Crappy time for Baertschi to get injured given that it looked like he was starting to get his confidence back. Hopefully it's a short-term thing.
Miller should not be playing twice in a row.
Eh, he was really good against AZ so I get riding the hot hand
Half of our forward are AHLers... wouldn't have hurt to have one of Pulkkinen, MPS or Griffith now..
Crappy time for Baertschi to get injured given that it looked like he was starting to get his confidence back. Hopefully it's a short-term thing.
Irrelevant. He's not here next year and we need to know what we have with Markstrom.
Yeah, that really sucks. His last 2 games were very good and gave hope that maybe he was going to break out. Very disappointing setback.
Yeah, it's ridiculous.
If Miller gave us an obviously better chance to win, MAYBE there's some argument there. But their stats have been almost identical for two years. And one guy is theoretically a huge long-term part of the team while the other will be gone next year. Markstrom should be getting 50 starts this year, but without Miller's injury/illness he'd be on pace for 25 yet again.
This. Look, I'm a Marky homer and you all know that. But Benning seems to agree and yet, he's still clearly the backup. He gets the back end of b2b's and when both have been available - Miller has been chosen most of the time. I don't mind Miller, I think he's fine when rested - but when are we going to see what we have in Marky? Otherwise we will be right back signing another expensive goalie in the summer.
You know, our record isn't all that bad, especially when compared to supposed "top notch" teams like Dallas.
And the fact that half our team is injured already.
When they say foot injury.. its usually all or nothing -- needs a day or 2 for soreness to subside due to taking a puck off of it... or 6-8 weeks for a hairline fracture.
Usually.
Hoping its simply swollen and sore.
What weird reverse of fortunes from last season when it was consistently our dmen getting picked off by injuries... (edit.. actually on second thought... it was everyone last yr)
We win anyway..
Keep the scoring up boys..
You know, our record isn't all that bad, especially when compared to supposed "top notch" teams like Dallas.
And the fact that half our team is injured already.
You know, this is the big illusion with the three-point NHL....despite just three regulation wins in 20 games, the Canucks record "really isn't all that bad"....no matter how badly you suck, the standings always say 'you're still in it"....this is Gary Bettman's preferred method of 'competitive balance'.....you can go on a nine game regulation losing streak like the Canucks, but hope will always spring eternal.
What people overlook is that we aren't just chasing the last playoff spots, we are also chasing them with a bunch of other outside teams. So we have to beat the last team and all the other chasers on hot streaks (ie that go on 7-2-1 or 6-2-2 streaks etc).Yup.
Our record last year doesn't look 'that' bad - 31-38-13. Only 7 games below .500!
But when you take out the OT losses that were just 'losses' under the old system and the SO wins that would have been ties, our actual record by 80s/90s rules was 25-47-10. A 60-point team.
And you see the same thing this year. Even though we only have 3 regulation wins in 20 games and the worst goal differential in the NHL ... we're only 3-4 points out of a playoff spot on account of all the loser points and free points we're accumulating.
And yeah, it's impossible to be that far out of a playoff spot at this point. 4 points out after 20 games projects to 16 points out after 82. To focus on this is to chase a mirage.
You know, our record isn't all that bad, especially when compared to supposed "top notch" teams like Dallas.
And the fact that half our team is injured already.