HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Are the Habs better than the Canucks?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2011, 03:45 PM
  #76
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
Heck I'd even argue on any size. Obviously if we're talking an AHL team with Price it's another story, but any NHL team even a weaker one with a hot goalie imo can actually make the playoffs. We're talking teams that don't deserve it.

I honestly think Edmonton had they had Price, Thomas, Rinne, they could have at least come close. That's a tough call because of their conference but their goaltending wasn't too good. Price could have won them a few more games at the very least.

As we've all seen from Thomas, a good goaltender can go very far. A good defense helps a lot too though. You look at Luongo and see him choking but at the same time his D haven't been stellar either. Boston is playing better overall and that helps a ton.
That's actually pretty easy to give a ballpark answer to mathematically.

Oilers allowed 3.17 goals on 31.7 shots per game last year. Therefore had a team save percentage of .900.

Best save percentage in the league was Boston with 2.30 goals against on 32.7 shots per game resulting in a team SVP% of .930.

If the Oilers had the Bruins save percentage then they would have allowed 31.7*(1-.930)= 2.22 goals against average. Oilers scored 2.33 goals per game this year so would have had a goal differential of (2.33-2.22)*82 = 9.02. So a +9 goals differential.

Worst goal differentials to make the playoffs in the West were Anahiem with +4 and Phoenix with +5. Best not to make the playoffs Calgary +13 and St. Louis +6. So Edmonton would probably be in the hunt with a +9 but not a sure bet.

So a theoretical Edmonton with Boston's goaltending goes from being the worst team in the league by a very strong margin (6 standing points and -15 goals differential from 2nd worst Colorado) to playoff bubble team. This should go to show just how dependant Boston is on getting ridiculous goaltending to be where they are right now. Essentially they are a slightly above average team with a fantastic netminder.

In case you were wondering how Edmonton would do with Montreal's goaltending by this measure. Habs goaltending was 0.918 this season. Edmonton ends up with -22 and is about as good as Minnesota was at 12th in the west.

Rest easy, if the Habs were a terrible team only carried by goaltending they'd be outside the playoffs with Toronto and New Jersey. As they are they are good enough with Price to be 6th in the East despite their many misfortunes this season.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 03:54 PM
  #77
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
That's actually pretty easy to give a ballpark answer to mathematically.

Oilers allowed 3.17 goals on 31.7 shots per game last year. Therefore had a team save percentage of .900.

Best save percentage in the league was Boston with 2.30 goals against on 32.7 shots per game resulting in a team SVP% of .930.

If the Oilers had the Bruins save percentage then they would have allowed 31.7*(1-.930)= 2.22 goals against average. Oilers scored 2.33 goals per game this year so would have had a goal differential of (2.33-2.22)*82 = 9.02. So a +9 goals differential.

Worst goal differentials to make the playoffs in the West were Anahiem with +4 and Phoenix with +5. Best not to make the playoffs Calgary +13 and St. Louis +6. So Edmonton would probably be in the hunt with a +9 but not a sure bet.

So a theoretical Edmonton with Boston's goaltending goes from being the worst team in the league by a very strong margin (6 standing points and -15 goals differential from 2nd worst Colorado) to playoff bubble team. This should go to show just how dependant Boston is on getting ridiculous goaltending to be where they are right now. Essentially they are a slightly above average team with a fantastic netminder.

In case you were wondering how Edmonton would do with Montreal's goaltending by this measure. Habs goaltending was 0.918 this season. Edmonton ends up with -22 and is about as good as Minnesota was at 12th in the west.

Rest easy, if the Habs were a terrible team only carried by goaltending they'd be outside the playoffs with Toronto and New Jersey. As they are they are good enough with Price to be 6th in the East despite their many misfortunes this season.
All this proves is that the matrix you're using to determine this isn't one bit accurate. Edmonton was terrible, because they were terrible. Boston did better than edmonton because they're a superior team on every level.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 03:56 PM
  #78
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Joker View Post
When it comes to how the Habs and the Canucks each match up against the Bruins, the main difference is that the Habs know how to beat Thomas, while the Canucks clearly don't.

While Luongo has been horrible in his three road goames against Boston, the Canucks have struggled to score against Thomas in almost every game.

Game 1 - 1 goal

Game 2 - 3 goals

Game 3 - 1 goal

Game 4 - 0 goals

Game 5 - 1 goal

Game 6 - 2 goals


You add that up, and average it out, and the Canucks have managed a measly 1.33 goals per game on Boston in this series. It's a minor miracle, really, that the Canucks might still win this series and the Stanley Cup, even with an offensive showing that anemic.


