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

Japadogs 2, Tortas 3 (SO): Randy Newman spins in his grave

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-29-2013, 12:53 AM
  #826
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,779
vCash: 500
This isn't fatigue. You could use that excuse for other teams as well.


Really, this comes down to saying that LA is just flat out better than the Canucks. They are a clearly better team.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:54 AM
  #827
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
It's always somewhat interesting to see how coloured the impressions of certain players are based on narratives coming into the game. Tanev was getting bailed out by Ballard on regular basis today, got bailed out by Schroeder twice, etc. He did not have a very good game, merely average or if I'm generous then above average. Ballard on the other hand was a stud.

Garrison wasn't great but also wasn't as bad as people are implying. Blocked everything he could, was excellent along the boards most of the game, etc.
I thought Tanev played great. Quick on his check and easily our best defensemen at getting the puck on a forwards tape. I'm not sure what "narrative" you're talking about?

I thought Schroeder was the one that got caught standing around watching defensively a couple times tonight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
So is this a function of 4 games in 6 nights?


Or is LA a better team that is too big and strong for VAN to handle?
3 games in 4 nights on a road trip is tough. The team obviously isn't playing that well either which doesn't help. I saw the same two deep, 3 high forecheck we've been running for most of the season.

Scurr is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:55 AM
  #828
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
So is this a function of 4 games in 6 nights?


Or is LA a better team that is too big and strong for VAN to handle?
Vancouver with the exact same circumstances as of now with a new coach would have won 14-0 tonight....seems that's what you want to hear.

Being serious, clearly the Canucks can't hang with Kings. They ground us into oblivion.

You can tell this when our biggest guy (Kassian) is the same size as their 7th biggest forward.

Makes you wonder what it would like with Kesler and Booth, cause we almost ground that one out getting dominated.

Read me2's post. That is reality right now.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:56 AM
  #829
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,717
vCash: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I thought Tanev played great. Quick on his check and easily our best defensemen at getting the puck on a forwards tape. I'm not sure what "narrative" you're talking about?

I thought Schroeder was the one that got caught standing around watching defensively a couple times tonight.



3 games in 4 nights on a road trip is tough. The team obviously isn't playing that well either which doesn't help. I saw the same two deep, 3 high forecheck we've been running for most of the season.
Tanev played well, but not his spectacular self. It's evident by the ice-time cut from his usual 19 minutes to 15 minutes tonight. He just wasn't as steady against the heavy forecheck of the Kings.

shortshorts is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:57 AM
  #830
CanadianPirate
Registered User
 
CanadianPirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
The problem is our "slow starts" equates to a month and change. If we continue along that line than the media is correct.
The thing is the canucks slow starts don't equal no wins. If they keep pace with the rest of the division, which they currently are, and then remember how to win again they will be fine. They won't win the president's trophy but they will be fine.

Just to expand on my point about the last shortened season. The devils over their first ten games had 3 wins, 2 ties, and 5 losses. They went on to win the cup. The canucks slow start is not the end of the world. I'm not saying that the canucks will mimic the devils but what I am saying is that the media nonsense about how a slow start will kill you in a shortened season is bs. Oh and this isn't directed just at you.

Just any of you don't believe me here is the devils schedule and results from the 1994-95 season.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/team...995_games.html
Turns out I was wrong about them losing their first four. They went 0, 3, 1.

CanadianPirate is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:57 AM
  #831
BrandonL
Registered User
 
BrandonL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,309
vCash: 500
I also like how AV benched Kassian during the OT.

Why bother playing your best forward at that point of the game? Just a shame AV couldn't throw Ebbett out there for a few shifts.

BrandonL is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:57 AM
  #832
pahlsson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stovepipe Cup View Post
Tanev had some absolutely great, smart plays to help the team out. He's been one of our most reliable d-men.

