HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Vancouver Canucks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=36)
-   -   Rate the teams toughness (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1355951)

goodluckchuck 02-20-2013 07:56 PM

Rate the teams toughness
 
I honestly think the Canucks are soft as cookie dough

- They rarely fight back when a teammate gets drilled (legally or illegally) and they even fail to protect the goalie
- They succumb to pressure pretty quickly
- Sedin twins
- Dive bombs
- Lack of intimidation

Skills wise, the Cancuks are great. But toughness wise, they got rid of the only player that actually played with an edge, that if you did something to a teammate he would go to war with you.

Ya outside the locker room, these guys seem like the best of friends, but on the ice they show otherwise.

Is it because they have fallen into the myth that the referres are out to get them? Well, that's dumb, because most games canucks receive bad calls by the refs all the time. This is nothing new. Might as well put some bodies in the stretcher if the refs calling it one-sided.

Anyways, vote.

Wilch 02-20-2013 08:13 PM

0.5/10

Vankiller Whale 02-20-2013 08:24 PM

6/10

The Canucks aren't pushovers anymore in the physicality department imo.

Luuuongo 02-20-2013 08:27 PM

6.5, potential to be a 7.

Not the most soft team anymore, but Canucks aren't a team that scream fear or toughness.

Kassian is tough, but needs to he needs to be emotionally engaged.
Weise is decent, but usually ends up losing the fight.
Volpatti is decent.

Stories Tales Lies 02-20-2013 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luuuongo (Post 60131247)
6.5, potential to be a 7.

Not the most soft team anymore, but Canucks aren't a team that scream fear or toughness.

Kassian is tough, but needs to he needs to be emotionally engaged.
Weise is decent, but usually ends up losing the fight.
Volpatti is decent.

I Was actually impressed by Weise against Bolling. Not saying he won but he got jumped by a goon that sucker punched him then held his own, didn't really lose.

Smokey McCanucks 02-20-2013 09:06 PM

There's a lot of toughness on this team, but not the kind of aggressively violent toughness people associate with a "tough" hockey team. A lot of that is intentional. I think it's pretty obvious that Vigneault, Gillis, the Sedins and other leaders actively discourage the kind of instant retaliation and goonery that people think is "toughness."

However if it comes down to it I'm not sure there's even one player on the team you could objectively say is "soft," nobody who avoids the tough areas or avoids battling along the boards. Even the Sedins, who get hit with that label the most, take a ton of punishment without batting an eye and rarely miss a shift, let alone a game. That takes more toughness than dropping the gloves after taking a clean hit. Having the willpower not to take a dumb penalty retaliating for something, that takes mental toughness.

The Canucks have learned after getting burned by it before, there's too many officials, both on-ice and off, and too many agents of influence who will bend the direction of or actively work for Toronto, Boston, Chicago, LA and the big-market American/eastern teams, for us to play the rambunctious and physical style of play. It's really not even possible to get in a scrum with this team right now unless you want to come out killing a penalty, that style isn't an option.

This team is more than capable of holding its own when push comes to shove, but it's not in our best interest to seek out that sort of game.

TheDiver* 02-20-2013 09:11 PM

I think it's improved. Volpatti stood up for Burrows two games ago. Weise and Volpatti as well as Kassian will drop them. Bieksa will too.

I think our D is a little soft. Bieksa is the only one with some jam.

OgoBoHo 02-20-2013 09:13 PM

Wrong thread.

dave babych returns 02-20-2013 09:23 PM

Oh great, another referendum on "team toughness" that doesn't include a coherent definition of that term.

Dado 02-20-2013 09:27 PM

I'd put them solidly middle of the pack.

biturbo19 02-20-2013 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodluckchuck (Post 60129173)
I honestly think the Canucks are soft as cookie dough

- They rarely fight back when a teammate gets drilled (legally or illegally) and they even fail to protect the goalie
- They succumb to pressure pretty quickly
- Sedin twins
- Dive bombs
- Lack of intimidation

Skills wise, the Cancuks are great. But toughness wise, they got rid of the only player that actually played with an edge, that if you did something to a teammate he would go to war with you.

Ya outside the locker room, these guys seem like the best of friends, but on the ice they show otherwise.

