Thread: Ed Jovanovski
View Single Post
Old
10-23-2012, 06:20 PM
  #28
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW View Post
I think that the effort level thing with Jovanovski might be his lack of hockey IQ (and, I suspect, non-hockey IQ, but that's a different topic) manifesting itself. Guy was a really, really dumb player that had a ton of skill and was a natural athlete. When things worked for him, he looked amazing. Other times he was a total non-factor, and I'm not sure if that was lack of effort, or that he was just constantly in the wrong spot and doing the wrong thing, and it made him look like a lazy floater. One of my least-favourite Canucks of all time.
i'm not as hard on jovo as you are, but i agree. i liked the guy, though he was super frustrating. on the other hand, my favourite non-bald canuck of all time was bertuzzi, also a phenomenally physically skilled guy with nothing between the ears. bert, i think, was legitimately lazy... or at least something was going on in his head that prevented him from caring for large stretches.

with jovo, yeah he was frustrating, but i didn't have high hopes for that team anyway, so i was happy to see him sometimes be a one man wrecking crew. unlike MS above, i always thought he was trying, and i actually thought when he was on that his energy was infectious. more than i can say about most guys on that team, who if they ever led nobody ever followed.

but i look at bieksa, who has pinballed between one of my favourite and least favourite canucks his entire career and think what if about jovo. at his worst, bieksa was much worse than special ed. but what if jovo had had a mitchell or a hamhuis in his prime instead of scott lachance and marek malik? i would have loved to have seen that.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote