Player Discussion The Henrik & Daniel Sedin Discussion - Part IV | Encore for 2019?

[Hardyvan123]

62 points in 74 games then. About the same as Datsyuk since Datsyuk became a top six player. Really not that bad. Certainly not bad enough to obsess over.

Well not really about the same as Datsyuk but why let the facts get in the way eh?

Hank has had an okay (but not really that great compared to his regular season expectations) playoff career but absolutely no one is ever going to mistake his postseason resume with Datsyuk...period.

The playoff resume of the Sedins, along with their less than elite international careers is what makes their entire careers and legacy less than their stats might suggest.

Also Hank has had a better career hands down.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Well not really about the same as Datsyuk but why let the facts get in the way eh?

Hank has had an okay (but not really that great compared to his regular season expectations) playoff career but absolutely no one is ever going to mistake his postseason resume with Datsyuk...period.

The playoff resume of the Sedins, along with their less than elite international careers is what makes their entire careers and legacy less than their stats might suggest.

Also Hank has had a better career hands down.

I will never forgive the Sedins for their disappearing acts in the 2011 playoffs (especially the Boston series, but it adds up when you add the Nashville and Chicago series in there).

 

[Intangibos]

Well not really about the same as Datsyuk but why let the facts get in the way eh?

Hank has had an okay (but not really that great compared to his regular season expectations) playoff career but absolutely no one is ever going to mistake his postseason resume with Datsyuk...period.

The playoff resume of the Sedins, along with their less than elite international careers is what makes their entire careers and legacy less than their stats might suggest.

Also Hank has had a better career hands down.

Sedins have a higher PPG pace than Jonathan 'Playoff Performer' Toews and Kane in the playoffs, at least counting from like 2008 (obviously their early careers where they weren't elite aren't relevant for, they hit their primes fairly late)

Not really sure what you people want from them. They have produced in the playoffs, and the stats are there to back it up. People on this city like to complain about them, but if you compared players looking at 2007-present, you would have them near the very top every time, even just looking at their playoff stats. Not to mention they clearly play hurt all the time, given everyone seems to be able to take liberties with them. I've never seen players get crosschecked in the lower back as much as Henrik Sedin. I remember near the end of the 2011 season Weber got him and you could hear him scream on TV, but he kept playing. I don't think he was healthy for the playoffs and he still produced.

Loss to Hawks 2009 - Henrik 10GP, 4G, 6A, 10P - Daniel 10GP, 4G, 6A, 10P (PPG)
Loss to Hawks 2010 - Henrik 12GP, 3G, 11A, 14P - Daniel 12GP, 5G, 9A, 14P (PPG)
Loss to Bruins 2011 - Henrik 25GP, 3G, 19A, 22P - Daniel 25GP, 9G, 11A, 20P (Almost PPG, 0.8 for Daniel)
Loss to Kings 2012 - Henrik 5GP, 2G, 3A, 5P - Daniel 2GP, 0G, 2A, 2P (Fresh back from Injury, Keith hit, both PPG, absolutely dominant Kings team)
Loss to Sharks 2013 - Henrik 4GP, 0G, 3A, 3P - Daniel 4GP, 0G, 3A, 3P (0.75PPG, small sample, probably the worst officiated series I've ever seen)
Loss to Flames 2014 - Henrik 6GP, 1G, 3A, 4P - Daniel 6GP, 2G, 2A, 4P (Keep in mind 1,2,3,4. They looked dominant but barely got icetime. 0.66 PPG which is their worst pace since 2009, but small sample size and again, limited ice time)

Real playoff chokers. Yeah, they are all 'Losses', but only one out of 16 teams win in the playoffs. We lost to the eventual cup champions multiple times. We were decimated in 2011 and should have won, had Hamhuis or Malhotra not sustained freak injuries. They have put the team on their backs every year, in spite of playing against some of the best defence in the world. Weber/Suter, Chara, Keith/Seabrook, Doughty. And that's fine, it's their job, but they get heavily line matched and either play against shut down guys (and still produce), or top lines (and win the matchup).

I find it shocking this playoff choker myth still exists, given how clearly false it is. It isn't even that they play poorly in the playoffs, people claim they can't score in the playoffs when obviously that's not true just looking at the points. When the Sedins are gone, I hope you people realize how wrong you were and how amazing they were in their prime. I doubt we ever see players like them again.

