krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,645
- 10,375
not sure why this guy has only been given one game out of three.
Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign RD Vincent Desharnais 2-Year, $2M AAV Contract
- Thread starter Vector
- Start date
I agree.....what's going on here.? He wasn't great against Calgary in the opener, but nobody on the
Canucks blueline was very good.
Desharnais is signed for another season after this one, so they'd better hope this is just a 'blip' in a long season.
Hoglander
I'm Höglander. I can do whatever I want.
Yeah, this is weird. No word of injury or illness, yet not playing. Signs a 2 year deal @ 2mil per, in which Tocchet even phoned the guy to help convince him to sign, then he's back-to-back scratched after only one game.
It really doesn't make sense... obviously there is something going on
It really doesn't make sense... obviously there is something going on
Agree. He’s night and day better than Juulsen, doesn’t make any sense.
You saw why tonight. I actually felt a little sorry or Brannstrom. You get the call-up and want to make a good first impression. But you end up tethered to a boat anchor like Desharnais.
So he's only played two of the first four games.....and it's been mostly hard to watch.
- Aug 28, 2011
- 18,196
- 23,057
Desharnais was more or less even tonight in chances by any of the metrics (corsi, xG, scoring chances), and so was Brannstrom when paired with Desharnais... except Brannstrom finished in the pits because he had a bad shift with Soucy.
Desharnais' poor first game was also entirely due to a bad pairing with Forbort. Overall he's been ok.
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
This is Allvins replacement for Zadorov, and so far I'm not liking it. I will give him more games before I start to worry, but Desharnais handles the puck like a grenade in his own end. Even the simple passes seem to be extra difficult for Desharnais. Definitely a project that Adam Foote and Gonchar will need to put extra time in. Hopefully the big man pans out.
Ya, it’s way too early to conclude anything, but Desharnais looks as he did when he played on the Oilers against us, and that’s…….not very good.
Found Desharnais comments in a recent interview very interesting. He was recounting how the Canucks and the Oilers have their d-men playing an almost totally different system.
He points out that Tocchet's system has the d-men playing a lot closer to the forwards in the neutral zone, trying either to strip the puck or force shoot-ins. Of course the downside, is that if the forward does 'chip and chase' it's likely that he arrives simultaneously with the d-man along the back wall.
And that's one of rationales for the Canucks constructing a big back line, because those guys can win more one-on-one puck battles.
Clearly the system threw Desharnais for a bit of a loop early......but looks like he's finally figuring it out. And working with Foote and Gonchar, he's learning from two of the best.
He points out that Tocchet's system has the d-men playing a lot closer to the forwards in the neutral zone, trying either to strip the puck or force shoot-ins. Of course the downside, is that if the forward does 'chip and chase' it's likely that he arrives simultaneously with the d-man along the back wall.
And that's one of rationales for the Canucks constructing a big back line, because those guys can win more one-on-one puck battles.
Clearly the system threw Desharnais for a bit of a loop early......but looks like he's finally figuring it out. And working with Foote and Gonchar, he's learning from two of the best.
That's the thing about systems. Good systems tend to produce good results over time. Good systems can also fail over a short period of time, such as a best-of-seven series. I believe in employing good systems, but it's imperative that players, coaches, and management are all in alignment with the system. That's when success is most likely to occur.
Good systems increase probability but guarantee nothing, especially in a league like the NHL that emphasizes a short-term tournament (SC playoffs) over regular season performance (President's trophy) to determine the league champion.
I think the concern is that you also need guys who can move the puck. Zone exits can be a problem for our big Dmen.
Is it me or is Vinny kind of soft?
There's no way he's a Zadorov replacement. Zadorov was mean and went looking for hits. Desharnais actually looks like he avoids contact. Hoglander is literally 10" smaller and has doubled his hit totals.
There's no way he's a Zadorov replacement. Zadorov was mean and went looking for hits. Desharnais actually looks like he avoids contact. Hoglander is literally 10" smaller and has doubled his hit totals.
strattonius
Registered User
I think he's still adjusting to our system so he's a bit less committal on some plays as to not take himself out of position.
But soft? I'm really not seeing that.
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
I don't know about that.
