Incredibly Disturbing Trends for the Canucks

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

Moderator: Referees

Post Reply
User avatar
mattola
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 1853
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:44 am

Incredibly Disturbing Trends for the Canucks

Post by mattola » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:52 am

- We are starting to DIE on the Road now creeping to .500. I suppose .500 would not be terrible on the road however to really be considered a contender you must dominate on both side of the scheduel.

- 0-15-1 when trailing after 2 periods (I know our record is something stupid like 20-0-1 when leading) however this shows we have no drive to come back when needed. you only get 4 chances in the playoffs to figure that out before you are DONE

- Naslund slipping back to start of season Naslund

- Canucks slipping back to start of season Canucks

- Someone Stole MVP Bobby Lou and replaced him with early Season Bobby Lou

- Scoring is gone past Sedins

Great part is that we are still positioned nicely however a couple more losses could drop us to ninth...... NINTH????

This conference is too tight to be slipping like this. man you have to play consistent over .600 hockey to make sure you make the playoffs alone.

Shake the funk boys or the media and fans will be crying louder soon enough...

Detroit up Next should bring out our best and then the Kings which bring out our worse...

make a STATEMENT on BOTH..

GO CANUCKS GO

User avatar
the Cunning Linguist
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 600
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 10:18 am
Location: If not in here then offthepost.ORG...
Contact:

Post by the Cunning Linguist » Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:46 pm

Add to that, the PK looks nothing like last season's No. 1 overall...

Shots on goal are down 20% from last season...

Calgary, Minnesota, Colorado and now also Edmonton are winning games...

Central Division teams are that much tougher to play against...

0-4 against San Jose... Split those games and Vancouver has more breathing room in the NW.
Image
Image

User avatar
Todd Bersnoozi
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2259
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm

Post by Todd Bersnoozi » Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:17 pm

It's a long season. Every team will go through its slump and even Lou will have some stretches with some crappy games.

User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 7594
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Post by Cornuck » Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:22 pm

I think the 0-4 against San Jose shows that we're not fully contenders yet, although we can compete with any team on any night. The coming from behind stat speaks as much about our "drive" as is does against our ability to score. It just shows that in times when we need goals, and the other team is tightning up, we can't do it. And what's playoff hockey? Teams tighten up their game, and once again our lack of scoring will bite us in the ass.

Last time I looked, the Kings had more goals than us - does that sound like we're contenders?
2018-19 - The Road to 82

User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:40 pm

I think the 0-4 against San Jose shows that we're not fully contenders yet, although we can compete with any team on any night.
As far as I was concerned with our current lineup we never were contenders ... a decent team that could steal a few wins and possibly a playoff round with Lou for sure but not a team that could win the Cup ... lots of holes ... lots of consistency problems. Even the Sedin's this year have been somewhat "streaky" in their scoring.

As far as the record goes for losing after two periods ... I don't think that that is unusual. Most teams have a losing record.

We ran a team a few years ago with Bert/Nazzy in their prime ... we had the offence but the defence and goaltending wasn't enough ... now we apparently seem to be somewhat on the other side of the pendulum ....

It's hard to find that exact balance to win it all ... why there is only one winner every year and why you don't see teams win 2, 3 or 4 championships in a row any more.

Grizz

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 11449
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:04 pm

I disagree about the team a few years ago Grizz. The defence was prett solid, perhaps the styl could have been tightened a kunthair, but the real achilles heel on that squad was Dan Cloutier. He can't even play in the NHL anymore.................. what does that say ???? :?

User avatar
sic puppy
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:37 pm

Post by sic puppy » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:27 pm

Cornuck wrote: Last time I looked, the Kings had more goals than us - does that sound like we're contenders?
What ??

Didn't know that any team that scored more goals than another was more of a contender in any league.

User avatar
Jyrki21
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:51 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON
Contact:

Post by Jyrki21 » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:39 pm

Cornuck wrote:Last time I looked, the Kings had more goals than us - does that sound like we're contenders?
The 2005-06 Canucks outscored most teams in the NHL, but it didn't end up helping their golf game a whole lot.
Image

User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:37 am

Blob Mckenzie wrote:I disagree about the team a few years ago Grizz. The defence was prett solid, perhaps the styl could have been tightened a kunthair, but the real achilles heel on that squad was Dan Cloutier. He can't even play in the NHL anymore.................. what does that say ???? :?
Fair comment Blob ... certainly Cloutier was our achilles heal ... I probably generalized it too much when I said just our D.

Back then our strength and bread and butter was the offence ... we went how it went and didn't rely so much on the defensive aspect of things. Looking back I pulled some of the basic stats (I think 02-03 was one of our big years so I grabbed that) ...interesting....