If you don't like them because they don't play physical, or "Canadian" or off the rush (they did for a while, but slowed down again and it was never their specialty), fine. But don't claim they can't score in the playoffs because unless you don't know what scoring means, it has no basis in reality.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Sedins have a higher PPG pace than Jonathan 'Playoff Performer' Toews and Kane in the playoffs, at least counting from like 2007 (obviously their early careers where they weren't elite aren't relevant for, they hit their primes fairly late)

Not really sure what you people want from them. They have produced in the playoffs, and the stats are there to back it up. People on this city like to complain about them, but if you compared players looking at 2007-present, you would have them near the very top every time, even just looking at their playoff stats.

LOL. Let's just arbitrarily throw out some of their bad years, but ignore the fact that Toews and Kane produced right from a young age.

Toews and Kane are Conn Smythe calibre players. The Sedins are not. The Sedins have been inconsistent in the playoffs. They'll have a series where they produce in bunches, then they'll disappear for a while. And in 2011, outside of the San Jose series, they were awful.

 

[Luongos Knob]

I will never forgive the Sedins for their disappearing acts in the 2011 playoffs (especially the Boston series, but it adds up when you add the Nashville and Chicago series in there).

Daniel sedin most points among canucks in that series

 

[Hardyvan123]

Yea, because randomly falling off at age 31 by game 60 of the season for no apparent reason makes a lot more sense

10 and 11 at ages 29 and 30 are clear outliers in Daniel's career.

In 12, Daniel was already well below the 10 and 11 outlier seasons by quite a bit.

anyone who watched the Canucks last year can see that despite Daniel points Hank was the better player as all to often Daniel just gave away the puck to no one.

 

[Intangibos]

LOL. Let's just arbitrarily throw out some of their bad years, but ignore the fact that Toews and Kane produced right from a young age.

Toews and Kane are Conn Smythe calibre players. The Sedins are not. The Sedins have been inconsistent in the playoffs. They'll have a series where they produce in bunches, then they'll disappear for a while. And in 2011, outside of the San Jose series, they were awful.

So you think all players have the same career trajectory? Nobody here is upset about Sedins' playoff performances in 2003. We're talking about the cup winning window where they were paid and played on the first line and expected to produce at that rate (which they did.) Nobody cares if they put up 0.5ppg playing on the 3rd line in 2002 or whatever getting paid $1M. Arbitrary indeed.

If we had won the cup, the Conn Smyth should have gone to Sedin or Luongo. I would vote for Luongo since he was absolutely phenomenal in the 2011 run, aside from the blowouts, but the entire team collapsed in front of him in those.

Star players disappear for a while, I hate to break it to you. In that 2011 series where we beat Chicago, Toews looked invisible throughout, despite scoring a key goal to tie game 7. Sedins were fine in the Chicago series, amazing in the SJ series, poor in the Nashville series and fine in the Boston series. Everyone was injured, there is a reason we were giving up 6 goal games when we were on the road. Daniel was the highest scoring forward in that series, and the Sedins were literally the only healthy line, and I seriously doubt their health in that series.

Kesler
Samuelsson
Malhotra
Edler
Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Higgins
Bieksa

all playing injured. And like I said, I'd wager at least Henrik was playing hurt.

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Raymond(Injured in game 6 SCF) --- --- (Kesler + Samuelsson)
--- --- Torres (Higgins + Malhotra)
Glass Lapierre Hansen
Tambellini
Oreskovich
Hodgson
Rypien



Salo --- (Ehrhoff)
--- --- (Hamhuis Bieksa)
--- Rome (Edler)
Tanev
Alberts
Ballard

I don't know many star players that would produce being a one line team like that against the 2011 Bruins. We lost, get over it, it wasn't the Sedins fault. Most of those players obviously played, outside of Hamhuis, Samuelsson, and Malhotra, but their effectiveness was severely limited due to the injuries. Lets face it, the games we lost in that series we lost big. Potting a few more goals wouldn't have won us the series when we couldn't play defence.

 

[dave babych returns]

I wonder if Pauser will ever be able to forgive the Sedins for being worse than Toews, Kane et al but better than 99% of the league.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I will never forgive the Sedins for their disappearing acts in the 2011 playoffs (especially the Boston series, but it adds up when you add the Nashville and Chicago series in there).

I'm sure they're heart-broken.

 

[Aphid Attraction]

I will never forgive the Sedins for their disappearing acts in the 2011 playoffs (especially the Boston series, but it adds up when you add the Nashville and Chicago series in there).

Shows the character of the man i guess. Nelson Mandela was able to forgive the sins of a country that held him in prison... But you just be bitter about that. I must have hurt you alot.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Shows the character of the man i guess. Nelson Mandela was able to forgive the sins of a country that held him in prison... But you just be bitter about that. I must have hurt you alot.

Henrik, is that you? Or are you Daniel?

