Post-Game Talk: Canucks 1, Blues 0 - PGT starts at post #593

[Barney Gumble]

thing is if we make the playoffs we'll probably do better than either of the past two years, I mean its impossible to do worse! which will mean even after a first round exit it will be spun in a positive fashion allowing us to bring the exact same team back again next year!

That said I still want to make the playoffs an ''see what happens''

As long as Torts doesn't put out the Sedins with something like minute left in the game if we had a one goal lead in any given playoff game like some other coach (as well as a defensive pairing of Edler-Bieksa).....

 

[alternate]

so no forward with over 20 minutes of ice time and we pull one out in the third, just like we used to. Coincidence?

 

[canuck4life16]

so no forward with over 20 minutes of ice time and we pull one out in the third, just like we used to. Coincidence?

I guess the coaching staff took the two week break to make some adjustment....but PP still need work.....it will probably require players to look at more videos

 

[Barney Gumble]

so no forward with over 20 minutes of ice time and we pull one out in the third, just like we used to. Coincidence?

Blues really seem to need to get at least one legit 1st liner goal scorer; can't see them ever beating a team like the Kings in a playoff series as it is.

 

[shottasasa]

I do not want to see this team tank, it is not acceptable to me as a fan. End of story. I see the logic behind why teams do it, but that is not the type of team i want to cheer for. Especially when there is any hope of making the playoffs. If the Canucks get healthy at the right time, anything can happen and that is the possibility I want, not a high draft pick which does not increase our chances of drafting an impact player dramatically.

 

[vanuck]

If they do make the playoffs, and that's a BIG if, the Blues are the best team to face... Wouldn't think so when looking at the teams on paper but the Canucks have this weird ability to outplay the Blues whenever they play them, no matter how bad they are.

Maybe... just maybe... we're not quite as bad as people think?

Nahhhh.

 

[vanuck]

Holy hell, a win.

And people saying we should tank should go **** themselves. Losers. Anyone who would rather draft 12th and miss the playoffs over drafting 16th and making the playoffs isn't a hockey fan.

They are if they have a crystal ball and foresaw the future. Just being real here.

 

[vanuck]

As long as Torts doesn't put out the Sedins with something like minute left in the game if we had a one goal lead in any given playoff game like some other coach (as well as a defensive pairing of Edler-Bieksa).....

While I agree the D coaching was certainly horrible in that series, I don't think the Sedins + Burrows are bad players to put out in that scenario in general. Being good two-way players you have to expect them to be able to handle that type of situation some of the time. What AV messed up in your example was the timing of who he wanted out there IIRC.

 

[Jack Tripper]

not a bad game by the canucks but the first post-olympic game can be such an anomaly that it's hard to read too much into the result

encouraged by the play of lack and kassian...lack continues to be this team's most valuable player and i thought kassian was the best/most dangerous forward

discouraged yet again by the play of schroeder and the sedins but the canucks got the win so i'll focus on that for now

 

[Outside99*]

In terms of player eval for this one

Stanton was solid, real smart player who competes every shift, covered for wandering d partner more than once. If he was a little bigger and a little faster, he'd definitely be top 4 material. I'd even call him Underutilized offensively (nice heads up play on the Kassian chance in the 1st)

Diaz was an excellent pickup.

Edler was also V. good, was proactive playing with confidence. Of all the trade bait if we can call it that, I will say he will garner genuine interest from many teams as in this guy is available???

Hansen was also excellent obv scored the GWG but was a beast on the forecheck. When he plays like that, why would you trade him but the sudden TOI and resp. Increase points to him being showcased, the irony of course is that we won the game and he was a big part...

Burr and the Sedins had moments against tough defenders but what's with the 1 man forecheck with $10M+ elite forwards playing as 3rd and 4th D? If that's what they call the trap, then I have to say its a gross miscarriage of hockey talent.

Don't think Bieksa bought in to whatever system they brought in as he was wandering all over the ice as only he can.

Gotta kudos #15 for his compete level. Been a gem, under rated offense IMO. Kudos to pro scouting on this one.

Thought #20 was fine in this one.

#9 continues to get better, skating and anticipation improving, more focused on playing before than after the whistle.

Couple of comments on the D - take Edler and Bieksa out of the lineup and that is not a very physical d corps. Also, from the play on the ice, you woulkdn Know who's making 4.5 and who's making 550/1.2.

Schroeder has skill but I concur with Orca on this one. Ditto for Dalpe.

 

[604]

Blues really seem to need to get at least one legit 1st liner goal scorer; can't see them ever beating a team like the Kings in a playoff series as it is.

I don't understand this thinking at all.

Teams like the Blues and Kings win because they can stop teams from scoring and have a few players that can create goals, including on the PP.

That is exactly what we could be. We should have a good PP...and we a have a a pair of strong goaltenders and what should be on paper a very good defense.