3.22 ave goals per game - 2nd overall
2.54 GAA per game 11th overall

I certainly think our offence was good enough to win but the GAA was weaker ... mostly likely due to Cloutier as you said ... Lou in there would have almost undoubtedly given us a better GAA ... makes ya wonder if it were possible what we could have done with him. Pendulum really swung the other way the last couple of years though.

Grizz

User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1069
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by DonCherry4PM » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:29 am

Just to contrast those stats with today:

(GFA) average goals per game is 2.53 - 22nd (ahead of both the Sharks and Ducks)
our current GAA is 2.23 - 3rd overall (Det -1 and SJ -2)
that is only a .3 difference whereas 02-03 the margin was quite a bit larger with the difference being .68
Our save percentage is best in the league with 92.0 (thank you Luongo)
While our SOGA is 14th at 29.2 - surprisingly high given our super defensive style
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu

User avatar
jchockey
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:46 am
Location: Vancouver, BC

Post by jchockey » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:36 am

DonCherry4PM wrote: While our SOGA is 14th at 29.2 - surprisingly high given our super defensive style
That's always been a major, major problem. We do a fairly good job of keep the shots to the oustide, but letting Luongo make the size will have its costs. He will get fatigued and as good as he is he will let in the bad goal once in awhile.

We are also not a very good shot-blocking team.

User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:04 pm

jchockey wrote:
DonCherry4PM wrote: While our SOGA is 14th at 29.2 - surprisingly high given our super defensive style
That's always been a major, major problem. We do a fairly good job of keep the shots to the oustide, but letting Luongo make the size will have its costs. He will get fatigued and as good as he is he will let in the bad goal once in awhile.

We are also not a very good shot-blocking team.
I would have to agree JC that the SOGA doesn't mean alot to me consider most of the chances (I think) are from the outside ... not quality scoring chances.

Where are we at with shot blocking ... I didn't think we were that bad ... maybe I'm wrong.

Grizz

whistler
CC Veteran
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:47 pm
Location: Whistler

Post by whistler » Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:16 pm

Loungo, with the '02-'03 team, might have challenged for the Cup, but blaming it all on Cloutier isn't the complete answer.

The style of play under Burke and Crawford was designed to be entertaining and fill the building with fans.
It worked like a charm but left glaring holes in a team hoping to go all the way.

We were essentially playing a 3.5 - 1.5 style ( averaging 3 1/2 forwards up ice with 1 1/2 defence hanging back).
We had way more offensive punch with the WCE and other forward lines joined on almost every rush by one defenceman.

But we also got beaten spectacularly on a lot of ocassions and Cloutier faced far more 'quality' scoring chances than Luongo sees under our current system of 2-1-2 or 1-2-2 with all five skaters expected to backcheck right to our crease. Odd man rushes on Cloutier were common place.

Crawford's top forwards did not back check. They regrouped in the neutral zone and hoped our defence could chip the puck out so they could get back on the attack.
The defence played aggresively and it often worked.

But that's why we sucked when trying to sit back and hold a one-goal lead...we didn't know how and Cloutier wasn't Luongo when it came time to make those huge game winning saves.

AV has a more sound hockey system though it is less entertaining but, not only are we lacking the skill set of the WCE in its prime, what forwards we have don't have the energy to attack after burning so much energy in our own zone.

Our aging veterans rarely look as dangerous as our youngsters even though they have a better skill set. The veterans put more pucks in the net but they're too tired to create enough of those quality chances.

AV stresses responsible, positional hockey. It could be argued that it is good strategy and it does work more often than not but the downside I see is a lot of guys playing as if afraid of making a mistake rather than aggressively moving on the puck.
That hesitation often means an aggressive opposition gets control of the puck and we're right back to chasing again, getting more tired by the shift.

We refer to 'puck luck' and 'getting the bounces' but it really just means we were playing aggressively and not making mistakes, forcing the other team to worry and hesitate.

I expect we're going to get beat tonight...possibly smoked...but I'm not so worried about facing Detroit in the finals.
Our guys are good enough to challenge them if they can tweak a couple of details in their game.

Part of trusting your system is trusting that four guys will cover your back while you aggressively pursue the puck and having the coach accept that gamble as part of the game.

SRsez
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:13 pm

Post by SRsez » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:32 am

Grizzly wrote:Back then our strength and bread and butter was the offence ... we went how it went and didn't rely so much on the defensive aspect of things.
Back then? When? 70-71, 80-81, 90-91 or 00-01? The team has always gone how their scoring goes.

The problem with the Canucks has always been it's inability to score on 16 chances, while making it easy for the opponent to score on the 2 or 3 chances they get.

For 40 damn years now.
Real hockey fans refuse to listen to the Idiot(tm)

Post Reply