Tanev had redeeming moments tonight. Garrison did not.
yeah tanev played bad by his standards tonight, but idk how anyone can say he wasn't easily better than garrison

pahlsson is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:58 AM
  #833
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Exaggeration. We start slow every year, when was the last time we weren't in a playoff position after 48 games?
They were either out of a playoff spot or within a point or two of 9th place at the 48 game mark in each of 07-08, 08-09, and 09-10.

opendoor is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:58 AM
  #834
Linden*
[hello] :)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 49,472
vCash: 50
Not too many issues with the game
Sedins played ok, but need to be better
Kassian had another solid game
Ballard played like a stud
Burrows/Higgins decided to show up
Hansen was very on and off
Luongo played outstanding
Schroeder/Raymond had another strong night
Tanev looked meh
Bieksa/Hamhuis continue to struggle
Edler/Garrison- meh
Lappierre- assumed injured
Weise needs to be replaced on Schroeder's line

We sat back at the end of the game and it cost us, I just hate losing to a ****ing Gimmick

Linden* is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:58 AM
  #835
miked1101
Registered User
 
miked1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 688
vCash: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandonlee View Post
I also like how AV benched Kassian during the OT.

Why bother playing your best forward at that point of the game? Just a shame AV couldn't throw Ebbett out there for a few shifts.
Because we were playing to go to the shootout.

miked1101 is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:59 AM
  #836
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
Tanev played well, but not his spectacular self. It's evident by the ice-time cut from his usual 19 minutes to 15 minutes tonight. He just wasn't as steady against the heavy forecheck of the Kings.
Tanev made as many tape to tape passes as the rest of the defence combined tonight. This crowd is far too quick to make a judgement on a players game from one or two plays.

Scurr is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:59 AM
  #837
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I thought Tanev played great. Quick on his check and easily our best defensemen at getting the puck on a forwards tape. I'm not sure what "narrative" you're talking about?

I thought Schroeder was the one that got caught standing around watching defensively a couple times tonight.



3 games in 4 nights on a road trip is tough. The team obviously isn't playing that well either which doesn't help. I saw the same two deep, 3 high forecheck we've been running for most of the season.


SJ was on 3 games in 4 nights.


I saw a team constantly dump the puck as a strategy. Seems we saw different things.



Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Vancouver with the exact same circumstances as of now with a new coach would have won 14-0 tonight....seems that's what you want to hear.

Being serious, clearly the Canucks can't hang with Kings. They ground us into oblivion.

You can tell this when our biggest guy (Kassian) is the same size as their 7th biggest forward.

Makes you wonder what it would like with Kesler and Booth, cause we almost ground that one out getting dominated.

Read me2's post. That is reality right now.


So LA is a better team. Flat out? Is this the assertion here?


Are people ready to accept this as fact? The evidence is pretty telling.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:59 AM
  #838
M A K A V E L I*
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: van Coevorden
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500

M A K A V E L I* is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 12:59 AM
  #839
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,665
vCash: 500
I thought Tanev had a few shaky shifts under the big forecheck of the Kings. Had some troubles along the wall. Still made some really nice plays and picked up his 1st point.

Schroeder did bail him out a few times defensively and Schroeder did play well defensively. Saw him angle off Dwight King and Rob Scuderi twice. Was often the first guy on the puck.

thefeebster is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #840
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,717
vCash: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Tanev made as many tape to tape passes as the rest of the defence combined tonight. This crowd is far too quick to make a judgement on a players game from one or two plays.
Did I say he played badly? He simply did not play as well as he usually does, and as I alluded to, it was most likely due to the heavy forecheck.

shortshorts is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #841
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 21,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pahlsson View Post
yeah tanev played bad by his standards tonight, but idk how anyone can say he wasn't easily better than garrison
I didn't say that. I said one was worse than he is being described as and the other better. Garrison was still poor just not as poor as one would think reading around here. Tanev was not anywhere near excellent or very good or even good, he was at best above average.

