GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADIO: 1

This forum is to discuss game day happenings. New threads will be posted for each game.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
dhabums
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by dhabums »

Larry Goodenough wrote: I think this "physical deterrent" expectation is just an old habit from simplistic thinking, perpetrated largely from a reactionary media looking to draw attention to themselves with a chicken little story.
I disagree, I'd say it is more basic human nature. It's even possibly derived from decades of hockey.

--

Look no further than this board. Follow the rules or be banned. People then start to follow the rules. Time we start making the rules.
dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by dbr »

But being banned or having your drivers license suspended aren't analogous to getting a punch in the face or having your goalie run... they are analogous to getting a big fat suspension from the league.

Your analogies should be closer to advocating we ram people on the road when we're not happy with their driving, or attack fellow posters on this board if they break the rules.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Potatoe1 »

dhabums wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote:
Having a tougher line up will cut "some" of the crap, (i.e Marchant speed bagging Daniel) but the hit we saw last night is a terrible example yet people will use it to further the naritive which was started in the finals.
The narrative didn't start in the Finals, it was just re-opened on hockey's biggest stage. I will repeat this for you, nobody thinks Methot will magically stop last night because he might have to fight. It is about the level of respect/fear your opponents have going into the game and how they will act. There is no reason to look over your shoulder when playing the Canucks.
You responded to my post and you clearly did not understand the point.

I was not saying that toughness wouldn't help this team nor was I saying that we shouldn't have gone a little harder after Methot.

What I was saying is that because of what happened in the finals, the media and fans are going to over react to every situation even situations like last night where our toughness level really wasn't relevant to the hit delivered on Henrik.

The current narrative is that the Canucks aren't tough enough and you can beat them by pushing them around. The media and fans seem destined to take very poor examples (like the one we saw last night) and use them to further their own story.

This fan just isn't buying it.

I don't think you can beat the Canuck's by trying to push them around and taking cheap shots. I think that teams who try this will find themselves on the losing end most nights.

I don't believe they are less likely to "stick up" for there stars then a lot of teams, and I don't believe they are more prone to diving then a lot of teams.

There was a ton of nonsense created by media during the run to the finals, most of it is simply junk that should be ignored.
Larry Goodenough
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:43 am

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Larry Goodenough »

dhabums wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote:
Having a tougher line up will cut "some" of the crap, (i.e Marchant speed bagging Daniel) but the hit we saw last night is a terrible example yet people will use it to further the naritive which was started in the finals.
The narrative didn't start in the Finals, it was just re-opened on hockey's biggest stage. I will repeat this for you, nobody thinks Methot will magically stop last night because he might have to fight. It is about the level of respect/fear your opponents have going into the game and how they will act. There is no reason to look over your shoulder when playing the Canucks.

If we are going to allow other teams to do what they want then it will continue to happen. I am not talking about suspension worthy things because that isn't the issue. This team shouldn't allow their tickets to success to get touched by anyone without the possible fear of retribution. You are not going to stop everyone ever, but we have taken the opposite approach of allowing anyone to act as they please.

No slash, no punch in the head, no hit after the whistle should go unpunished. While some may celebrate PP goals in November, I'll take healthy Sedins in June rather than the annual "they are injured" stories.
One more time, if that is the Canucks response, then as an opponent, I will slash, punch and hit a Sedin after the whistle every chance I get knowing it will draw a reaction and a penalty.

In today's NHL, few players fear retribution. If they do, it's tempered by the millions of dollars they will earn by being the type of player that runs the Sedins and then puts his team on the powerplay by drawing retribution.
User avatar
KeyserSoze
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:39 am

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by KeyserSoze »

Potatoe1 wrote: What I was saying is that because of what happened in the finals, the media and fans are going to over react to every situation even situations like last night where our toughness level really wasn't relevant to the hit delivered on Henrik.
Pot, it doesn't really matter what happened in the finals or what media/people are saying about it...when Marc Methot takes a cheap shot run at your Captain like that there needs to be some consequences.
Potatoe1 wrote: The current narrative is that the Canucks aren't tough enough and you can beat them by pushing them around. The media and fans seem destined to take very poor examples (like the one we saw last night) and use them to further their own story.

This fan just isn't buying it.

I don't think you can beat the Canuck's by trying to push them around and taking cheap shots. I think that teams who try this will find themselves on the losing end most nights.
I agree, and the Jackets did find themselves losing last night.

I also agree that is not why Boston beat the Canucks in the finals.