Overall, the Canucks have a much better 1st line than we have, and have a better mix of size and speed. So, overall, I think the Canucks have a somewhat stronger team than we have.

However, our goaltending is more consistent, and we know how to score on Thomas.

In all seriousness, the Canucks should be studying Habs/Bruins video footage to learn how to beat Thomas. It's incredible the degree to which the Sedins and Kesler have done so little offensively this series. Unless they're playing with injuries, that's hard to explain.
You can flip it on its head as well. Its really hard for any team to win when the goaltender they are facing is that ridiculously on his game. Ask Pittsburg or Washington about that.

Thomas has had a 0.960 save percentage in the last 5 games. That's the kind of goaltending that would give Team Germany a decent chance against Team Canada in a 7 game series.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 04:09 PM
  #79
yobro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
Boston's the best team. Best goaltender, defenceman in Chara- better supporting cast on defence, more depth up front, with the best 3rd and 4th lines in the game. The scary part is they willl get better.

yobro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 04:18 PM
  #80
SirRobichon
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 55
vCash: 500
No in overall, but we can beat the canucks in a 4 of 7.

SirRobichon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 04:35 PM
  #81
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
All this proves is that the matrix you're using to determine this isn't one bit accurate. Edmonton was terrible, because they were terrible. Boston did better than edmonton because they're a superior team on every level.
Like I said its a ball park estimate. It ignores a number of established statistical realities like score effects and special teams time. It also ignores some unestablished ones like the effect of defensive skill on save percentage. There is also the luck factor of where goals end up getting distributed resulting in wins and losses

But it is a basic estimate of how much effect goaltending has on a teams success. It should be obvious to anyone that Edmonton's putrid goaltending had a lot to do with their last place finish and Boston's phenomenal goaltending is what lead them to among to the top teams in the East and the Stanley Cup finals. This quantifies these apparent facts.

Boston is led by Thomas's goaltending, that should be obvious to even the most casual observer. How much are they dependent on him is up for debate. I believe it is the major cause, others may believe that there are other factors that are just as important. I respect the other position even though I'm pretty sure its wrong.

You on the other hand have nothing but a lame circular argument that the Oilers are bad because they are bad and the Bruins are good because they are good. Which shouldn't convince a 5 year old of anything but there we are.

Of course Boston is better than Edmonton at every level (except shot prevention strangely). That isn't a good sign for Boston because Edmonton is terrible at everything there is to be bad at. If Edmonton managed to make the playoffs on the back the best regular season save percentage ever while being absolute terrible otherwise that would be unsuprising. Bad teams have made the playoffs on the back of truly spectacular goaltending before, just look at the Sabres with Hasek or Montreal 2001-02 with Theodore's ridiculous .931 over 67 games.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 05:53 PM
  #82
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,861
vCash: 500
The playoffs are just as much a battle of attrition as it is about the best team on the ice.

What we see from the canucks right now are a couple sedins who are limping, and ryan kesler who is clearly labouring since midway through the san jose series.

When your top 3 offensive players are all in poor health, it shouldnt come as a surprise that the team has found itself in a desperate dogfight. Samuelsson and raymond aren;t even well enough to play at this point.

The hamhuis injury has also sent a trickle down effect on D too.

I know boston is dealing with a couple injuries too but the canucks have an injury epidemic on their hand similar (but not quite as bad) to mtl when they were entering the playoffs, and detroit's epidemic in the 2nd round.

When it comes to attrition, Boston has been the clear winner in every series.

So its tough to say if the canucks are better than habs, but if you take the attrition aspect out and compare these 2 healthy teams, I think the canucks have the better team for the time being.

Hackett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 07:35 PM
  #83
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 20,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
Like I said its a ball park estimate. It ignores a number of established statistical realities like score effects and special teams time. It also ignores some unestablished ones like the effect of defensive skill on save percentage. There is also the luck factor of where goals end up getting distributed resulting in wins and losses
Actually, it ignores the actual important factors like Edmonton being a young and inexperienced team that isn't quite used to doing all the right things at the right time without having to take time to think about it first. I enjoy my stats as much as the next guy, and everyone knows it. But even I have my limits of how much stats geek nonsense I'll accept as explaining "effects" on anything. Stats describe what happened, not why. And patterns in stats allow us to make guesses as to what might happen next... but not why. I've learned to separate stats from "why", and I think there are lots of other folks out there who fancy themselves intellectuals who would be well advised to do the same.

/rant over

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 07:47 PM
  #84
Mousepad*
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montréal/Mérida
Country: Mexico
Posts: 209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlgib21 View Post
Stupidest thread ever. "knowledgeable" hockey fans .LOL
Stupidest reply ever. "retarded" hockey fan. LOL

Makes sense?

