2013 FA Thread

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

Moderator: Referees

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby Reefer2 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Making the playoffs isn't the issue, it is how far this team will go in the playoffs that matters.

MG had a bit of a window to trade to players who were about to get NTC/NMC contracts who could make this team more successful in the playoffs but he didn't. I still hold out hope that this team will go far with a healthy lineup and like everyone says, once you make the playoffs anything can happen.
User avatar
Reefer2
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 967
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby Meds » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:38 pm

ukcanuck wrote:Hey Meds you oughta change your name to Murray Pessimism,

What's with the gloom? There's Chicago and LA that this team split games with last year and there's everyone else.


Listening to you one woukd think Gilly sat on his ass with a sad sack non playoff team last year...


Out in 5 to LA. No change.

Out in 4 to San Jose. Slight changes, mostly behind the bench.

Our two most inconsistent players, Bieksa and Edler, are still here. If the new coach can get these guys playing the way we know the CAN play, then this team will still be very good. If they are still as inconsistent as they have been, then the team will be one of the wild cards.

There were injuries and distractions, no question that they played a part, but I just don't think this team is a lock for a top 3 spot.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby ukcanuck » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:41 pm

Reefer2 wrote:Making the playoffs isn't the issue, it is how far this team will go in the playoffs that matters.

MG had a bit of a window to trade to players who were about to get NTC/NMC contracts who could make this team more successful in the playoffs but he didn't. I still hold out hope that this team will go far with a healthy lineup and like everyone says, once you make the playoffs anything can happen.

I think making the playoffs is the point because after that its a crap shoot.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby coco_canuck » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:44 pm

Meds wrote:Considering the surprises we see every year, it's foolish to write those teams off and pencil us in. That's just blind homerism, the Canucks are not "EASILY" top 3.


How is it blind homerism?

This is the same roster that has been a perennial 100 point team and while it's a veteran squad, no key player is well past his prime and there is still depth on this roster.

Go and have a gander through other teams' rosters and see how they stack up on paper.

The Canucks aren't a top 5 team in the league any longer but they're still very good, so it's rather amusing reading the doom and gloom you're espousing.

Meds wrote:Based on your "lack of expertise" we probably should never attribute Edler's mistakes to be brain cramps, we should just assume that he's overrated. Besides, it's not just who's going to thrive under Torts, it's also who is going to, most likely, have the more difficult time with the loss of their country club. :P


What are you going on about?

There are things we can measure with sight & stats and then there's reading minds.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby coco_canuck » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:46 pm

Meds wrote:So now we play arm-chair scout and speculate on how a guy with only a few seasons between the AHL and NHL, and whom we've seen play very little, will be an improvement on Ballard?

Oh, sorry, we'll play arm-chair psychologist instead and speculate on how a guy would probably play better under Torts.....

I think you should have stuck with your "decline to comment".

Moving on.


This is cute.

Ruffle your feathers much?

Meds wrote:Our two most inconsistent players, Bieksa and Edler, are still here. If the new coach can get these guys playing the way we know the CAN play, then this team will still be very good. If they are still as inconsistent as they have been, then the team will be one of the wild cards.


The biggest issue with your reasoning is that you place most of the blame of the Canucks lack of playoff success on Edler and Bieksa when they haven't been the part of the biggest issue.

It's pretty simple, the Canucks have not been able to score. Their relentless forecheck from 2011 hasn't been there. We haven't been able to get to the net and win enough battles along the boards and in front of the net.

Yes, Edler and Bieksa have struggled at key times but they're not to blame for the Canucks lack of playoff success these past two years.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby Meds » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:18 pm

coco_canuck wrote:
Meds wrote:So now we play arm-chair scout and speculate on how a guy with only a few seasons between the AHL and NHL, and whom we've seen play very little, will be an improvement on Ballard?

Oh, sorry, we'll play arm-chair psychologist instead and speculate on how a guy would probably play better under Torts.....

I think you should have stuck with your "decline to comment".

Moving on.


This is cute.

Ruffle your feathers much?



