Farhan's $0.05 - The way we used Kesler in 2011 playoffs vs.

[Farhan Lalji]

^^^^ LOL, so what do YOU get out of this deal?

I'd better be getting a really good [mod edit] sometime around June 3rd 12:30 a.m.

[Strangelove]

Nothing like a good mod edit.

We're off to see MIB..... AND i expect a good mod edit!

CHEERS

[Topper]

I was serious.

Wait...... a...... SECOND!

Seriously?

Curiosity killed the cat.

ahhh GM, eyes closed, receiving a good [mod edit], fantasizing of Charlize Theron

[CaptainTrev]

What Farhan said

I still say Kesler needs to get moved back to the wing on a semi-permanent basis. He looked great driving the net with Sundin, imagine if played now with a centerman who can skate.

Use Kesler as the shut-down 3rd line center, while keeping his spot on the 1st unit PP. Slide Lappy down to the 4th line. When we need a goal and/or the lines go in the blender, move Kesler to 2nd line wing, Lappy to 3rd line (and the 4th line becomes a sh*t show, which is no worse off than it's been since....forever)

So Gillis simply needs to go out and get a 60-70 point offensive center. Easy.

[Island Nucklehead]

Kesler was 18th in the league in the circle this year.

He needs that playmaking winger (Whitney?) to set him up, not be the bull moose.

He also loses shutdown ability playing the wing, imo. Having him alternate between C and W on a shift-by-shift basis just adds to the confusion. He's either C, or W. The PP is a different beast.

[Farhan Lalji]

I was serious.

Wait...... a...... SECOND!

Seriously?

Curiosity killed the cat.

ahhh GM, eyes closed, receiving a good [mod edit], fantasizing of Charlize Theron

[UWSaint]

Farhan's $0.05 - The way we used Kesler in 2011 playoffs vs. this year
(paraphrasing) -- Kesler needs to be a two way center

In the playoffs, I think you are right.

In my view, one of the misconceptions about no-place-for-Hodgson argument or the need-for-a-true-checking-center argument is that Kesler is (when healthy ) one of the best shut down centers in the league and that being a Selke-level defensive center is as important as being a really good second line center. Come playoffs, you *should* rely on Kesler for this role if you need the shut down line, the next best option isn't in the same league defensively (as Pahlsson wasn't, but might have been 5 years ago) and you are deploying your assets correctly. And frankly, the one-dimensionality of Pahlsson *really* limited what the Canucks could do -- both in terms of matching up, but more importantly, how difficult it was to match up against them.

I don't say this to rehash the Hodgson trade -- that story is a lot more complicated -- but to argue that the Canucks don't need a traditional third line center for playoff success. Getting a decent traditional second line center could be better and make this team much harder to line up against.

[rats19]

Farhan's $0.05 - The way we used Kesler in 2011 playoffs vs. this year
(paraphrasing) -- Kesler needs to be a two way center

In the playoffs, I think you are right.

In my view, one of the misconceptions about no-place-for-Hodgson argument or the need-for-a-true-checking-center argument is that Kesler is (when healthy ) one of the best shut down centers in the league and that being a Selke-level defensive center is as important as being a really good second line center. Come playoffs, you *should* rely on Kesler for this role if you need the shut down line, the next best option isn't in the same league defensively (as Pahlsson wasn't, but might have been 5 years ago) and you are deploying your assets correctly. And frankly, the one-dimensionality of Pahlsson *really* limited what the Canucks could do -- both in terms of matching up, but more importantly, how difficult it was to match up against them.

I don't say this to rehash the Hodgson trade -- that story is a lot more complicated -- but to argue that the Canucks don't need a traditional third line center for playoff success. Getting a decent traditional second line center could be better and make this team much harder to line up against.

THANK GOD..UW
I am getting awfully tired of packing all these a-holes

[Farhan Lalji]

I don't say this to rehash the Hodgson trade -- that story is a lot more complicated -- but to argue that the Canucks don't need a traditional third line center for playoff success. Getting a decent traditional second line center could be better and make this team much harder to line up against.