But the point is that if someone is going to make a point of taking a run at 22, 33, 17, etc they need to actually beleive that there might be consequences...maybe not on that shift, or maybe not even to them directly, but someone on their team will be paying the price if you take a cheap shot on one of our star players. And it certainly does not take a goon to do this.
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 19129
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Hockey Widow »

Points won in Oct are just as valuable as points won in April. We got the 2 points. Maybe we don't get the 2 points if we run around and try to extract revenge for the hit. I think a league suspension of 4-5 games would serve more of a deterrent than any revenge the Canucks could have meted out. But I don't think the play will garner a suspension, and it should. Thats the message that needs to get sent about respect. Don't wait for a player to get a serious, potentially career threatening injury. Hammer the guy right now with 4-5 games and he doesn't do it again. Punch him in the face and he walks away laughing.
The only HW the Canucks need
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Potatoe1 »

Larry Goodenough wrote: One more time, if that is the Canucks response, then as an opponent, I will slash, punch and hit a Sedin after the whistle every chance I get knowing it will draw a reaction and a penalty.
Correct... Unfortunately some fans and media live in the alternate reality where logic just doesn't exist.
n today's NHL, few players fear retribution. If they do, it's tempered by the millions of dollars they will earn by being the type of player that runs the Sedins and then puts his team on the powerplay by drawing retribution.
Raffi Torrez is not a good fighter but every time he steps on the ice he is looking to crush people. I doubt he knows or cares who is in the other teams line up.

He's played like that for almost a decade and I honestly cant remember any situation where he received any type of physical retribution for his actions.

Sure he's had to fight a few times but for the most part his fights are just some hugging and a few love taps.

A tough line up isn't going to detour players of his ilk, what is going to detour them is penalties and suspensions.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by UWSaint »

Bieksa and Hamhuis have looked like the two defensemen most in regular season mode, but having two defensemen chase a guy behind the net to get in a hit is going to lead to a chance. Ginger didn't bail them out, but looks like the goalternder most in regular season mode.

Jeff Carter + Rick Nash = Daniel + Henrik ... playing one handed.

If Sturm and Sammy are starting slowly, the answer is not to "promote" Higgins to the second line and make your third line weaker. At least the Canucks have two solid lines now, and this is the third line that has the most potential of being a traditional third line. Sammuelsson and Sturm are not strong enough defensively (though still awaiting final judgment on Sturm).

Without a complete second line, silent 3 made the second line look almost dangerous at times. If he plays like that, then I can see him staying up and sliding over to wing, getting time on the 2nd PP unit. Very important set of games for silent 3 coming up.

When Kesler and Raymond return, there will be 4 good lines and 3 pretty good D pairings, and two very good goaltenders.

Until everyone else gets hurt.

But watch other teams play hockey; the Canucks strength is their depth.

And one of the best, if not the best, first lines in hockey.

Ballard should get 2d pp time, but not because I think he's better in the zone than the 5 who've gotten time so far (2, 3, 6, 23, 26). Hamhuis' pass to silent 3 in the second showed Hamhuis can read a play and execute. But Ballard should be in because the second unit needs Ballard as an entry-into-the-zone alternative. The second group looked fine set up, but was much weaker (now for two games in a row) at getting set up. Salo's a dinosaur, Burrows fumbles, and silent 3 doesn't hit the line with speed.

All in time, Chris Tanev. But, geez, ten years ago Bryan Helmer was the Canucks' 6th D.

Volpatti is this year's Desbiens.

Hansen gets the unsung player of the game from me. Deserved second assist and great forecheck that led to a turnover and (IIRC) a BJ penalty.

3rd period is a charm. Canucks should start home games an hour later so they can close it out in the Second.
Hono_rary Canadian
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Potatoe1 »

KeyserSoze wrote: Pot, it doesn't really matter what happened in the finals or what media/people are saying about it...when Marc Methot takes a cheap shot run at your Captain like that there needs to be some consequences.
People are acting like the team just skated away.....

Watch the replay, after the hit there was a pretty lively scrum (given who was on the ice). Later in the game Burrows ran their goalie and apparently both Bieksa and Volpatti tried to fight Methot.

What exactly should they have done beyond that?
User avatar
Rumsfeld
CC Legend
Posts: 4272
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:48 pm
Location: Raqqa

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Rumsfeld »

Potatoe1 wrote:
KeyserSoze wrote: Pot, it doesn't really matter what happened in the finals or what media/people are saying about it...when Marc Methot takes a cheap shot run at your Captain like that there needs to be some consequences.
What exactly should they have done beyond that?
Heads. Spikes. Walls.

Image
Chairman of the Jim Benning Appreciation Society
User avatar
BladesofSteel
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1852
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by BladesofSteel »

Potatoe1 wrote: Pure Nonsense.
Good post Tate.
Potatoe1 wrote: Ballard was good and only playing him 13 min is an absolute joke.
The main reasoning for the lack of ice-time in my mind is that Ballard isn't seeing any special teams. The bulk of his 13 min is 5 on 5.
User avatar
BladesofSteel
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1852
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by BladesofSteel »

Potatoe1 wrote:
KeyserSoze wrote: Pot, it doesn't really matter what happened in the finals or what media/people are saying about it...when Marc Methot takes a cheap shot run at your Captain like that there needs to be some consequences.
People are acting like the team just skated away.....

