Post-Game Talk: Post-Tank Thread: Vancouver finishes w/ 3rd tank position (lottery odds in OP)

[ATypicalCanadian]

1) Canucks
2) Colorado
3)Winnipeg
4) Toronto
5) Oilers

First try today and I gotta say I would be okay with this.

 

[CanaFan]

I said this team would be bottom 5, and probably even bottom 3. I'm just attacking Y2K's post since I took it as a "the Sedins aren't good" post when in reality I don't think much could have kept this ship afloat.

Also, with Sutter, this would have been a 100 point playoff team

Fair. I remember getting into a couple of long debates with posters over that topic and I argued our fortunes rested more heavily on our goaltending (mainly Miller at the time) than the Sedins. In other words if our 'tending was bad enough "even the Sedins" couldn't save us from sinking to the bottom.

Turns out I was right but for the wrong reason. Goaltending wasn't really the problem but Sedins weren't nearly good enough in the second half. Not saying they were the "problem" but they didn't play well enough to keep us out of the bottom as people thought.

 

[Scurr]

Fair. I remember getting into a couple of long debates with posters over that topic and I argued our fortunes rested more heavily on our goaltending (mainly Miller at the time) than the Sedins. In other words if our 'tending was bad enough "even the Sedins" couldn't save us from sinking to the bottom.

Turns out I was right but for the wrong reason. Goaltending wasn't really the problem but Sedins weren't nearly good enough in the second half. Not saying they were the "problem" but they didn't play well enough to keep us out of the bottom as people thought.

Henrik missed some games and laboured through many others.

I don't follow the rest of the league all that closely, do many teams have 70 games missed from their top 2 centres and 68 games from their top 3 defensemen? Are they built to withstand them?

 

[CanaFan]

Henrik missed some games and laboured through many others.

I don't follow the rest of the league all that closely, do many teams have 70 games missed from their top 2 centres and 68 games from their top 3 defensemen? Are they built to withstand them?

That's not my argument. My argument was the Sedins couldn't prevent a bottom 5 finish if the roster was crappy enough. I didn't put caveats on it for injury, etc. Maybe because I foresaw that injuries happen to teams and that expecting a full season without injury to a paper thin line up is a mistake. We got injuries that were probably around the league average, no more no less. Sutter, even if healthy isn't actually a second line centre. He just happened to be ours.

 

[Scurr]

That's not my argument. My argument was the Sedins couldn't prevent a bottom 5 finish if the roster was crappy enough. I didn't put caveats on it for injury, etc. Maybe because I foresaw that injuries happen to teams and that expecting a full season without injury to a paper thin line up is a mistake. We got injuries that were probably around the league average, no more no less. Sutter, even if healthy isn't actually a second line centre. He just happened to be ours.

Sorry, I wasn't arguing your point. Henrik being injured was just something I thought could help explain their second half. At their age it's foolish to keep expecting the kind of health we've seen from them. The defence being in shambles would have hurt, too. I'm not making excuses for the team… just the twins

Also, I'm not suggesting the team suffered worse than it should have. It was thin on defence and down the middle and paid the price for it. It does seem a little unlucky to have so many of those injuries be to those spots specifically, though. Is it more common than I think?

 

[arttk]

Sorry, I wasn't arguing your point. Henrik being injured was just something I thought could help explain their second half. At their age it's foolish to keep expecting the kind of health we've seen from them. The defence being in shambles would have hurt, too. I'm not making excuses for the team… just the twins

Also, I'm not suggesting the team suffered worse than it should have. It was thin on defence and down the middle and paid the price for it. It does seem a little unlucky to have so many of those injuries be to those spots specifically, though. Is it more common than I think?

We have a lot of D injuries every single year. Even Benning himself said before the start of this season that we should have 9 or 10 NHL D(forgot the count) and yet only starting the season with 7(and 3 of those are barely 3rd paring level).

 

[Scurr]

We have a lot of D injuries every single year. Even Benning himself said before the start of this season that we should have 9 or 10 NHL D(forgot the count) and yet only starting the season with 7(and 3 of those are barely 3rd paring level).

Yeah, you almost have to expect 1 of the 6 to be injured at all times and prepare for stretches with 2 or 3 missing. It's rarely so top heavy, though. Last year it was 43, the year before it was 40. 68 is a lot.

I definitely agree they lacked depth, though.