Ballard is the guy that stood out and everyone else was playing in his shadow, by a huge margin.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #842
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
 
EpochLink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,484
vCash: 500
AV is too conservative, I have no clue what he was doing thinking a 2 goal lead is safe..

another blown opportunity

EpochLink is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #843
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,268
vCash: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by keslerburrows View Post
It's not arrogant. I'm just tired of all the whining like its easy to just fire AV and hire a guy in season.

So someone tell me. "Who the **** would we hire as our new coach?"
Dallas Eakins

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #844
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey View Post
This

Tanev played surprisingly average, I can think of three pretty terrible plays of the top of my head. People just have the preconceived notion that Tanev > Garrison and therefore look for faults in Jason's game and overlook Tanev's mistakes
Tanev broke up so many plays at the blueline.

I don't what you and Tiranis were watching.

By all means, he wasn't perfect, but he turned plays back at his blue line, and seemed like the only d man who could get the puck out of his own zone with any consistency.

I can agree with Tiranis that Ballard was very good.

Ballard and Bieksa were very good at blocking passing and shooting lanes tonight.

We need to become a collapsing team like the Rangers. Anything else is beyond our fitness and 'rust' level right now.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:00 AM
  #845
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
They were either out of a playoff spot or within a point or two of 9th place at the 48 game mark in each of 07-08, 08-09, and 09-10.
This team is much better than any of those teams. We've started slow the last couple years and recovered long before the 48 game mark.

Scurr is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:02 AM
  #846
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,061
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Bleach Clean;58581663]SJ was on 3 games in 4 nights.


I saw a team constantly dump the puck as a strategy. Seems we saw different things.







So LA is a better team. Flat out? Is this the assertion here?


Are people ready to accept this as fact? The evidence is pretty telling.[/
QUOTE]

Yep. I say **** it and blow the whole thing up.

Let's bring in Jones or MacKinnon and focus on 2018.

Just A Bit Outside is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:03 AM
  #847
miked1101
Registered User
 
miked1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 688
vCash: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by EpochLink View Post
AV is too conservative, I have no clue what he was doing thinking a 2 goal lead is safe..

another blown opportunity
How many times have we blown a game by trying to sit on a lead in the past few years. Too many. Some people say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result...

miked1101 is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:03 AM
  #848
Nuck Bonino
Registered User
 
Nuck Bonino's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,267
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianPirate View Post
The thing is the canucks slow starts don't equal no wins. If they keep pace with the rest of the division, which they currently are, and then remember how to win again they will be fine. They won't win the president's trophy but they will be fine.

Just to expand on my point about the last shortened season. The devils over their first ten games had 3 wins, 2 ties, and 5 losses. They went on to win the cup. The canucks slow start is not the end of the world. I'm not saying that the canucks will mimic the devils but what I am saying is that the media nonsense about how a slow start will kill you in a shortened season is bs. Oh and this isn't directed just at you.

Just any of you don't believe me here is the devils schedule and results from the 1994-95 season.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/team...995_games.html
Turns out I was wrong about them losing their first four. They went 0, 3, 1.
Agreed. Im still pissed off about this loss though

Nuck Bonino is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:03 AM
  #849
pahlsson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
By all means, he wasn't perfect, but he turned plays back at his blue line, and seemed like the only d man who could get the puck out of his own zone with any consistency.
i swear he's the only one on our d core that doesn't automatically shoot the puck up the boards to get it out of the zone

pahlsson is offline  
Old
01-29-2013, 01:03 AM
  #850
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
I didn't say that. I said one was worse than he is being described as and the other better. Garrison was still poor just not as poor as one would think reading around here. Tanev was not anywhere near excellent or very good or even good, he was at best above average.

Ballard is the guy that stood out and everyone else was playing in his shadow, by a huge margin.


As an aside, how does a little 5'11" Ballard do well, very well, against a hulking team like the Kings? One would think that he would get ground down like all the other smaller Canuck players?

Bleach Clean is online now  
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 04:24 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.