Last game Bunting got into that scuffle with Brannstrom and Vinny came in and put his arm around Bunting and pulled him away with ease like a father who firmly says "alright that's enough" to his kid that's acting up.
Maybe he won't be as "mean" as Zadorov in general but I don't think toughness is an issue here.
As for the player, he looks raw and a little clunky. Hard to say whether those kinks will be ironed out with time and experience or if he just is what he is. But I would love to see how he looks towards the end of the season once he's had a good chunk of time working with our coaching staff before I make any hard judgments.
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
Handles the puck like a grenade. Plays smaller than Garland with a hell a lot less tenacity. Has problems making simple passes. Spends most of the time hemmed in his own zone. Not aggressive and barely hits. Desharnais has not looked good thus far, this player has a ton to work on.
He's having a major struggle with adapting to our system and guys are getting in behind him too easily. He'll have some shifts that look promising ... and then just a major positional gaffe.
I liked the gamble/upside with this signing at the time but right now it's looking like a mistake.
I liked the gamble/upside with this signing at the time but right now it's looking like a mistake.
I don't think its all systems. I remember thinking he made bad decisions and struggled to defend in Edmonton and that's what I'm seeing here. Like, getting walked by Blake last night wasn't a system mistake, that's a guy who sucks at defending mistake. But obviously he can, and hopefully will, improve. But these glaring errors as not making me overly optimistic.
It sounds like the consensus among Oilers' fans was that he improved significantly last season. Before that it sounded like he was prone to the bad decisions we're seeing here.
He's a guy who relies on being big and it's crucial that he gets his body and stick in the right positions to block shots and disrupt plays. I'm not so sure that he's a good fit under what Tocchet wants to do. Desharnais is bad at defending the rush. I don't think his skating can keep up.
I think when the Canucks signed Desharnais they knew he'd be something of 'a project'. Despite being 28, his first full season in the NHL was last year in Edmonton.
The feeling was there was still some potential for growth in his game. But agreed that so far he's been like a guy on an island out there. It's a tribute to Brannstrom that he's been able to survive playing with this guy.
The only hope is that working with blueline coaches like Gonchar and Foote, will bring his game around. But looking like a real gamble right now.
The feeling was there was still some potential for growth in his game. But agreed that so far he's been like a guy on an island out there. It's a tribute to Brannstrom that he's been able to survive playing with this guy.
The only hope is that working with blueline coaches like Gonchar and Foote, will bring his game around. But looking like a real gamble right now.
strattonius
Registered User
For me it's really just a systems problem for him right now. He's not in the right places and often is caught behind the play rushing a play up the boards and giving the puck away. Or he's flat footed and gets walked quite easily. In 1on1 situations or in front of the net when his responsibilities are easily defined he does a good job.
End of the day he's been a disappointing player for me but I do expect a slow rise in play throughout the year.
End of the day he's been a disappointing player for me but I do expect a slow rise in play throughout the year.
I honestly loved our off season moves more than most, but when I complained about this signing everyone just told me "Oh he's going to get whipped into shape by our great defence coaches" and "he's a big body so it's a good risk". If he's a big body that doesn't lay out hits, and he can't really handle the puck at the NHL level, I don't really think people who said that (and are clearly still saying that) really properly understand how long it's going to take to "whip" vinny into shape. We could be looking at a half season, or a season of this. That's a LOT of extra goals against. The play dies on his stick, he doesn't have any patience and tends to panic when pressured, and his reads seem slow.
Having large, physical, defensemen is key to playoff success; I can't think of many champions that didn't have a few. There was analysis conducted on this, will post if I find the link. Big D value is significantly higher in the playoffs when the intensity & physicality get ramped way up and the refs put their whistles away.
Imagine as a player having to battle against the same big, nasty D that keep destroying your arms, back, and body every chance they get (absolutely destroy you when you’re near the net) for potentially 7 games in a row. At some point you'll just start hearing footsteps when you go into the corners.
Imagine as a player having to battle against the same big, nasty D that keep destroying your arms, back, and body every chance they get (absolutely destroy you when you’re near the net) for potentially 7 games in a row. At some point you'll just start hearing footsteps when you go into the corners.