Not at all, personally I've always found you to be one of the most arrogant posters on here (old site too). Not because you flaunt knowledge, or trash people, but your are often just dismissive of other opinions and come off as if they are beneath you. So I personally found it amusing that you make a seemingly snide comment about playing arm-chair GM in regards to how some of our players will respond to Torts and then make a vey similar comment about how you think Ballard would have responded.....I suppose I found that cute.

But whatever...

coco wrote:
Meds wrote:Our two most inconsistent players, Bieksa and Edler, are still here. If the new coach can get these guys playing the way we know the CAN play, then this team will still be very good. If they are still as inconsistent as they have been, then the team will be one of the wild cards.


The biggest issue with your reasoning is that you place most of the blame of the Canucks lack of playoff success on Edler and Bieksa when they haven't been the part of the biggest issue.

It's pretty simple, the Canucks have not been able to score. Their relentless forecheck from 2011 hasn't been there. We haven't been able to get to the net and win enough battles along the boards and in front of the net.

Yes, Edler and Bieksa have struggled at key times but they're not to blame for the Canucks lack of playoff success these past two years.


No argument about the lack of a forecheck or the difficulty scoring. Some this can be attributed to injuries, and some of it, likely, to coaching. Edler's bumbling point work and mental screw ups that cost us offensive zone possession time and also goals against, and Bieksa's "casual lapses", have cost us as well.

I have wanted Bieksa gone since his comments (in the Province I think) is spring about not wanting or needing a coach who will crack the whip, and how he thinks they don't need that because they can keep themselves accountable and he thinks they know what it takes to win. That attitude seems to be what we see from #3 whenever Casual Kev shows up for a game.

I really do want to see Edler succeed and succeed here. I want him to make his $5M salary look like a steal of a deal. I just don't think he has the mental chops to do it. The whole bash on European and Scandinavian players is their heart and desire, that's the mental game, and it is a valid argument for some, it applies to NA players as well though. I think Edler falls into this category. Athletic talent, size, strength, lack of focus. I'm encouraged by what Torts said about him.....there will have to be something more there.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby dbr » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:32 pm

I'm sorry Meds, not to pile on but it's tough to take your posts seriously when you've claimed we're going to have trouble with a team like Nashville, who have followed up a 27th overall finish by signing a bunch of third liners and who will give a (talented, of course) 18 year old top four ice time on their blue line..

I guess if you take a super charitable view towards the Preds and a pessimistic view of the Canucks it makes sense.. which is of course exactly what you're doing here.

You've basically just assumed that half our top four blue liners will stink next year on top of the team looking similar to how it has the last two years missing Ryan Kesler ie. the straw that stirs the drink.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby coco_canuck » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:32 pm

Meds wrote:I have wanted Bieksa gone since his comments (in the Province I think) is spring about not wanting or needing a coach who will crack the whip, and how he thinks they don't need that because they can keep themselves accountable and he thinks they know what it takes to win. That attitude seems to be what we see from #3 whenever Casual Kev shows up for a game.


There was an Iian MacIntyre column a few months ago when he cited someone on the Canucks telling him (Coaching/Management) how Bieksa's game declines significantly when he plays past a certain amount of minutes.

An issue last playoffs was the big minutes Bieksa and Edler played compared to Garrison, who had been performing better than both of those players for much of the playoffs. The minutes have to be distributed better amongst the top 4 and the 3rd pair has to be trusted enough to not force the coach to overplay his go-to guys.

Another problem of course was the absence of Chris Tanev.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby Meds » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:58 pm

dbr wrote:I'm sorry Meds, not to pile on but it's tough to take your posts seriously when you've claimed we're going to have trouble with a team like Nashville, who have followed up a 27th overall finish by signing a bunch of third liners and who will give a (talented, of course) 18 year old top four ice time on their blue line..

I guess if you take a super charitable view towards the Preds and a pessimistic view of the Canucks it makes sense.. which is of course exactly what you're doing here.

You've basically just assumed that half our top four blue liners will stink next year on top of the team looking similar to how it has the last two years missing Ryan Kesler ie. the straw that stirs the drink.


That's ok, did any of us expect to lose 7-2 to the Oilers? We played them 4 times last year and had a 1-2-1 record against them.

