View Single Post
Old
04-10-2013, 11:51 AM
  #603
Lundface*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARSix View Post
Vancouver: Booth, Kesler. And Chicago's was much worse, missing Sharp and Hossa for long stretches in addition to Bolland.

When playoff time comes around most of the above list will be back. The Canucks aren't screwed missing two top 6 forwards and one defenseman, the iced roster will still be good. But it becomes a situation where the team cannot afford even one more injury (unless I guess it's to a goalie).

Basically, if everyone is a bit late and we have to play the first round without those guys, we will still have a better than 50-50 shot against San Jose, Detroit or Minnesota. I would give the nod to any other opponent we might have to face in the West. When healthy, we are a toss-up or better against any team in the league except perhaps Pittsburgh, Boston, Chicago and L.A., each of whom I would narrowly favour (but by no means are we huge underdogs there).
If at full strength the only two teams favoured are Chicago and Pittsburgh. Just because we lost to the other two with injuries doesn't mean we are worse, it's even if anything. Neither of the first two has our goaltending either so it would be tight

Lundface* is offline