HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXXI - Nobody Loves Raymond Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-16-2013, 02:06 AM
  #176
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
The expectations for Tanev around here are crazy. He won't be anything more than a 5-6 IMO.
Over his career? I think it's pretty clear Tanev has some quality. I see him as the typical 4-5 tweener. Where he could easily be a #4 but would be a #5 on a stacked team

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:36 AM
  #177
Samzilla
Registered User
 
Samzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,284
vCash: 934
wrong thread

Samzilla is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:41 AM
  #178
The Optimist
Registered User
 
The Optimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SFU
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,172
vCash: 1258
It's good to know that Tanev has peaked (at the age of 23) and will never be anything more than what he currently is.

The Optimist is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:15 AM
  #179
PG Canuck
Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,502
vCash: 1512
Tanev, if paired with the right defensemen, can handle top four minutes IMO.

PG Canuck is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 04:53 AM
  #180
Royal Canuck
HF's Bounty Hunter
 
Royal Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,718
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Optimist View Post
It's good to know that Tanev has peaked (at the age of 23) and will never be anything more than what he currently is.
Let's not forget, traditionally defensemen have a longer development and peak period than forwards, maybe it's not until 29-30 that Tanev really reaches his full potential.

__________________

Twitter |HFBoards Contact | Blog
Xbox Live Gamertag: "CxC Canuck"
"You're never a loser until you quit trying. " - Mike Ditka
Royal Canuck is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 08:29 AM
  #181
Rod Buskas*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
The expectations for Tanev around here are crazy. He won't be anything more than a 5-6 IMO.
it's good to see you've been humbled over the lockout.

Rod Buskas* is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 08:41 AM
  #182
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Optimist View Post
It's good to know that Tanev has peaked (at the age of 23) and will never be anything more than what he currently is.
Nobody is saying that, but he's barely a Top 6 player at this point and has shown no offense whatsoever. Defensemen who don't score when they're young generally don't score when they're older. If he gets bigger he could be a Top 4 defensive specialist at some point, though.

Proto is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 08:46 AM
  #183
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Nobody is saying that, but he's barely a Top 6 player at this point and has shown no offense whatsoever. Defensemen who don't score when they're young generally don't score when they're older. If he gets bigger he could be a Top 4 defensive specialist at some point, though.
He outproduced Connauton in the AHL this season and scored as many goals. He had excellent numbers in college. He might never score a ton of goals, but that's not the only way to contribute offensively.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 09:12 AM
  #184
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Nobody is saying that, but he's barely a Top 6 player at this point and has shown no offense whatsoever. Defensemen who don't score when they're young generally don't score when they're older. If he gets bigger he could be a Top 4 defensive specialist at some point, though.
I strongly disagree with that. Tanev has had a strong effect on shot differential on the bottom pairing for parts of two seasons and played really well with Hamhuis for a stretch at the end of the season. He's a #5 defensemen right now on a very good defence.

Scurr is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:07 AM
  #185
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Canuck View Post
Let's not forget, traditionally defensemen have a longer development and peak period than forwards, maybe it's not until 29-30 that Tanev really reaches his full potential.
It'll probably take that long for him to get to 200lbs.

He's already a 5-6, that is why I don't get that that would be his peak.

His development curve is sharp, and he's definitely still climbing it.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:13 AM
  #186
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Figz14 View Post
All these line ups ****ing suck and depress me.
Why do they suck? These lineups (sans Lou) got us back to back president's trophy and within a game of the Stanley Cup.

I also think people are underestimating the Edler - Garrison pairing, as long as it gels (and it's looking as though it will), we will have two excellent pairings.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 01:24 PM
  #187
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,400
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Why do they suck? These lineups (sans Lou) got us back to back president's trophy and within a game of the Stanley Cup.

I also think people are underestimating the Edler - Garrison pairing, as long as it gels (and it's looking as though it will), we will have two excellent pairings.
Lou was a major reason we won back to back President's trophies and the biggest reason we got to within a game of the Stanley Cup. Those lineups, without Luongo, and without any real offensive upgrades won't even get close to those heights.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 01:46 PM
  #188
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,644
vCash: 500
Yes, the Canucks really relied on Luongo's 11th place SV% amongst starters to win the President's Trophy last season.

pitseleh is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 01:48 PM
  #189
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,400
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Yes, the Canucks really relied on Luongo's 11th place SV% amongst starters to win the President's Trophy last season.
His bad October dragged his SV% down quite a bit. From Nov-end of the season he was dominant.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 01:54 PM
  #190
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Yes, the Canucks really relied on Luongo's 11th place SV% amongst starters to win the President's Trophy last season.
Save % vs "eye test", I go to the eye test.

My eyes told me both our goalies led us to wins, in games we had no business being in.

You guys love your stats though.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:03 PM
  #191
Stonz
Registered User
 
Stonz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Save % vs "eye test", I go to the eye test.

My eyes told me both our goalies led us to wins, in games we had no business being in.

You guys love your stats though.
It's not just your eyes, it's the stats too.

Schneider: 33GP, 20-8-1, .937 SV% (2nd), 1.96 GAA (3rd)
Luongo: 55GP, 31-14-8, .919 SV% (12th), 2.41 GAA (16th)

Both played very well. Schneider was better, albeit on a lesser workload.

Stonz is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:06 PM
  #192
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Lou was a major reason we won back to back President's trophies and the biggest reason we got to within a game of the Stanley Cup. Those lineups, without Luongo, and without any real offensive upgrades won't even get close to those heights.
Those offensive upgrades would come from within though (ie Kassian). Perhaps Gillis hits the Luongo trade out of the park and we get a good 40+ point 3rd line centre (could be Bjugstad in 2013 ), we still need Hansen and Higgins to step up a bit as well.

