to have Rypien around (he'll add toughness, but I'm not sure much else), but I don't know that Rypien should take the place of Shannon. Maybe he should take the place of Burrows? Or even Cooke for that matter - neither of those two guys have added points or, more to their skill set, grit. In any event, mark my words - Rypien will be in the line up soon.

whistler · Post by **whistler** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:22 pm

The last interview I saw, Nonis said AV wanted to have a bigger crowd in the press box so he would have more roster options.

It would suite AV's style, allowing him to reward (and punish) with icetime using a wider brush.
He'd probably like to sit half the squad at the moment.

Nonis wants developing players in Manitoba instead of the press box.

Maybe this Shannon thing is a bit of a power struggle.

EDIT: I can't believe I let those Flyers 'bond' in my town as they prepared to humiliate the Canucks.
I feel soiled somehow.