Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for?

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

Moderator: Referees

Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

Doc,

You're missing my point. Of course teams won't play 110% flawless hockey game in game out over an 82 game season (plus playoffs). I'm just talking about general trends....and how teams perform when it matters most. Chicago and Pitsburgh are great examples of teams that "had their shit together" before winning their respective cups. In both cases, Chicago and Pitsburgh simply lost to a more talented Detroit team. There were no signficant "mental gaffs" from what I saw.

Anaheim in the 05/06 season looked like a team on a significant rise....and their loss to the Oilers that post-season was just a result of losing to a team on fire. Like my Chicago and Pitsburgh examples, there were no "mental gaffs"..and they won the cup a year later. There were no constant 'blown leads' or severe breakdowns in one facet of the game. I can call a spade a spade. It's not like I just go around blaming every single Canuck playoff loss on "mental fragility." Against Colorado in 01', Anaheim in 07', and even Detroit in 02', the Canucks simply lost to better teams (and yes - the Cloutier/Lidstrom incident did turn the tides a little, but Detroit was an absolute juggernaut that year anyways). Hell - even against Dallas in 07', I felt that Dallas probably deserved to win. Ditto for St. Louis in 03'.

Against Minnesota in 03' and Calgary in 04'? I felt the Canucks losses were a combination of

1) The Canucks not having a style of game that was conducive towards the 'clutch and grab' pre-lockout playoff era.
2) Both Minnesota and Calgary having a TREMENDOUSLY suited game for pre-lockout playoffs....along with the fact that both teams were on fire (and beat the Nucks in 7 games).

Against Chicago however, both times, I felt that the Canucks 'gave away' the series (particularly more in 09' than last season...since last season, the Hawks genuinely were the superior team.....even though they were still very beatable....and were definitely on the ropes after the first 100 minutes of the series).
dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by dr.dork »

Farhan Lalji wrote: You're missing my point.
Whatever. Every time the Canucks lose you trot out this "mental fragility" mumbo jumbo when 9 out 10 times the result was that the better team (skill) won or the team with better bounces (luck) won. Or maybe the team that was less injured won.

We lost to Chicago last year because they were better (skill). Burrows and Kesler were both hurt.

There is certainly a mental aspect to this game, and a skill, luck and physical aspect too. Part of the mental aspect is very hard to turn on and off (probably best to term this as "confidence") and part of it is easier to turn on and off (effort). Part of the physical aspect is injury, and part is how your body is feeling (sickness or fatigue).

But no, it couldn't possibly be all of those things that cause variation, it must be "mental fragility" and I don't even know what that means other than "if you didn't win the championship you were mentally fragile". By that definition I guess the Canucks are mentally fragile.

What I do know is when the 'nucks don't win the cup Farhan will be there patting himself on the back and claiming there is his proof that the Canucks didn't win because they are mentally fragile.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

dr.dork wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote: You're missing my point.
Whatever. Every time the Canucks lose you trot out this "mental fragility" mumbo jumbo when 9 out 10 times the result was that the better team (skill) won or the team with better bounces (luck) won. Or maybe the team that was less injured won.
Errrrr......no. You saw the examples that I cited right? (i.e. our losses to Anaheim, Colorado, Detroit, Calgary, Minnesota). I even admitted that our victories against Dallas in 07' and St. Louis in 03' were undeserving. I am simply calling a spade a spade.
We lost to Chicago last year because they were better (skill). Burrows and Kesler were both hurt.
And I admitted as such. Still - I think that series was for the taking and we definitely had Chicago on the ropes (i.e. a dominating game 1 victory and a solid lead in Game 2).
There is certainly a mental aspect to this game, and a skill, luck and physical aspect too. Part of the mental aspect is very hard to turn on and off (probably best to term this as "confidence") and part of it is easier to turn on and off (effort). Part of the physical aspect is injury, and part is how your body is feeling (sickness or fatigue).
I'm not debating as to whether there are other aspects of the game. All I'm doing is pointing out which aspect the Canucks need (significant) work on.
But no, it couldn't possibly be all of those things that cause variation, it must be "mental fragility" and I don't even know what that means other than "if you didn't win the championship you were mentally fragile". By that definition I guess the Canucks are mentally fragile.
I don't know what to say at this point. You either see it or you don't. :?
What I do know is when the 'nucks don't win the cup Farhan will be there patting himself on the back and claiming there is his proof that the Canucks didn't win because they are mentally fragile.
Noope. I'll simply call a spade a spade. If the Nucks put forth a solid effort and lose to a better team, I'll call it (as I did back in 01', 02', 03', 04', and 07').
User avatar
LotusBlossom
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2460
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Metro Vancouver
Contact:

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by LotusBlossom »

I feel like we're on a track going round and round and passing batons.