My thoughts exactly. Only difference being that you worded it much better than me.

This is also one of the reason's why I was suggesting Vinnie Lecavlier a month or so back. Lecavlier, though expensive, would have given us that punch down the middle. Even if he's your traditional 2nd line guy, a healthy Kesler being used as a two way shut down guy in the playoffs would ensure that Lecavlier would be going up against impotent 3rd/4th lines of other teams.

Luongo for Lecavlier could be done straight up, and we wouldn't have to give up any defenseman, prospects, etc......while at the same time, adding a guy that could help us now. On top of that - for as much as Lecavlier has regressed during the regular season, the guy is still a war horse come playoff time............case in point: (http://lightning.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8467329). 19 points in 18 games in last year's playoffs.

Assuming that he was healthy and was a PPG player playing for us in this year's playoffs, I wonder how we would have done against the Kings had Schneider, Daniel Sedin, and Lecavlier been with us from Game 1 on.

As far as our prospects/developing players go (Schroeder, Kassian), their learning curve would increase exponentially playing alongside Lecavlier as opposed to some lesbian like Lapierre. Would it not?

[FAN]

The way we used Ryan Kesler in the 2011 post-season was THE perfect way to use him in my opinion (although in our case, we were a little too dependent on Kesler and we ended up overplaying him which may have lead to him getting injured down the stretch).

That was the problem in 2011. Pre-eye-injury Malhotra was a very effective player and could be considered as one of the league's best checking line centers. Malhotra was a 16 minute guy and a constant on the PK. Sending out Malhotra for defensive zone draws was a no brainer. After Malhotra went down, the team had to use Lapierre in that role. Lapierre played well, but he was a step down from Malhotra. Consequently, the team became reliant on Kesler much more for defensive zone draws. Kesler is at his best generating offensive chances with his defense in the offensive or neutral zone, not in the defensive zone.

One thing that irritated me in these past playoffs, was how the Canucks were trying to use Kesler. Kesler is not an "offense first" kind of guy, and his game will suffer when he has that mindset in my opinion.

I don't see it that way. Kesler's role has remained the same except the team tried to lessen his defensive responsibilities. That shouldn't change his mindset. Kesler was a Selke winner who has established himself as a star in the NHL. You think Kesler's mindset is different when he's up against Mike Richards and LA's "second line" instead of Anze Kopitar and LA's "top line"? Seems silly to me.

THAT is the Ryan Kesler that we need. THAT is the Ryan Kesler that played against Team Canada during the 2010 Olympics. Defensive first, followed by strong offensive chances as a result of great defensive efforts.

You keep harping about how we need the Ryan Kesler that dominated Nashville in the playoffs. THAT is what a healthy Ryan Kesler is capable of. But I don't know if you've been following the Canucks this season, Ryan Kesler simply hasn't been that player this season. That has nothing to do with Kesler's role on the team or his mindset. That has everything to do with his abilities. Kesler wasn't 100% when he played his first game of the season and he was battling another significant injury come playoff time. It's like Kesler in the Boston series. There were things Kesler was not capable of doing and that created a ripple effect throughout the lineup.

I have absolutely nothing against Malhottra or Pahlsson and like both players very much, but I'd rather see the Canucks let both players go to another team while at the same time, bringing in another skilled offensive minded center.

I disagree. I still think having a skilled shutdown center is the way to go. When the Ducks won the Cup Pahlsson had 12 points, that was 3 less than Selanne. Last year, Chris Kelly had more points than Milan Lucic in the playoffs. You mentioned Lecavalier. Dominc Moore wasn't far off from Lecavalier's point totals. None of those guys are considered 2nd line players or offensive minded. The Canucks advanced to the Finals last year because either the Sedins or Kesler was producing offensively with the 3rd line provided supplementary offense. The Canucks had to move Hansen and even Lapierre up to play on the top 2 lines. When you have to do that that means the top 2 lines aren't producing. Bottom line is that you can't win when only your 3rd line is producing offensively.