 

[CCF]

Ran the simulator 40 times....Canucks had 3 top 3 picks....yikes

 

[The Jesus*]

Fair to keep in mind that if the Oilers pick at 3 and us at 4, they probably take Chych leaving us one of the Finns.

 

[Josepho]

Fair to keep in mind that if the Oilers pick at 3 and us at 4, they probably take Chych leaving us one of the Finns.

They most certainly wouldn't.

 

[The Jesus*]

They most certainly wouldn't.

I see them going Chych over Laine. They'd probably take Jesse though at 3. Or maybe they'd entertain moving down if it's Laine that's on board.

 

[polarbearcub]

They most certainly wouldn't.

Agreed. More of a chance they trade for a d

 

[CanaFan]

Sorry, I wasn't arguing your point. Henrik being injured was just something I thought could help explain their second half. At their age it's foolish to keep expecting the kind of health we've seen from them. The defence being in shambles would have hurt, too. I'm not making excuses for the team… just the twins

Also, I'm not suggesting the team suffered worse than it should have. It was thin on defence and down the middle and paid the price for it. It does seem a little unlucky to have so many of those injuries be to those spots specifically, though. Is it more common than I think?

Ah ok. I'm definitely not "blaming" the Sedins, but I was just being realistic that they couldn't single handily keep this team from the putrid season that was showing as early as last October. That was a function of both how bad the rest of the team looked, as well as the cracks starting to show in their games. They are still very good players but it wasn't reasonable to heap meta human powers on them as well, which *some* posters seemed to be doing at the time. That's all. Certainly not pointing the finger at them or anything.

 

[The Stig]

Ran the simulator. First try:

1.Vancouver
2.Toronto
3.Arizona
4.Edmonton
5.Columbus

 

[VanJack]

Laines shot is incredible

McKeens has Laine passing Matthews as the first pick....but even in a worst case scenario, and we draft 5-6, that still leaves a choice of Tkachuk or Chychrun...a no-lose situation really.

 

[The Stig]

McKeens has Laine passing Matthews as the first pick....but even in a worst case scenario, and we draft 5-6, that still leaves a choice of Tkachuk or Chychrun...a no-lose situation really.

Best case scenario, we have a future franchise player. Worst case scenario, we end up with a really good player.

 

[Icebreakers]

Best case scenario, we have a future franchise player. Worst case scenario, we end up with a really good player.

Worst case scenario is we draft a Jake Virtanen and the other players are a Nylander Ehlers ripping it up in the league. It all relative. If we draft the worst player compared to the teams around us we lose in the end. Imagine drafting a 2nd pairing dman while Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Edmonton get first liners.

 

[Serac]

Worst case scenario is we draft a Jake Virtanen and the other players are a Nylander Ehlers ripping it up in the league. It all relative. If we draft the worst player compared to the teams around us we lose in the end. Imagine drafting a 2nd pairing dman while Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Edmonton get first liners.

Jesus lol

 

[dwarf]

Best case scenario, we have a future franchise player. Worst case scenario, we end up with a really good player.

Yeah with a top 6 pick we are going to get a solid player this year. I am excited!

 

[CanaFan]

Worst case scenario is we draft a Jake Virtanen and the other players are a Nylander Ehlers ripping it up in the league. It all relative. If we draft the worst player compared to the teams around us we lose in the end. Imagine drafting a 2nd pairing dman while Calgary Winnipeg Toronto Edmonton get first liners.

Only in a league where we don't play any other teams except the ones that "out drafted" us. Jesus, if we get a good player, that's a good thing. We don't have to out draft everyone else for it to be meaningful. Like did Carolina lose when they drafted Eric Staal because Anaheim drafted a better player in Getzlaf? Was it all "in vain" for them? Lol

 

[Wilch]

Ran the simulator 40 times....Canucks had 3 top 3 picks....yikes

2 first overall in 5 tries.

It's a matter of luck.

 

[Nuckles]

Guys, I just ran an online simulator that means absolutely nothing and the Canucks got the 1st overall pick! This is a sign that we're getting Matthews!

 

[Serac]

Guys, I just ran an online simulator that means absolutely nothing and the Canucks got the 1st overall pick! This is a sign that we're getting Matthews!

Quoting this for when we get Matthews !
It will be on your head, Nuckles

 

[M2Beezy]

One word: MATTHEWS

 

[M2Beezy]

Quoting this for when we get Matthews !
It will be on your head, Nuckles

We will get him dont u worry