They stunk up the joint Saturday, with a better effort but still lost on Sunday. Up and over, prepare for next game but it certainly would be nice to beat the Blackhawks and shut up the critics and the pseudo-psychoanalysis that is happening everywhere, not just this board.
parfois, je veux juste laisser tinber un coude volant sur le monde
dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by dr.dork »

Farhan Lalji wrote: Noope. I'll simply call a spade a spade. If the Nucks put forth a solid effort and lose to a better team, I'll call it (as I did back in 01', 02', 03', 04', and 07').
You're calling a duck a spade. The only fact is they lost. Saying they lost because of "mental fragility" is a leap of faith.

You're calling the Sedin's mentally fragile. These are two hockey players that put up with almost 10 years of abuse at the hands of the Vancouver media AND so-called fans. Yes, they must be mentally fragile. And to prove it, they signed here long term. And 3 months after collecting the Art Ross and Hart trophies you are silly enough to trot out this mental fragility gibberish.

So yes, when it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, old Farhan says it must be a spade.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

I wasn't specifically pointing out the twins, but yes, I don't think they play the same way in the playoffs/Olympics as they do in the regular season. While the drop in level isn't as drastic as....Joe Thornton's per se, there is still a slight drop. They seem to be very similar to Markus Naslund in this regard. Like Naslund, they manage to be PPG players, but their points tend to come in bunches. And like Naslund, they appear to be very invisible when they aren't putting up the points.

Compare this to Pavel Bure in 1994. In the 1st round against Calgary that year, Bure wasn't getting many points...but he was an absolute TERROR almost every time he stepped out on the ice. Bure was being double teamed and triple teamed as a result. Iginla in 2004 - same thing. Even if he wasn't racking up points, he had that "presence" about him...and it manifested in so many different ways. Guys like Yzerman, Sakic, etc., etc. ...all of the same mold. Linden pre 1997; same mold.

Luongo in 07 playoffs --> THAT is what I'm talking about.
Kesler during these past Olympics --> THAT is what I'm talking about.

I have NEVER seen that from the twins when it has mattered most....and I hope that changes. Regular season glory is one thing, but its never translated at the Olympic and/or Playoff level...and you're kidding yourself if you think it has.
User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by the toucan kid »

I have NEVER seen that from the twins when it has mattered most....and I hope that changes. Regular season glory is one thing, but its never translated at the Olympic and/or Playoff level...and you're kidding yourself if you think it has.
What exactly are the Twins supposed to do besides produce points? They don't really have any other aspect to their game that they can contribute with... frankly their playoff stats are just fine if you look at them, 06/07 aside.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

the toucan kid wrote:
I have NEVER seen that from the twins when it has mattered most....and I hope that changes. Regular season glory is one thing, but its never translated at the Olympic and/or Playoff level...and you're kidding yourself if you think it has.
What exactly are the Twins supposed to do besides produce points? They don't really have any other aspect to their game that they can contribute with... frankly their playoff stats are just fine if you look at them, 06/07 aside.
I don't expect Daniel Sedin to throw a tantrum when facing Dave Bolland.

I would just like to see the same 'dominance' (or even a greater level of 'dominance') from the twins when the playoffs hit. You can't justifiably tell me that their game in the playoffs/Olympics is the same as it is during the regular season.
GETTHIS
AHL Prospect
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by GETTHIS »

Not Fit at Forty...they still don't have the stuff to bring Stanley home.AND WON'T - Not as long as Luongo is here. The Porturgese princess is soft in the noodle. He's hit his peak, won't make more cash than he's not earning now ...yeah yeah, i know the big paddle saves ....oooooooo , no other goalie in the leauge can possibly do that. His ego won't allow for a back up roll...that's just asking for Favre-esque drama and distraction. I think Luongo would be just as happy cashing in his poker chips and joining the Full Tilt tour bouncing the lil Portugese bun oon his tweaky knee.