 

[Aphid Attraction]

Henrik, is that you? Or are you Daniel?

Lol... It*

 

[vanuck]

LOL. Let's just arbitrarily throw out some of their bad years, but ignore the fact that Toews and Kane produced right from a young age.

Toews and Kane are Conn Smythe calibre players. The Sedins are not. The Sedins have been inconsistent in the playoffs. They'll have a series where they produce in bunches, then they'll disappear for a while. And in 2011, outside of the San Jose series, they were awful.

IIRC, Toews and Thornton didn't look great either in the series we played against them (especially the former who was mostly invisible). Sedins outperformed them both.

When they lead your team in playoff scoring, it's not how they did it that you should be fretting over. It's the fact that they did it while Hank and half the team were injured and nobody else was able to provide secondary scoring.

 

[Cancuks]

Canucks would have won the Cup if Schneider played in game #7 rather then Luongo IMO. Not Sedins fault. That series was decided by goaltending.

 

[Intangibos]

IIRC, Toews and Thornton didn't look great either in the series we played against them (especially the former who was mostly invisible). Sedins outperformed them both.

When they lead your team in playoff scoring, it's not how they did it that you should be fretting over. It's the fact that they did it while Hank and half the team were injured and nobody else was able to provide secondary scoring.

Pretty much this. Toews and Kane have plenty of depth behind them when they get shut down, and they do get shut down. Behind the Sedins, Kesler had one dominant series. I was usually more impressed with our 3rd line in most playoff series since 2008. To be fair, the second line got a lot of defensive responsibility and the 3rd was meant to put up points, until we got Malhotra in 2011. Then when Malhotra went down, that responsibility went partially back to Kesler's line. Still, though, the Canucks have been a 'one line team' for a while.

The only reason anyone should want the Sedins gone is due to the return, or knowing that without them we're a bottom 5 team and can get some top picks. Their play has been stellar for us for years. It's just they've been so good for us, it's really hard to put up awful losing seasons with them playing without being crippled by injury or exhaustion.

Canucks would have won the Cup if Schneider played in game #7 rather then Luongo IMO. Not Sedins fault. That series was decided by goaltending.

You know you have to score goals to win, right? We lost game 7 4-0. Was Schneider going to pot a few or what? Luongo carried that injured team to game 7 almost single handedly. No team has ever gone to game 7 scoring less goals than we did, not even trap era Devils. He had AHLers playing in front of him and you'll find lots of those goals against us in that series were 2 on 1s, breakaways ect. It was like an all star game, except only one team had all stars, Luongo can't stop them all. The 3 games we won in that series were 1 goal games IIRC, and game 7 we got shut out. I don't want to sound snooty, but people who blame Luongo for that series, much like the people who blame the Sedins for that series, have no idea what they're talking about. You're either listening to the media's narrative where they stir up negativity and controversy, or you don't like those players for some reason. No reasonable objective person could blame Luongo for that series. Yeah, he got blown the **** out in our losses, but how many breakaways and 2 on 1s can you stop before you let them in? We had a depleted lineup and Boston pressed that advantage when they had last change at home to get their guys out against our AHLers.

 

[Cancuks]

Pretty much this. Toews and Kane have plenty of depth behind them when they get shut down, and they do get shut down. Behind the Sedins, Kesler had one dominant series. I was usually more impressed with our 3rd line in most playoff series since 2008. To be fair, the second line got a lot of defensive responsibility and the 3rd was meant to put up points, until we got Malhotra in 2011. Then when Malhotra went down, that responsibility went partially back to Kesler's line. Still, though, the Canucks have been a 'one line team' for a while.

The only reason anyone should want the Sedins gone is due to the return, or knowing that without them we're a bottom 5 team and can get some top picks. Their play has been stellar for us for years. It's just they've been so good for us, it's really hard to put up awful losing seasons with them playing without being crippled by injury or exhaustion.



You know you have to score goals to win, right? We lost game 7 4-0. Was Schneider going to pot a few or what? Luongo carried that injured team to game 7 almost single handedly. No team has ever gone to game 7 scoring less goals than we did, not even trap era Devils. He had AHLers playing in front of him and you'll find lots of those goals against us in that series were 2 on 1s, breakaways ect. It was like an all star game, except only one team had all stars, Luongo can't stop them all. The 3 games we won in that series were 1 goal games IIRC, and game 7 we got shut out. I don't want to sound snooty, but people who blame Luongo for that series, much like the people who blame the Sedins for that series, have no idea what they're talking about. You're either listening to the media's narrative where they stir up negativity and controversy, or you don't like those players for some reason. No reasonable objective person could blame Luongo for that series. Yeah, he got blown the **** out in our losses, but how many breakaways and 2 on 1s can you stop before you let them in? We had a depleted lineup and Boston pressed that advantage when they had last change at home to get their guys out against our AHLers.