 

[quat]

I'm a Canucks fan and yes, I think they should tank. I admire their enthusiasm tonight but in the best interests of the future of this team, they should tank unfortunately. They won't though.. because they are all professionals with pride.

As a fan of the franchise though, I'd be much happier with a great draft pick than likely one round of playoffs... or worse yet, we just barely miss the playoffs and end up with a crappy pick, and that's the most likely scenario.

Unfortunate for you then that this version of the Canucks simply isn`t bad enough to garner a high draft pick. If the Canucks are to improve, Gillis has to trade players that have value for younger guys and picks who are not as proven but have a chance at a similar upside. Tricky business.

I think there`s posters here who simply don`t recall what it`s like to watch a team struggle so much they get a high draft pick. Then, it`s usually years of being not good enough to `play with the big boys`, and then years more and a couple of coaches and GM`s before things start to fit together. Look at the Avalanche for example. And they`ve succeeded better than a lot of others.

 

[Tiranis]

Unfortunate for you then that this version of the Canucks simply isn`t bad enough to garner a high draft pick. If the Canucks are to improve, Gillis has to trade players that have value for younger guys and picks who are not as proven but have a chance at a similar upside. Tricky business.

I think there`s posters here who simply don`t recall what it`s like to watch a team struggle so much they get a high draft pick. Then, it`s usually years of being not good enough to `play with the big boys`, and then years more and a couple of coaches and GM`s before things start to fit together. Look at the Avalanche for example. And they`ve succeeded better than a lot of others.

And we don't even know where the Avalanche will be long-term. Their goaltending has been out of this world so far. Is that sustainable? Are they going to be consistently a playoff team? Will they make any sort of a dent once they do get there?

It's actually somewhat strange when people point at the Avalanche as a success story when they haven't won anything or even made the playoffs yet. For all we know, this re-built core of theirs might never get out of the 1st round and then where's the success story?

 

[quat]

See the post below yours. 12-7-2 is reasonable.

And attempting to tank doesn't guarantee tanking. Look at Calgary last year - trade Iginla and Bouwmeester, and start winning games. The idea that you'll get magical fairy losing dust by trading players doesn't really work. We're just as likely to finish 7th by trying to win as by trying to lose.

And again, the payoff isn't worth it. And cheering to lose is disgusting.

I thought the fourth line was very good this evening, and I hope that Tortorella learns to make a bit better use of his bench. Having Lain and Sestito banging guys and taking some of the physical focus off the other lines was good to see. Kassian and Booth seem pretty solid on their skates these days as well.

It bodes well for the Canucks if the whole team is asked to carry the load and not just the " best players".

Not sure why I'm quoting you. heh.

 

[quat]

And we don't even know where the Avalanche will be long-term. Their goaltending has been out of this world so far. Is that sustainable? Are they going to be consistently a playoff team? Will they make any sort of a dent once they do get there?

It's actually somewhat strange when people point at the Avalanche as a success story when they haven't won anything or even made the playoffs yet. For all we know, this re-built core of theirs might never get out of the 1st round and then where's the success story?

Yes, well said. It's just as likely they're simply in that inconsistent part of a rebuild when things are all going their way. A couple of major injuries and they're back to missing the playoffs.

The Blues are a great example. They've been lauded as being one of the next big teams for years now, and they've done very little for having so much promise.

 

[tantalum]

To make the playoffs? Seriously, people even complain if we win

Yep. Always complaining. Personally I'd rather a team sneak into the playoffs instead of finishing 9th or 10th. Better to see if a cinderella run results rather than having no chance at such a run.

As it stands they are in a wild card spot. Yes Dallas and Phoenix have 3 games in hand but all that really means is that the canucks need to make up another 3 or so points on those teams. Certainly not time to throw in the towel on the season. Also not time to make significant additions at the cost of future pieces but don't throw in the towel.

 

[Rooting4TheNUCKS]

I saw the Blues game just now and Im so happy that The Canucks won it
As others has mentioned, we should not put to much into this particular game as its the first game after the Olympic break, but it sure was crucial for us to break the losing streak we had going.
A positive thing from today's (yesterday's) game is our penalty killing, the PK unit where quite good
Also we won the game in the 3rd for once
Nah, I think if we hit some back to Back wins and really find ourselves the Playoffs could still be within reach.

 

[Barney Gumble]

I don't understand this thinking at all.

Teams like the Blues and Kings win because they can stop teams from scoring and have a few players that can create goals, including on the PP.

That is exactly what we could be. We should have a good PP...and we a have a a pair of strong goaltenders and what should be on paper a very good defense.

Blues haven't really been that more success in the post-season than the Canucks since our run to the Finals. Kings have a goalie that has proven, more than once, of elevating his game in the post-season. Blues are weak (as least when one looks at playoff teams) down the middle while the Kings are strong down the middle. IMHO, that's a pretty big difference between the Kings and the Blues (at least with respect to the post-season).