Mousepad* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 07:57 PM
  #85
jwolf
Registered User
 
jwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by yobro View Post
Boston's the best team. Best goaltender, defenceman in Chara- better supporting cast on defence, more depth up front, with the best 3rd and 4th lines in the game. The scary part is they willl get better.
Hey! New HFB member here... Glad to be aboard.
While I agree with you pertaining to the Bruins depth up front and the goaltending (TT is so good this year I want to puke), I must take issue with your claim of Chara being the best defenceman. He's big tough and positionally sound, but he can be had with speed and misdirection. The Canucks should have watched tape of every Habs/Bruins game from the last few seasons. There is a general lack of speed on the back end in Beantown, in fact and Vancouver is simply not exploiting that weakness.

jwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 08:10 PM
  #86
jlgib21*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mousepad View Post
Stupidest reply ever. "retarded" hockey fan. LOL

Makes sense?
Calling someone "retarded " is like calling someone a "frog". It's hate speech. Understand? Another kid who's never seen a Montreal Cup. Go away

jlgib21* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 08:27 PM
  #87
roflstomper
I don't row.
 
roflstomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,346
vCash: 500
Canadiens match up the best against the Bruins and had a 2-0 series lead going back home. Bruins played at, I'd say about a 65 percent level that series and still beat them (didnt even score a pp goal). The way they are playing now at this high level as well as the Canucks I dont see how anyone could even make this comparison. Its like if someone asked are the Blackwaks better than the Bruins simply becuase they almost beat the Canucks.

roflstomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 09:08 PM
  #88
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Actually, it ignores the actual important factors like Edmonton being a young and inexperienced team that isn't quite used to doing all the right things at the right time without having to take time to think about it first. I enjoy my stats as much as the next guy, and everyone knows it. But even I have my limits of how much stats geek nonsense I'll accept as explaining "effects" on anything. Stats describe what happened, not why. And patterns in stats allow us to make guesses as to what might happen next... but not why. I've learned to separate stats from "why", and I think there are lots of other folks out there who fancy themselves intellectuals who would be well advised to do the same.

/rant over
Those stuff kinda do show up in things like shots against you know as I said. It doesn't control for things no one knows like how much of an effect team defense has on save percentage. But this is simply a ballpark estimate to answer a point raised earlier in the thread.

All what I'm talking to comes down to Q: How good would the worst team in the league be if they switched to the best goaltending in the league A: As far as I'm willing to guess; about average, maybe in the playoffs, maybe not. Which given the history of ridiculous goaltending performances on bad teams, is an entirely reasonable answer.

The numbers just help us describe things that it would be way to hard to do otherwise. Of course its flawed and of course there are so many things that would change it in real life. But this is the kind of thing that lets you get a handle on what your talking about beyond "that guy over there is doing pretty good, eh?"

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 09:24 PM
  #89
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflstomper View Post
Canadiens match up the best against the Bruins and had a 2-0 series lead going back home. Bruins played at, I'd say about a 65 percent level that series and still beat them (didnt even score a pp goal). The way they are playing now at this high level as well as the Canucks I dont see how anyone could even make this comparison. Its like if someone asked are the Blackwaks better than the Bruins simply becuase they almost beat the Canucks.
nice to see some rational minds out there...

it's a message board, so any topic of conversation is as worthy as people want to make it, but frankly i find it a little embarrassing that 2 of the major threads on our boards these days are hallmarks of sore losers...

are better than the canucks? seriously? just b/c the team we LOST to in 7 games is now playing a tight series with the best team in the league that somehow makes us as good if not better than them?

it's beyond ridiculous.

we lost in the first round... that puts us in the group of the "worst teams to make the playoffs"... point final. Wether we lost in 4-5-6 or 7, bottom line is that when push came to shove, we couldn't hack it.

if the Bruins win the cup, it won't be the first time in recent memory that we were eliminated by the eventual cup winners...

TB in '04, Carolina in '06... both of those series we lost despite at times looking like the better team, big deal.

as the future showed, our "success" against the eventual cup winners meant little in terms of how "good" we were or were going to be.

bottom line, imo, is that the habs NEED a good offseason just to be back as a borderline playoff team, let alone putting together a roster that could legitimately contend for a cup.
both the nucks and the B's are already there, and barring pretty major screw-ups, they will be back in the top-4/conference hunt come September.

fan bias is all fine and good, but let's not turn into a bunch of leafs fans with our out-of-wack extrapolations!