He can't beat the Blackhawks and won't puck stop the Nucks past the Kings. Just being a realist, LA bounces Vancouver in the first round.

UNLESS........ Luongo gets sent to the homeland and a habs jersey...and our boy comes home.
Price for Looo...one piece of the puzzle that sadly won't happen soon enough.

Yeah, paying big bucks for boooooooooooooring hockey. Not inspired and neither is my wallet.
User avatar
nucklehead_88
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:55 pm
Location: Maple Ridge B.C.

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by nucklehead_88 »

GETTHIS wrote:Not Fit at Forty...they still don't have the stuff to bring Stanley home.AND WON'T - Not as long as Luongo is here. The Porturgese princess is soft in the noodle. He's hit his peak, won't make more cash than he's not earning now ...yeah yeah, i know the big paddle saves ....oooooooo , no other goalie in the leauge can possibly do that. His ego won't allow for a back up roll...that's just asking for Favre-esque drama and distraction. I think Luongo would be just as happy cashing in his poker chips and joining the Full Tilt tour bouncing the lil Portugese bun oon his tweaky knee.

He can't beat the Blackhawks and won't puck stop the Nucks past the Kings. Just being a realist, LA bounces Vancouver in the first round.

UNLESS........ Luongo gets sent to the homeland and a habs jersey...and our boy comes home.
Price for Looo...one piece of the puzzle that sadly won't happen soon enough.

Yeah, paying big bucks for boooooooooooooring hockey. Not inspired and neither is my wallet.

dont want price.....ever
"HE WILL PLAY, YOU KNOW HE'LL PLAY, HE'LL PLAY ON CRUTCHES...."

Jim Robson
dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by dr.dork »

Farhan Lalji wrote: I would just like to see the same 'dominance' (or even a greater level of 'dominance') from the twins when the playoffs hit. You can't justifiably tell me that their game in the playoffs/Olympics is the same as it is during the regular season.
Maybe just maybe their play against Chicago was influenced by having a linemate with a broken wing ? Did you ever think of that ? Plus you can't blame the twins for the loss against Chicago. There is nothing wrong with the Sedins and they are actually very very good value for their money. You're the only one naive enough to start the Sedin bashing at this point of the season. Yes, Henrik has had a dry spell lately but that same guy who has had a dry spell is still sitting 1st (in the NHL) in assists and both Sedins are top 10 in scoring. So yes, I can tell you that their playoff play is consistent with their regular season play.

And if you want to talk about Kesler and team USA in the olympics, that is fine but team USA was mentally fragile. They beat team Canada (trounced, actually) the first time but couldn't win when it actually mattered. If I was Farhan, I would be harping on the mental fragility of team USA.

Team Sweden ? Do I even have to point out who the twins were playing with ? Or who was on the 2nd, 3rd or 4th lines ? Are you really going to argue the twins are to blame for team sweden not making it too far in the Olympics ? Come on, Farhan, you can do better than that.

It is nice that you jump off the bandwagon so soon, but your arguments aren't exactly sound.
User avatar
jchockey
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:46 am
Location: Vancouver, BC

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by jchockey »

Farhan Lalji wrote:I wasn't specifically pointing out the twins, but yes, I don't think they play the same way in the playoffs/Olympics as they do in the regular season. While the drop in level isn't as drastic as....Joe Thornton's per se, there is still a slight drop. They seem to be very similar to Markus Naslund in this regard. Like Naslund, they manage to be PPG players, but their points tend to come in bunches. And like Naslund, they appear to be very invisible when they aren't putting up the points.

Compare this to Pavel Bure in 1994. In the 1st round against Calgary that year, Bure wasn't getting many points...but he was an absolute TERROR almost every time he stepped out on the ice. Bure was being double teamed and triple teamed as a result. Iginla in 2004 - same thing. Even if he wasn't racking up points, he had that "presence" about him...and it manifested in so many different ways. Guys like Yzerman, Sakic, etc., etc. ...all of the same mold. Linden pre 1997; same mold.

Luongo in 07 playoffs --> THAT is what I'm talking about.
Kesler during these past Olympics --> THAT is what I'm talking about.