Again, granted, injuries, etc.

We went 0-6-1 against San Jose last year (including the playoffs).

1-2 against the Ducks.

I suppose Nashville is a bit of a stretch, and we didn't lose to them last season, but a. 1-0 win.....they were always in that one. 7-4? We gave up 4 goals to a team of defensemen and 2nd and 3rd liners. But that's neither here nor there. My point is that, outside of the Flames, it's not a good idea to write off any of the teams in our division, because, between inconsistent officiating, puck luck, hockey gods, brain cramps, etc..... shit happens in the NHL. Like I said, I won't be surprised if we finish outside the playoffs next year, but I do expect the team to be good enough to be a wild card at least, and saying we're s lock for a top 3.....I just don't see it. I'm just not getting my hopes up until I see what the team looks like out there with a new voice and system coming from behind the bench.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby coco_canuck » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:15 pm

Meds wrote:Not at all, personally I've always found you to be one of the most arrogant posters on here (old site too). Not because you flaunt knowledge, or trash people, but your are often just dismissive of other opinions and come off as if they are beneath you. So I personally found it amusing that you make a seemingly snide comment about playing arm-chair GM in regards to how some of our players will respond to Torts and then make a vey similar comment about how you think Ballard would have responded.....I suppose I found that cute.


Well, some opinions are better than others.

It's not arm-chair GM I have a problem with, it's arm-chair psychologist.

We saw how Ballard fit in Vancouver under AV, he didn't. Ballard has some qualities Torts liked in New York, i.e. shot-blocking. AV didn't like it when his D held on to the puck too long in their own end, it was about quick movement up the ice, whether with a pass, dump out or straight rush. Ballard likes to circle back and look for holes to rush the puck, not something AV was fond of. I don't know how Torts would feel about Ballard's style of play but perhaps he would be more receptive and trusting in placing him in a larger role when the need arose.

Quite different from saying Edler's psyche won't hold up to Torts.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby dbr » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:31 pm

Meds wrote:That's ok, did any of us expect to lose 7-2 to the Oilers? We played them 4 times last year and had a 1-2-1 record against them.


Did you see the lineup we iced in that game? Honestly the game was meaningless to the Canucks (and you can see it in their lineup decisions.. 30s of ice time for Henrik, 20 minutes for Derek Joslin).

Again, granted, injuries, etc.


Well this part that you grant and then resume ignoring is huge for this team.

Did the Canucks takes steps this offseason to ensure that another run of injuries to their top six forwards or their top four defense won't be a crisis? Absolutely not but expecting that is completely unreasonable in a cap system - especially in a year where the ceiling falls and the best teams have to cut depth (something most top teams have done this offseason).

The best teams are able to cope with injuries due to having excellent young players able to take on more responsibility, and that's something the team has addressed this year (although we are still in the gap where we can't sign good enough free agents to fill all the holes and the younger players aren't there yet).

If we have another year of "injuries, etc" then this team won't perform anywhere near to where it should.. but if they stay healthy they are a lock to be near the top of the conference as usual.

We went 0-6-1 against San Jose last year (including the playoffs).

1-2 against the Ducks.

I suppose Nashville is a bit of a stretch, and we didn't lose to them last season, but a. 1-0 win.....they were always in that one. 7-4? We gave up 4 goals to a team of defensemen and 2nd and 3rd liners. But that's neither here nor there. My point is that, outside of the Flames, it's not a good idea to write off any of the teams in our division, because, between inconsistent officiating, puck luck, hockey gods, brain cramps, etc..... shit happens in the NHL. Like I said, I won't be surprised if we finish outside the playoffs next year, but I do expect the team to be good enough to be a wild card at least, and saying we're s lock for a top 3.....I just don't see it. I'm just not getting my hopes up until I see what the team looks like out there with a new voice and system coming from behind the bench.


You're right. And if you draw conclusions of "shit happens" happening over 48 games you might end up being mislead.. a full season is much more opportunity for those ups and downs to even out.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby darren » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:53 pm

Meds wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:There were injuries and distractions, no question that they played a part, but I just don't think this team is a lock for a top 3 spot.


