Post-Game Talk: GM 32 | Golden Knights def. Canucks | 3-1 (Blueger) | Royal(ly) Flush(ed)

[Canuckle1970]

I was expecting a loss last night, but feared that we'd be blown out. That we only lost 1-3 due to an empty netter gives me some relief, all things considered.

 

[Shareefruck]

It was as much of a schedule loss as it gets, so there's that.

The offensive generation problems are just how Tocc wants them to play. This is the team they are. If you're mad about it, well, you should have been mad about it 120 games ago. This is how they've always played under Tocc. Just the first half of last season it was masked by unsustainable shooting luck (despite many saying that they'd found a "new style" of play to maintain it). It's been pointed out that they don't create offense, over a year ago.

They made a big deal of "evolving" and trying to create more rush chances. They brought in guys like Sprong and Debrusk to do this. Except they immediately backpedaled on the plan, promptly punted Sprong, and then told Debrusk to just be a pure netfront guy.

Tocc wants to win games 2-1. The problem with that being your gameplan, is that if you get a bad bounce or two, you lose 2-1. This is just how they're going to be. I still think they'll make the playoffs, and once Hronek is back then they will get better results with Hughes-Hronek able to carry crooked differentials to subsidize the rest of the team, but I think it's clear they're not really a threat to any real contender now. Last season was their shot.

I don't buy this argument at all, personally. You completely decimate a dynamite 6-man defense, leaving nobody that can outlet besides Hughes, and this seems like the likely result of that, which everyone dreaded and already somewhat anticipated as a possible problem going into the season with Forbort and Desharnais replacing significant minutes-- it seems disingenuous to attribute all this back to PDO regressing to the norm and get all I told you so about that when that significant difference in personnel has been staring everyone in the face all along, in my opinion.

Can PDO regressing to the norm also be an issue that could have happened anyways? Possibly, sure, but the effect of that is pretty ambiguous when a much bigger problem is currently hamstringing the team.

 

[VanJack]

I was expecting a loss last night, but feared that we'd be blown out. That we only lost 1-3 due to an empty netter gives me some relief, all things considered.

The reality is, the Canucks did play a very strong road game. They dominated the first period and should have come out of it up by more than 1-0.

But you knew that after going to OT the night before in Utah, the Canucks energy-level would be waning by the late second and third periods. Yet despite being down 2-1 they did throw everything at Vegas to at least try and salvage something out of the game.

So you're right. This really wasn't a bad effort by the Canucks at all. I think what disappointed Canuck fans the most is the impotence of the offence, and the disappearance of the Canucks best players.

But it's been a season-long trend.....the inability to drive five-on-five offense. If the fourth line is your top offensive driver like it was last night, it's almost a guaranteed loss.