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 09:56 PM
  #90
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
All what I'm talking to comes down to Q: How good would the worst team in the league be if they switched to the best goaltending in the league A: As far as I'm willing to guess; about average, maybe in the playoffs, maybe not. Which given the history of ridiculous goaltending performances on bad teams, is an entirely reasonable answer.
Actually, I think it would look somewhat similar to the 2009-2010 Habs, who were utterly terrible 5-on-5 except for goaltending. (But they had very good special teams, so that may not count.)

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 10:07 PM
  #91
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
nice to see some rational minds out there...

it's a message board, so any topic of conversation is as worthy as people want to make it, but frankly i find it a little embarrassing that 2 of the major threads on our boards these days are hallmarks of sore losers...

are better than the canucks? seriously? just b/c the team we LOST to in 7 games is now playing a tight series with the best team in the league that somehow makes us as good if not better than them?

it's beyond ridiculous.

we lost in the first round... that puts us in the group of the "worst teams to make the playoffs"... point final. Wether we lost in 4-5-6 or 7, bottom line is that when push came to shove, we couldn't hack it.

if the Bruins win the cup, it won't be the first time in recent memory that we were eliminated by the eventual cup winners...

TB in '04, Carolina in '06... both of those series we lost despite at times looking like the better team, big deal.

as the future showed, our "success" against the eventual cup winners meant little in terms of how "good" we were or were going to be.

bottom line, imo, is that the habs NEED a good offseason just to be back as a borderline playoff team, let alone putting together a roster that could legitimately contend for a cup.
both the nucks and the B's are already there, and barring pretty major screw-ups, they will be back in the top-4/conference hunt come September.

fan bias is all fine and good, but let's not turn into a bunch of leafs fans with our out-of-wack extrapolations!
We would've won the cup if we had Markov.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 10:15 PM
  #92
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
Those stuff kinda do show up in things like shots against you know as I said. It doesn't control for things no one knows like how much of an effect team defense has on save percentage. But this is simply a ballpark estimate to answer a point raised earlier in the thread.

All what I'm talking to comes down to Q: How good would the worst team in the league be if they switched to the best goaltending in the league A: As far as I'm willing to guess; about average, maybe in the playoffs, maybe not. Which given the history of ridiculous goaltending performances on bad teams, is an entirely reasonable answer.

The numbers just help us describe things that it would be way to hard to do otherwise. Of course its flawed and of course there are so many things that would change it in real life. But this is the kind of thing that lets you get a handle on what your talking about beyond "that guy over there is doing pretty good, eh?"
i don't know if the stats tell you anything relevant in this case...

as good as the top goalies in the league are, it's all about their mental state in any given season. Let's not forget that last year Thomas sat on the bench (rightfully so) and watched Rask lead the bruins into the playoffs.
Thomas isn't a "better" goalie today than he was a year ago, it's just the nature of the beast.

adding an elite goalie to the Oilers could go either way... the team could've gained confidence early on b/c said goalie stole a game or two, and rode that confidence into the playoffs...
or just as feasibly, the pourous play of the team in front of him could've killed the goalies confidence and reduced him to sub-par performances, leaving the team no better off than they were..

or anywhere in between.

there isn't a stat-package on earth complete enough to give any accurate insight into this kind of dilema. confidence, momentum, attitude, these are all intangible factors that, try as we might, we can't reduce to simple numbers.

in sports, especially team sports, there are so many variables, that it's impossible to know how changing one might impact the whole.

as much as "we" tend to glamorize (and vilify) the individual performance/person, fact is that any given game, series, season, is a cluster**** of random occurences, each of which contributing to unpredicatable outcomes culminating in one deciding game/series... after which, all of the talking heads look back and deduce an "obvious" explanation for why it played out the way it did... pure B.S... human need to explain the unexplainable.

bottom line is that human "success" and "achievement" is far more indebt to their circumstances/environment than it is to their innate skills or ability.

Thomas, Price, Rinne, Luongo... anyone of them could have "led" the oilers to the playoffs, but not anymore so than a timely goal to win a game sometime before hope was lost, or an injury for them that didn't happen or for an opponent that did happen...