Ultimately the team will score more by playing better hockey, and the new 2nd pairing should help in that regard.

The cap is set for this year and the next, unless the team does a major overhaul (ie trades Edler, Booth) there isn't a lot of space for a major offensive upgrade. Even a guy like Voracek has a 4.25 cap hit.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:08 PM
  #193
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,168
vCash: 500
As mentioned above, Luongo's poor play was contained to fairly brief part of the season. After returning from injury he put up a .929 sv% over the final 4.5 months of the season and it was in the latter half where the Canucks' goalies really saved the team's bacon. If Luongo and Schneider didn't put up a .935 or whatever sv% in the 2nd half of last season the team's fortunes would've been vastly different given how their scoring went in the toilet.

opendoor is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:11 PM
  #194
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Nobody is saying that, but he's barely a Top 6 player at this point and has shown no offense whatsoever. Defensemen who don't score when they're young generally don't score when they're older. If he gets bigger he could be a Top 4 defensive specialist at some point, though.
They are saying that because Tanev is not "barely a top 6" defenseman. By all accounts, Rome is an average #6 guy and Ballard is an average #5 guy. Tanev has outplayed Rome and matched Ballard at the very least so far, IMO. So it seems pretty clear to me that he's already a #5/6 defenseman.

Even if he never develops his offensive game and just becomes defensively capable of shutting offensive forwards down, he'll probably become a #4 at some point. He's got more offensive talent than someone like Willie Mitchell, IMO

Shareefruck is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 02:20 PM
  #195
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG Canuck View Post
Tanev, if paired with the right defensemen, can handle top four minutes IMO.
Oh easily. We saw him do it last year with Hamhuis. But don't let his agent hear so we can lock him in to a cheap contract

PRNuck is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:01 PM
  #196
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
Tanev is still a kid, he was still 5'6" when he was 16 or something like that. his birth certificate may say 23 but he's more like 21 in my book (Kassian looks much older). Hockey IQ is excellent, reacts very fast to developing plays (too fast sometimes). Still has tons of upside in my book.

PS - would easily be a top 4 on big ice, maybe even top 2 with his quick reaction time, foot speed and excellent passing.

Outside99* is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:14 PM
  #197
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,823
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonz View Post
It's not just your eyes, it's the stats too.

Schneider: 33GP, 20-8-1, .937 SV% (2nd), 1.96 GAA (3rd)
Luongo: 55GP, 31-14-8, .919 SV% (12th), 2.41 GAA (16th)

Both played very well. Schneider was better, albeit on a lesser workload.
Luongo was 926 in Oct to April. Y2k is correct, our goalies carried us last year especially after Kesler fell into a hole due to injury.

me2 is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:24 PM
  #198
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,400
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
Luongo was 926 in Oct to April. Y2k is correct, our goalies carried us last year especially after Kesler fell into a hole due to injury.
Which is exactly why I think we become the Calgary Flames if we trade Luongo and don't address our offense. Even if its a subsequent deal like flipping Kadri and someone for Perry, we need to address the offense. If not for goaltending we probably finish 6th or 7th last year, maybe worse. It's not reasonable to expect Schneider to post a 0.937SVP playing 60-65 games in a season, nor is it reasonable to expect him to play 82 games and post a 0.928SVP, and the chances are whoever our backup is likely wont be a 0.920+ SVP goalie. Based on that alone and no offensive upgrades I don't see this team continuing to experience elite results.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:29 PM
  #199
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Which is exactly why I think we become the Calgary Flames if we trade Luongo and don't address our offense. Even if its a subsequent deal like flipping Kadri and someone for Perry, we need to address the offense. If not for goaltending we probably finish 6th or 7th last year, maybe worse. It's not reasonable to expect Schneider to post a 0.937SVP playing 60-65 games in a season, nor is it reasonable to expect him to play 82 games and post a 0.928SVP, and the chances are whoever our backup is likely wont be a 0.920+ SVP goalie. Based on that alone and no offensive upgrades I don't see this team continuing to experience elite results.
Especially not when apparently the secret's out that you can beat him glove side :-/

PRNuck is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 03:39 PM
  #200
BloatedGuppy
Registered User
 
BloatedGuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Which is exactly why I think we become the Calgary Flames if we trade Luongo and don't address our offense. Even if its a subsequent deal like flipping Kadri and someone for Perry, we need to address the offense. If not for goaltending we probably finish 6th or 7th last year, maybe worse. It's not reasonable to expect Schneider to post a 0.937SVP playing 60-65 games in a season, nor is it reasonable to expect him to play 82 games and post a 0.928SVP, and the chances are whoever our backup is likely wont be a 0.920+ SVP goalie. Based on that alone and no offensive upgrades I don't see this team continuing to experience elite results.
Good grief.

Vancouver finished 5th in scoring last year, tied with Chicago and a whopping .02 goals per game behind 4th place Ottawa. Only Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Boston scored at a meaningfully higher pace, and all three play in the east (all three suffered early ousters as well). The eventual Stanley Cup winner, Los Angeles, finished 29th out of 30 teams offensively.

There's definitely work that could be done on the offense for the Canucks. There's always work that can be done. But this persistent mythology that the offense is dreadful is getting kind of exhausting to read. Dreadful as compared to whom, exactly? Which team has a bevy of offensive riches distributed evenly across the lineup, with no injuries, one dimensional scorers or question marks to sully it?


Last edited by BloatedGuppy: 01-16-2013 at 04:24 PM.
BloatedGuppy is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:00 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.