No one will ever no for sure but I stand by the idea that a change in momentum - the only logical thing would be to change the goaltender - might have swung game 7 in our favor. Luongo's confidence was broken. Like when they played LA the next year, Schenider played lights out. A single change like that IMO would have swung momentum in Vancouver's favor. At least Vigneault should have had the ballz to try something like that.

 

[Intangibos]

No one will ever no for sure but I stand by the idea that a change in momentum - the only logical thing would be to change the goaltender - might have swung game 7 in our favor. Luongo's confidence was broken. Like when they played LA the next year, Schenider played lights out. A single change like that IMO would have swung momentum in Vancouver's favor. At least Vigneault should have had the ballz to try something like that.

Vigneault had the balls to play Schneider in game 6 against Chicago. He let in 3 goals, one being on a penalty shot and two off of him horribly misplaying the puck. Letting a bad goal happens, but two goals in an elimination game based off you misplaying the puck is pretty bad, so at the time Schneider didn't exactly earn another game. Luongo let in the goal in OT after playing fine coming in cold off the bench, since Schneider was hurt on the penalty shot IIRC (cramping due to dehydration). The OT goal was deflected and Luongo got it, but the puck wasn't cleared and rebound put in. Again, that wasn't really a rebound that could be controlled, he got his blocker in front of a deflection at the last second, you have to hope your D can clear. I love Schneider and would have been comfortable with him heading into the playoffs, but Luongo simply outplayed him. Note the "had him flailing on the first shot" which makes it seem bad but in reality it was his only option there. If the D clear the puck after, that's a Tim Thomas clip



Now conversely, if you can bear to watch:




While the first goal wasn't exactly very good, it was a cross ice one timer through traffic. All three goals against are the result of defensive breakdowns, and not just 'bad goals'. Furthermore, we had pressure throughout the game, but our powerplay was weak with injuries to Kesler, Edler, Ehrhoff, Bieksa, and probably one of the Sedins. We even produced chances 5v5 but Thomas played very well and their totally healthy D controlled Thomas' big rebounds.

Sedins couldn't carry the team against a Vezina / Smyth goalie with a Norris D stapled to them, especially when Boston could take liberties because we stopped being able to punish on the PP.
Luongo couldn't carry the team that couldn't score any goals and had no healthy players on the back end.

We were a victim of injuries. Maybe that was our playstyle, maybe it was bad luck (I do happen to think that the two biggest injuries happened to Hamhuis and Malhotra, and both were freak accidents, so we probably should have won the cup), but it wasn't Luongo. Schneider wasn't the savior of this team that we missed because he would have had to literally win games by himself, which Luongo did in games 1,2 and 5.

 

[Hardyvan123]

So you think all players have the same career trajectory? Nobody here is upset about Sedins' playoff performances in 2003. We're talking about the cup winning window where they were paid and played on the first line and expected to produce at that rate (which they did.) Nobody cares if they put up 0.5ppg playing on the 3rd line in 2002 or whatever getting paid $1M. Arbitrary indeed.

If we had won the cup, the Conn Smyth should have gone to Sedin or Luongo. I would vote for Luongo since he was absolutely phenomenal in the 2011 run, aside from the blowouts, but the entire team collapsed in front of him in those.

Star players disappear for a while, I hate to break it to you. In that 2011 series where we beat Chicago, Toews looked invisible throughout, despite scoring a key goal to tie game 7. Sedins were fine in the Chicago series, amazing in the SJ series, poor in the Nashville series and fine in the Boston series. Everyone was injured, there is a reason we were giving up 6 goal games when we were on the road. Daniel was the highest scoring forward in that series, and the Sedins were literally the only healthy line, and I seriously doubt their health in that series.

Kesler
Samuelsson
Malhotra
Edler
Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Higgins
Bieksa

all playing injured. And like I said, I'd wager at least Henrik was playing hurt.

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Raymond(Injured in game 6 SCF) --- --- (Kesler + Samuelsson)
--- --- Torres (Higgins + Malhotra)
Glass Lapierre Hansen
Tambellini
Oreskovich
Hodgson
Rypien



Salo --- (Ehrhoff)
--- --- (Hamhuis Bieksa)
--- Rome (Edler)
Tanev
Alberts
Ballard

I don't know many star players that would produce being a one line team like that against the 2011 Bruins. We lost, get over it, it wasn't the Sedins fault. Most of those players obviously played, outside of Hamhuis, Samuelsson, and Malhotra, but their effectiveness was severely limited due to the injuries. Lets face it, the games we lost in that series we lost big. Potting a few more goals wouldn't have won us the series when we couldn't play defence.