Is it because they have fallen into the myth that the referres are out to get them? Well, that's dumb, because most games canucks receive bad calls by the refs all the time. This is nothing new. Might as well put some bodies in the stretcher if the refs calling it one-sided.

Anyways, vote.

Weird ranges on the poll. 7-10 is a huge range.

Regardless, i think the Canucks 'toughness' is fine. In fact, if anything i'd say it's the pure 'skill' that is lacking at times.

We finally have some 'grit' sprinkled throughout the lineup. Maybe we're short of knucklehead 'goons', but that's bully mentality stuff and not real toughness. This isn't a team that's going to get pushed around anymore, and that's good enough for me. I'd rather watch them play hockey than pick fights.

And the bolded attitude is absolutely despicable. That is the kind of headhunting garbage mentality that is extremely destructive to the actual game of hockey. I want to watch guys play hockey, not go out and try to seriously injure other people because they feel the refs have done them wrong.

If you want to watch a bunch of goons pummelling each other, consider switching to MMA instead of hockey. :shakehead

me2 02-20-2013 09:49 PM

These things are hiliarious. Lose to a toughness team, fans demand more toughness. Lose to a skill team, fans demand more skill over toughness.

It's like what ever happened yesterday is all that matters.

LiquidSnake* 02-20-2013 09:53 PM

7. Not as tough as teams like Boston but tougher than teams like Chicago

y2kcanucks 02-20-2013 10:03 PM

I think our team toughness is still lacking. For example, a couple games ago when Luongo was run over by David Backes, not a single person stood up to Backes. We've had a number of our stars take beatings that have gone unspoken for. This is an area where I really hope we upgrade at the deadline.

Fat Tony 02-20-2013 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by me2 (Post 60140149)
These things are hiliarious. Lose to a toughness team, fans demand more toughness. Lose to a skill team, fans demand more skill over toughness.

It's like what ever happened yesterday is all that matters.

We didn't lose to a tough team yesterday.

ruiner 02-20-2013 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by y2kcanucks (Post 60141063)
I think our team toughness is still lacking. For example, a couple games ago when Luongo was run over by David Backes, not a single person stood up to Backes. We've had a number of our stars take beatings that have gone unspoken for. This is an area where I really hope we upgrade at the deadline.

After how they've actually been standing up for each other this year I couldn't believe they just ignored Backes and went back to that stupid hoping for a penalty mentality they have.

I can't vote but so far they've been a lot better this year than in the past couple of years.

jigsaw99 02-21-2013 12:00 AM

we didn't lose to hawks due to toughness we lost to them due to skills. you don't get out shot with that many odd man chances with out speed and skills. I thought we out hit them too.

Hansen 36 02-21-2013 12:01 AM

Was Salo the guy we got rid of? :sarcasm:

Fat Tony 02-21-2013 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jigsaw99 (Post 60148301)
I thought we out hit them too.

NHL.com had the hits 30-16 in the Canucks favour. The team is tougher this year than they were a couple of years ago but they can be a too passive sometimes like ruiner said.

jigsaw99 02-21-2013 03:20 AM

pretty much everyone in our lineup are physical players except for Sedins/Schreoder/Raymond/Tanev

We have Volpatti and Weise as our fighters and that's all u need. Kassian, Bieska, Kesler can drop the gloves if needed but who cares about fighting we can lay them out with big hits.

vanuck 02-21-2013 03:40 AM

I won't rate the team's toughness... because toughness is overrated. :p:

LiveeviL 02-21-2013 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave babych returns (Post 60137781)
Oh great, another referendum on "team toughness" that doesn't include a coherent definition of that term.

Yeah, especially as the OP mention the Sedins as soft. Then toughness probably means something like "testosterone flowing out of the ears", which is a definition I do not care about and do not vote on.

professorchaos 02-21-2013 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilch (Post 60130277)
0.5/10

Agreed. The Nucks are pansies.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan 02-21-2013 08:53 AM

The only "tougher" teams in the West are the Ducks and Blues imo.

PRNuck 02-21-2013 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan (Post 60156933)
The only "tougher" teams in the West are the Ducks and Blues imo.

Blackhawks, Kings and Sharks have all had their way with us recently.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:59 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.