I'm not claiming they'd be an easy team to play in the playoffs - only that they've got real weaknesses. Overrated.

 

[Hammer79]

It's a reference point, not a predictor of the future. For the Canucks to make the playoffs, they have to break the trend.

That trend could go either way - they can continue to dip and pick 6th overall, or they turn a corner and make the playoffs as the 7th/8th seed.

Those odds are based on a formula. One of the inputs to the formula is tweaked to give heavy weighting to goal differential to produce 'exciting' swings in the odds, and based on goal diff vs winning pct going back to WW2. That factors in a lot of data that isn't relevant today.

There is also about a 53-47 advantage given to home teams, based on how home teams performed last year. I know what the formula is because I used to run the AHL and ECHL pages on his site.

What his page is good for though, is schedule strength of remaining games. His formula figures out a team's relative strength from the goal diff formula, factors in home vs away, and then simulates the matches millions of times based on the inputs.

The takeaway? 30% by no means we have a 7 in 10 chance of missing, or that we are practically out of the race. The numbers are exaggerated to produce more exciting swings. The site is a good tool, but don't get carried away by thinking these are entirely accurate odds.

 

[Tiranis]

Those odds are based on a formula. One of the inputs to the formula is tweaked to give heavy weighting to goal differential to produce 'exciting' swings in the odds, and based on goal diff vs winning pct going back to WW2. That factors in a lot of data that isn't relevant today.

There is also about a 53-47 advantage given to home teams, based on how home teams performed last year. I know what the formula is because I used to run the AHL and ECHL pages on his site.

What his page is good for though, is schedule strength of remaining games. His formula figures out a team's relative strength from the goal diff formula, factors in home vs away, and then simulates the matches millions of times based on the inputs.

The takeaway? 30% by no means we have a 7 in 10 chance of missing, or that we are practically out of the race. The numbers are exaggerated to produce more exciting swings. The site is a good tool, but don't get carried away by thinking these are entirely accurate odds.

Considering goal differential is actually pretty good for predicting future success, I don't see what's wrong with that. You seem to be implying that it's just there to add 'excitement' which isn't true at all.

 

[PRNuck]

Schroeder - Does not look like he has anything like the speed or skill to compensate for his lack of size. Needs to a water bug out there and isn't. Still tries to poach on the play like he did in college rather than being a continuous part of it. One positive is that he didn't get lit up too bad on the defensive side of the play. However, he has to produce offense to stick and he doesn't seem to be able to do that.

Thanks for the recap OT, lots of good stuff here. Concerning to hear that Schroeder doesn't look fast enough. That was one of his calling cards in his draft year. Could his foot injury be hampering him still?

 

[Samzilla]

we want the cup! we want the cup!

 

[Dissonance]

I care about this team (and actually the sport, really) less right now than at any point in the last 25 years. But I'm sure as **** not going to start cheering for them to lose while in the heat of a playoff fight. And I don't respect anyone that does.

I do not want to see this team tank, it is not acceptable to me as a fan. End of story. I see the logic behind why teams do it, but that is not the type of team i want to cheer for. Especially when there is any hope of making the playoffs. If the Canucks get healthy at the right time, anything can happen and that is the possibility I want, not a high draft pick which does not increase our chances of drafting an impact player dramatically.

Well put. I wouldn't want to see this team tank even if we were mathematically eliminated from a playoff spot.

Seriously, screw trying to move up in the draft. Edmonton has plenty of high picks and they'll never go anywhere because that entire organization has a loser's mentality. They all think that losing games is totally acceptable because at least you get another decent draft pick at the end and the hope that maybe things will be a bit better next year. I'd honestly rather watch golf (or cheer for Calgary) than follow a team that believes that.

I get that a lot of people here find the experience of following prospects and projecting their hopes and dreams onto them a lot more exciting than following the ups and downs of an actual NHL roster over the course of a season. Cheering for a bubble playoff team is frustrating. But that's no way to run a hockey team.

-------

...That all said, I wouldn't be opposed to a big trade or three in the coming weeks. Even if that meant moving Kesler. This team could use a shake-up.

 

[PRNuck]

we want the cup! we want the cup!

Time to load up on Cammalleri and Vanek! Draft picks and prospects be damned!

 

[arsmaster*]

I know the comparison isn't perfect, but the Toronto Raptors made a trade earlier this season, moving their one true marquee player, with the idea of tanking. Since that deal they're winning like .650 percent of their games.

It doesn't always work like you want. I think Torts can get this team playing the right way, and get us into the playoffs. And we saw last night we can hang with playoff teams, playing playoff style of hockey.

I really wish we hadn't lost 7 straight. It's going to be a dog fight to get in now, but at least the stretch should be entertaining, and that's what sport is supposed to be - entertainment.