Hank was minus 11 in the playoffs that year, Daniel -9 and Erhoff, part of their offense help that year was -13.

Really doubt full that Hank was a serious Conn Smythe candidate that year.

Like I said before Hank and the Sedins have been okay in the playoffs, scoring points, but they haven't done enough to raise the Canucks to playoff glory.

And before the team gets blamed for all of their woes, some of which I agree with BTW, why the regular season success and then dismal playoff failure?

They were a goalpost away from losing in the 1st round against the Black Hawks and literally folded after Bolland came back, lucky to win that series really.

 

[Intangibos]

Hank was minus 11 in the playoffs that year, Daniel -9 and Erhoff, part of their offense help that year was -13.

Really doubt full that Hank was a serious Conn Smythe candidate that year.

Like I said before Hank and the Sedins have been okay in the playoffs, scoring points, but they haven't done enough to raise the Canucks to playoff glory.

And before the team gets blamed for all of their woes, some of which I agree with BTW, why the regular season success and then dismal playoff failure?

They were a goalpost away from losing in the 1st round against the Black Hawks and literally folded after Bolland came back, lucky to win that series really.

Jonathan "Mr Clutch" Toews was a -4 in just the Canucks series. Kane was a minus player in the playoffs from 2008-2011 (The three years we played them), including a -9 in 2008.

Plus Minus is a terrible stat that can be easily misleading.

 

[dave babych returns]

It's worth pointing out that Kesler was instrumental in the poor performances of Toews and Thornton.

If we had Manny healthy in those playoffs, with the way Kesler matched up against the #1 guys, we could have had the Sedins feasting on mismatches and would have breezed into the Finals. Would have made the difference IMO.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Star players disappear for a while, I hate to break it to you. In that 2011 series where we beat Chicago, Toews looked invisible throughout, despite scoring a key goal to tie game 7. Sedins were fine in the Chicago series, amazing in the SJ series, poor in the Nashville series and fine in the Boston series. Everyone was injured, there is a reason we were giving up 6 goal games when we were on the road. Daniel was the highest scoring forward in that series, and the Sedins were literally the only healthy line, and I seriously doubt their health in that series.

You don't have to doubt it. Reports later cited Henrik was playing through a groin injury, which was why he stopped taking faceoffs for a while. Our only healthy players throughout that series were Daniel, Burrows and Hansen. I firmly believe if Hamhuis or Kesler weren't injured, we would have beat Boston.

I disagree with you about the Conn Smythe though. Luongo pushed ahead, otherwise it was Kesler's to lose. He was an absolute monster until his injury.

 

[I am toxic]

You don't have to doubt it. Reports later cited Henrik was playing through a groin injury, which was why he stopped taking faceoffs for a while. Our only healthy players throughout that series were Daniel, Burrows and Hansen. I firmly believe if Hamhuis or Kesler weren't injured, we would have beat Boston.

I disagree with you about the Conn Smythe though. Luongo pushed ahead, otherwise it was Kesler's to lose. He was an absolute monster until his injury.

Also ankle and wrist. To his credit, he never discussed it in the media, wouldn't allow it to be used as an excuse (IIRC - CBC story appears taken down).

 

[JuniorNelson]

Sedins are entering the era of needing support players. Before, they could play with anybody and simply not pass the puck to him. Now, they are a little slower and their passing is a little less crisp. They can be anticipated and intercepted, especially Daniel. If they continue to adjust, this shouldn't be a big problem. They are very earnest and dedicated and showed last season that they are not on the traditional trajectory of scorers, who usually drop off by now.

I think they might benefit from some different deployment, as well. It's often all the eggs in one basket for this team. Daniel is a capable set-up man. Do we really need to see him put Henrik in alone, any more? We know that Henrik will pass it back. What if Daniel was setting up Horvat? Just asking.

 

[I am toxic]

Henrik refused to say anything at the time or since. I'm not excusing anything, I don't have any complaints about their playoff performances. Well, one - when one of the twins had a near backdoor play (I think with Burrows) earlier in game 7 of the SCF and opted to shoot. First goal was likely going to win that game. And really, that poor decision is on AV.

I really appreciate having them here, and I hope they retire as Canucks.

For me, it's not only about winning a SC.

 

[Huggy]

The Sedins will retire Stanely Cup Champions.

Horvat
Virtanen

core is forming and Chychurn is next