If the new divisional alignment had existed last year, we would have finished in the top 3 (barely, 59pts to SJ 57).
Of course, if the new divisional alignment had existed last year, there would have been more games against LA, SJ, Ana, Phx and fewer against Col and Min. On the whole, that's worse for us.
Other than coaching (which may or may not be an improvement), the Canucks have added no significant pieces so far and have lost CS. I like that trade but Horvat probably doesn't help us this year.
If the usual ingredients for being lucky are in place (we stay healthy, some of the new bit players work out, the core plays up to potential) we can easily finish top 3, but we are by no means a lock, and we could just as easily miss the playoffs. Over the long haul, Aquaman's financial resources will always keep us competitive, but if we're going to miss the playoffs for a year, this might be the year.
User avatar
darren
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:45 am

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby Meds » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:07 pm

coco_canuck wrote:
Meds wrote:I have wanted Bieksa gone since his comments (in the Province I think) is spring about not wanting or needing a coach who will crack the whip, and how he thinks they don't need that because they can keep themselves accountable and he thinks they know what it takes to win. That attitude seems to be what we see from #3 whenever Casual Kev shows up for a game.


There was an Iian MacIntyre column a few months ago when he cited someone on the Canucks telling him (Coaching/Management) how Bieksa's game declines significantly when he plays past a certain amount of minutes.

An issue last playoffs was the big minutes Bieksa and Edler played compared to Garrison, who had been performing better than both of those players for much of the playoffs. The minutes have to be distributed better amongst the top 4 and the 3rd pair has to be trusted enough to not force the coach to overplay his go-to guys.

Another problem of course was the absence of Chris Tanev.


That's an interesting point, I hadn't seen that article, but it makes sense, and I would venture to say it probably holds true for many top 4 defensemen in the league. That excuses the brain cramps.....sorta. It doesn't excuse a mindset that can't see the writing on the wall.

If the same stat tracking showed similar results for Edler, well I wouldn't be surprised.....and maybe Torts can fix that. Gillis will need to stock the blueline accordingly tho.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby ESQ » Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:39 am

coco_canuck wrote:It's pretty simple, the Canucks have not been able to score. Their relentless forecheck from 2011 hasn't been there. We haven't been able to get to the net and win enough battles along the boards and in front of the net.

Yes, Edler and Bieksa have struggled at key times but they're not to blame for the Canucks lack of playoff success these past two years.

When the team was playing well, the D, particularly Edler and Bieksa, were key components of the offensive pressure through intelligent passes, smart pinches, and accurate shots on net.

I agree with most of your points but the AV system was dominated by defensemen contributing offensively, both in terms of setting up plays but also in terms of points production. Having those two 23:00 Dmen struggle impacted the team's ability to score.
ESQ
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: 2013 FA Thread

Postby coco_canuck » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:24 am

ESQ wrote:When the team was playing well, the D, particularly Edler and Bieksa, were key components of the offensive pressure through intelligent passes, smart pinches, and accurate shots on net.

I agree with most of your points but the AV system was dominated by defensemen contributing offensively, both in terms of setting up plays but also in terms of points production. Having those two 23:00 Dmen struggle impacted the team's ability to score.


It had an impact yes, but the Canucks actually didn't have too much trouble getting the puck to the offensive zone, it was maintaining offensive pressure and creating good scoring chances that were big challenges for them.

Also, the Canucks took a more defensive posture in the first round the last couple of years not having the D-men pinch as liberally until the series began getting out of hand.

You won't find many posters who place a greater importance on having solid puck-moving Ds than I, but I still maintain that Bieksa and Edler's struggles, as infuriating as they were at times, weren't the main source of the Canucks struggle to score in the playoffs.

VS the Kings the Canucks were missing Daniel for the first three games and Kesler was a shell of himself with his shoulder injury and the team really struggled to create offensive opportunities.

VS the Sharks, Kesler had one strong game but was nowhere near the same two-way, play-driving force he can be, they missed Booth on the wing and the Sedin twins never got it going.

If you look at the shot stats in the series, the Canucks were getting pucks to the net, meaning they had offensive time, it just wasn't all that effective.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dchrist2, Google [Bot] and 3 guests