The last 3 games have been pretty tough to watch.
- The Sedins with Vanek works occasionally when they are able to set up. When they figure each other out they will be a little bit better because Vanek is one of the few players in the league with the IQ to play exactly their style, without simply being a puck retriever.
However, they are all old, slow, and cannot win many physical battles. As such, the are left to over rely on quick passing which becomes predictable.
I will say, on the PP they did a good job of setting up Brock 2 or 3 times for chances that might be goals once Brock is a bit more comfortable in the NHL (he bobbled one of them, and wasn't quite in the right position for the other).
- Horvat-Baertschi-Boeser
Not a good night for this line. Pretty much tend to create whatever Horvat can do on 1 on 2's whenever he gets up a head of steam. Baertschi's tricks aren't working right now. He's working hard, but he's just gotta find a way to be better and more effective. Boeser is a goal scorer, but he's not some franchise player who can come in and play effectively on the top line right away. He loses a fair few battles due to his size.
That said, Boeser's hockey sense is off the charts. He knows where to go, makes amazing short passes, and forechecks well because he is good at theory of mind. And that shot.
Sutter-Granlund-Dorsett
It's sad when Dorsett has been one of the best Canucks this year. But it's clear that the neck thing was bugging him for the last two years and he really is an effective 4th liner. Sutter is obviously overpaid, but fairly effective at his role too. That said, not a great night for him.
Granlund. I maintain, he is a bright spot. If you don't understand how good Granlund is, you probably either didn't play yourself or haven't watched for long enough. He has great hockey sense. Forces turnovers based on positioning and attacking at the right times. He's small and not entirely fast, so he can't move mountains on his own. But if he is ever placed with really good players, watch him take off. he has a habit of being the best part of any line he is on.
Burmistrov-Gagner-Eriksson
I like what I have seen from Burmistrov both within the season and in the pre-season. He's sneaky and good at stealing the puck. That little fake outside and then lean in that broke Hamilton's stick on the Dorsett goal was clever and bold. I think he's a good pick up.
Gagner: I hope he will figure it out. We're using him stupidly, he should be playing with Dorsett and Sutter in a 4th line role like he did in Columbus. Further, him on the point is absolutely asinine. He should be playing as the triangle option in front of the net, again, like he did in Columbus. And you can't fault his effort. But he is just so irrelevant. It really doesn't matter what he wants, bigger, faster opponents can easily strip him and render him useless.
Eriksson. He's intelligent and underrated in a way. There's a reason that his corsi tends to be pretty good. That said, for 6 mil? Just invisible and sad. Does anyone really think the outcome of our team is even tangentially related to his health?
Defense:
Pouliot: I saw some things that I liked. He made a nice move on Brodie when nobody was doing anything. Of course there was nobody with him and so it developed into nothing. But for his first game, and knowing that his confidence is stripped entirely, I was reasonably happy. This is a longterm plan. Not a short term one.
Stecher: Not sure what's wrong with the kid. He's playing kind of stupid. He may be struggling to adapt to the first league where he's not good enough to take over games with his feet, brain, and intellect. So he's trying to do too much because we are terrible and he isn't used to playing for bad teams.
Hutton: I like some of the aggression I see out of him offensively, but man he makes some dumb reads in the defensive zone. One of their goals came off a puck that was dumped into the corner and he was the closest player to it and didn't even lean in the direction of going for it. His partner had to chase it and Hutton was doing nothing on the play.
Tanev: Not a great game for him either. But one has to realize that NHL players tend to be champions at many levels that they play at. It does weird things to players psychologically to play for a bad team. For a guy who is elite defensively, and elite at taking the puck from tight spaces and then dishing it to more skilled players, to have to do it all on his own. It just doesn't work. Those aren't his instincts and it isn't his skill set.
Del Zotto: Mostly impressed so far. He won't turn water into wine but, depending on his partner, has shown he can be a semi-competent top 4 at 3 million per. Not bad.
Gudbranson: Fairly good game for him today. Shows a little physical assertiveness, which we lack in all other areas. That said, obviously Benning knows he made a mistake. He tried to trade him for a more expensive Jason Demers in the off season.
Goalie:
Markstrom:
Consistency man, figure it out. It' s not good enough to make 3 5-alarm saves and allow 2 floaters. It screws with your team's head. When a team starts fearing what will happen if they allow weak shots, it's all over.
---
God I hope this season gets more interesting. 78 more games of this is going to be tough to take.