I have NEVER seen that from the twins when it has mattered most....and I hope that changes. Regular season glory is one thing, but its never translated at the Olympic and/or Playoff level...and you're kidding yourself if you think it has.
The only knock against the Sedins is that they can't step up their game in the playoffs. We lost to Chicago because they were more talented but also because they wanted to win more. I think that was pretty clear. The loss hurt but it shouldn't have been all that surprising. It's not a drop in their playing level it's the inability to raise it. Their stats are still good but when we count of them sometimes they do disappear. Let's make no mistake - this is a good team that has a good shot at the Cup but they're not lead by a Richards, Toews, or Iginla. We'll have to make do with what we've got and see how well Vancouver responds in year 3.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

jchockey wrote: It's not a drop in their playing level it's the inability to raise it. Their stats are still good but when we count of them sometimes they do disappear. Let's make no mistake - this is a good team that has a good shot at the Cup but they're not lead by a Richards, Toews, or Iginla. We'll have to make do with what we've got and see how well Vancouver responds in year 3.
Excellent points, and I'm glad you made the distinction between "drop in play" and "inability to raise it" (I agree with you 100%).

Contrary to what others on here might think, I don't dislike the Sedins'. I actually like them a lot and think they are excellent players. I would just like to see more from them when it matters most.

In defense of last year however, injuries to Burrows and Kesler made the Sedins' job extremely difficult last year against the Hawks.

I'm not exactly sure what I expect out of the Sedins', but I do know that I expect more. It's that PRESENCE...if you want to call it that. Linden, Bure, and McLean had that in 94'. Luongo had that in 07'. Kesler had that in the Olympics this past year. Iginla in 04' is an example. Sakic in 1996, etc. If I didn't think the Sedin's were talented enough to do THAT, then I wouldn't be on their case.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8371
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Island Nucklehead »

Farhan Lalji wrote: In defense of last year however, injuries to Burrows and Kesler made the Sedins' job extremely difficult last year against the Hawks.

I'm not exactly sure what I expect out of the Sedins', but I do know that I expect more. It's that PRESENCE...if you want to call it that. Linden, Bure, and McLean had that in 94'. Luongo had that in 07'. Kesler had that in the Olympics this past year. Iginla in 04' is an example. Sakic in 1996, etc. If I didn't think the Sedin's were talented enough to do THAT, then I wouldn't be on their case.
Right. You need your best players to be your best players. But you also need MORE.

Sure, Toews got the Conn Smythe, but Fugly scored 11 times (T-team lead).
In 2007 Andy McDonald led Anaheim with 10 goals.
Crosby and Malkin led Pittsburgh to game 7 of the finals in 09, but Talbot had 2 goals in the W (8 in the playoffs).
Brind'Amours heroics got Carolina a cup in 06.
Fedotenko in '04.

The point is you not only need your best players to be at their best in the playoffs, you need the supporting cast to show up. Frankly, with how awful Burrows and Kesler were, and how our defense was decimated by injuries, it's shocking we made it as far as we did. Until we get the balanced scoring, survive the injury bug, get the unexpected revelation from a depth player, clutch goaltending, and the right bounces/calls/luck/karma, we're not going to win it. That goes for every team in the parity-fest that is the new NHL.

There is a lot more to worry about (health, depth scoring, defensive zone play etc.) than how the Sedins are going to play. If they keep playing at a point/game pace in the playoffs and we get some of the other stuff, we'll have a chance.
Joe Rockhead
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 468
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:19 pm
Location: North Delta

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Joe Rockhead »

First things first.

When I started this thread I was HAMMERED!!!

Secondly it had nothing to do with the Canucks Hawks game. Aside from the unanswered Boland slew foot on Sedin.

Its about the state of the game and the medias pussification of NHL hockey.

I love open ice hits, head shot, knockouts, concussion or not.

I love sticking up for teamates, whoevers on the ice should answer the bell.

I love fights, scrums, facewashes, intimidation, line brawls and general mayhem.

I love when two enforcers go toe to toe at the drop of the puck. Staged or not I don't f-ing care I just love it.

I love it when a guy like Richards calls out a punk like subban.

If nancyboys like Lansberg, Pratt, Taylor and the rest of the sissys in the media don't like rough, tough hockey then they should stick to womens hockey. No hits, lots of skill, just what they should like.

Leave real hockey to the redneck, beer swilling , fighting in the stands hockey fans. Like me.
Don Cherry for P.M.
Post Reply