Watch the replay, after the hit there was a pretty lively scrum (given who was on the ice). Later in the game Burrows ran their goalie and apparently both Bieksa and Volpatti tried to fight Methot.

What exactly should they have done beyond that?
Henrik admitted he held himself responsible on the play, that he isn't quite up to speed yet and didn't see Methot coming. That once he gets there he will recognize plays like that and minimize the impact.

I kind of agree that Hank turned away from it and Methot had little time to let up. Could have been a helluva lot worse.

It should also be noted that the Canucks bread and butter last season was their offense, in particular, making teams pay when the Canucks had the man advantage. Vancouver was down 2-1 when that hit took place. One minute later Cody tied it up on the power play that was a result of Methot's boarding minor.

That hit on Henrik was the turning point in the game. The Canucks rallied and won, that's all that matters.
User avatar
Rumsfeld
CC Legend
Posts: 4272
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:48 pm
Location: Raqqa

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by Rumsfeld »

BladesofSteel wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote:
KeyserSoze wrote: Pot, it doesn't really matter what happened in the finals or what media/people are saying about it...when Marc Methot takes a cheap shot run at your Captain like that there needs to be some consequences.
People are acting like the team just skated away.....

Watch the replay, after the hit there was a pretty lively scrum (given who was on the ice). Later in the game Burrows ran their goalie and apparently both Bieksa and Volpatti tried to fight Methot.

What exactly should they have done beyond that?
That hit on Henrik was the turning point in the game. The Canucks rallied and won, that's all that matters.
Vancouver was down 2-1 when that hit took place. One minute later Cody tied it up on the power play that was a result of Methot's boarding minor.
Nobody scored on that PP. Cody scored even strength well after the fact. The hit was in the first half of the second period and Hodgson's goal was early in the third.

I'd say that the turning point of the game was Schneider's penalty shot save and that the Henrik hit had little or nothing to do with the outcome...

And Henrik is just being Henrik when he gets all diplomatic and takes some responsibility for being vulnerable. That was a dirty shot to an elite player and should have been a five-minute penalty.
Last edited by Rumsfeld on Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Chairman of the Jim Benning Appreciation Society
User avatar
KeyserSoze
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:39 am

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by KeyserSoze »

Potatoe1 wrote: People are acting like the team just skated away.....

Watch the replay, after the hit there was a pretty lively scrum (given who was on the ice). Later in the game Burrows ran their goalie and apparently both Bieksa and Volpatti tried to fight Methot.

What exactly should they have done beyond that?
Burrows (likely accidently) backed into a goalie who was slightly out of his crease...I definately would not say he ran their goalie.

That's great that Bieksa and Volpatti both asked Methot to the dance, but as we saw Methot clearly and gracefully declined the invite.

I would have liked to see someone (anyone) put the puck in Methot's corner and attempt to put him through the boards. Or if for whatever reason that was not possible, let's see someone (again, anyone) target Jeff Carter with a hard hit (even if it is 2 seconds late) or nasty cross check to the arm and remind him why it happened.

If it was a clean hit it would have been a different story.

I am not talking about Bertuzzi-ing someone here...let's just make it clear give a hint that if someone wants to take a cheap shot from behind on one of our star players it will not be taken lightly.

And for the record I agree with you Pot and do not relate this and what happened in the SCF at all. You 100% take a punch to get a PP in the playoffs, and for the most part the same holds true for the regular season. The Methot hit (especially seeing as it was only penalized 2 mins) deserved more attention/reaction, and this is all I am saying.
BladesofSteel wrote: Henrik admitted he held himself responsible on the play, that he isn't quite up to speed yet and didn't see Methot coming.
He also referred to it as a cheap shot.
User avatar
dhabums
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: GDT: Oct 10 - Canucks @ Columbus - 4pm - SNET-P(HD) RADI

Post by dhabums »

Larry Goodenough wrote: One more time, if that is the Canucks response, then as an opponent, I will slash, punch and hit a Sedin after the whistle every chance I get knowing it will draw a reaction and a penalty.

In today's NHL, few players fear retribution. If they do, it's tempered by the millions of dollars they will earn by being the type of player that runs the Sedins and then puts his team on the powerplay by drawing retribution.
Fighting majors do not result in a PP. I've heard and read today people claiming "it was a close game so nothing could be done". WTH does that even mean? This is where someone should make a pointless reference to the instigator penalty, as if it is relevant.
Post Reply