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 10:25 PM
  #93
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
i don't know if the stats tell you anything relevant in this case...

as good as the top goalies in the league are, it's all about their mental state in any given season. Let's not forget that last year Thomas sat on the bench (rightfully so) and watched Rask lead the bruins into the playoffs.
Thomas isn't a "better" goalie today than he was a year ago, it's just the nature of the beast.

adding an elite goalie to the Oilers could go either way... the team could've gained confidence early on b/c said goalie stole a game or two, and rode that confidence into the playoffs...
or just as feasibly, the pourous play of the team in front of him could've killed the goalies confidence and reduced him to sub-par performances, leaving the team no better off than they were..

or anywhere in between.

there isn't a stat-package on earth complete enough to give any accurate insight into this kind of dilema. confidence, momentum, attitude, these are all intangible factors that, try as we might, we can't reduce to simple numbers.

in sports, especially team sports, there are so many variables, that it's impossible to know how changing one might impact the whole.

as much as "we" tend to glamorize (and vilify) the individual performance/person, fact is that any given game, series, season, is a cluster**** of random occurences, each of which contributing to unpredicatable outcomes culminating in one deciding game/series... after which, all of the talking heads look back and deduce an "obvious" explanation for why it played out the way it did... pure B.S... human need to explain the unexplainable.

bottom line is that human "success" and "achievement" is far more indebt to their circumstances/environment than it is to their innate skills or ability.

Thomas, Price, Rinne, Luongo... anyone of them could have "led" the oilers to the playoffs, but not anymore so than a timely goal to win a game sometime before hope was lost, or an injury for them that didn't happen or for an opponent that did happen...
Ah, but I'm not talking about whether Thomas himself could have done it, I'm talking about transposing one teams goaltending to another's. If the Oilers goalies preformed as well as Boston's that's enough to bring them back to the pack. The circumstances which delivered such preformance is irrelevant to my argument.

Boston's excellent goaltending performance enhanced them this season, the Oiler's crummy preformance helped to bury them. Whether a particular goaltender would have done better or worse in a different situation doesn't change that.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2011, 11:00 PM
  #94
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Good God... The Canadiens would not have gone through the physical series the Canucks had to go through this year. The Chicago series was crash and bang with the rivalry between the two physical teams. The Nashville series was quite physical as well, but nowhere close to the San Jose series, the most physical of all.

Those teams are no Washington and Pittsburgh physically and no, Montreal would not have lasted that long with their small team.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 03:53 AM
  #95
Dekar
Registered User
 
Dekar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bound Kingdom
Posts: 4,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NerdAtTheCoolTable View Post
No, they are not. Not even close. Vancouver has the Habs beat everywhere except for goaltending.
And in the head-to-head matchup. Montreal plays Vancouver for the cup, I'm preparing for the parade.

The playoffs are a game of rock/paper/scissors with team matchups. Once in a while, the matchup will go the way it doesn't usually tend to (see: Bruins/Habs 2011), but certain teams do well against certain other teams, and certain styles do well against certain other styles. It's not really fair to say Montreal is better or Vancouver is better without considering how they match-up.

Dekar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:05 AM
  #96
GCM
Kesler Did This
 
GCM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,854
vCash: 500
Some of you (like the guy who said the Canucks don't have much forward depth outside of the Sedins and Kesler) are forgetting the current lineup is banged up.

Let me present to you the "normal" lineup if everyone was healthy.

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Raymond - Kesler - Samuelsson
Higgins - Malhotra - Hansen
Torres - Lapierre - Oreskovich

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Ballard - Salo
Alberts
Tanev
Rome

Luongo
Schneider

Also, for what it's worth, Dan Hamhuis is pretty underrated. I was hoping that after this playoff run people would acknowledge how good he is on the back end but unfortunately he got injured. That was the biggest loss we took.

Why did Hammer have to hip check himself out of the series ;_;

GCM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2011, 04:11 AM
  #97
Double XX L
Registered User
 
Double XX L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCM View Post
Some of you (like the guy who said the Canucks don't have much forward depth outside of the Sedins and Kesler) are forgetting the current lineup is banged up.

Let me present to you the "normal" lineup if everyone was healthy.

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Raymond - Kesler - Samuelsson
Higgins - Malhotra - Hansen
Torres - Lapierre - Oreskovich

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Ballard - Salo
Alberts
Tanev
Rome

Luongo
Schneider

Also, for what it's worth, Dan Hamhuis is pretty underrated. I was hoping that after this playoff run people would acknowledge how good he is on the back end but unfortunately he got injured. That was the biggest loss we took.

Why did Hammer have to hip check himself out of the series ;_;
No doubt about Hamhuis... He's awesome... He plays like a complete Wizniewski would, and he brings it WAY more often than not. I wanted the Habs to draft him (we picked Komisarek) something tells me we would have fared better (In the fact that Hamhuis can actually play solid hockey.

This all being said, it will ALWAYS be circumstancial and hypotheticals... I think that it would be close, and it would have gotten close to game 7... I also think the mood would be a bit more 'chipper' lol

Would we win? It doesnt even matter... All I want today is for the Vancouver Canucks to win. Bring it on home boys

Double XX L is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.