Anyone Else Concerned With Unemotional Play?

[polarbearcub]

As others have said, I think it's perfect for this team to have those 3 games at the end of the year.

We will have to beat at least 1 of these teams maybe 2-3 to get to the finals.

Ducks usually own us and should be a spirited test. Hawks are the hawks and the wings have man handled us this year. Really pumped for these playoff primers!

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Will this still be the case when we show up lame against Chicago at the end of the season? I can see now, people will write it off to it being the second to last game of the season and suggesting that the Canucks are looking forward to their first round matchup instead.

Well there would be very good reason to believe this. 2 years ago the Canucks were accused of being soft and easy to play against and they flipped a switch from game 1 of the playoffs against the Hawks and ran rough-shod over the big, tough West by being as physical a team as any out there.

I am more concerned about the Canucks trying to be too physical and being too emotional come playoff time as opposed to lacking in this area. When the team focuses on the puck as opposed to the opposing players that's when they've looked their best IMO.

The Hawks are the softest playoff team in the West right now and the most feared. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[King of the ES*]

Well there would be very good reason to believe this. 2 years ago the Canucks were accused of being soft and easy to play against and they flipped a switch from game 1 of the playoffs against the Hawks and ran rough-shod over the big, tough West by being as physical a team as any out there.

Um, I guess that same switch got flipped-off after G3 against the Hawks?

Let's not forget that the Canucks were 1 goal away from completing the biggest tank-job in sports history that same year.

 

[King of the ES*]

The Hawks are the softest playoff team in the West right now and the most feared. Draw your own conclusions.

This is not true at all. They're not soft. Is Duncan Keith soft? Brent Seabrook? Jonathan Toews? Come on. Why are they soft? Because they don't have a "policeman" like Sestito?

You seriously think that the Vancouver Canucks are harder to play against than the Chicago Blackhawks?

 

[Drop the Sopel]

This is not true at all. They're not soft. Is Duncan Keith soft? Brent Seabrook? Jonathan Toews? Come on. Why are they soft? Because they don't have a "policeman" like Sestito?

You seriously think that the Vancouver Canucks are harder to play against than the Chicago Blackhawks?

Anyone who knows a lick about the West knows the Hawks are soft. Go ask they're own fans - they will be the first to tell you they are an easy team to play against physically.

The Canucks are a hell of lot 'tougher' than the Hawks. Tougher to play against? Depends if you mean physically or more dfficult to beat. The Hawks are tougher to beat, the Canucks much tougher with their fists and physical game.

Can't believe you're trying to convince me the Hawks are tough because they have 'gritty North Americans' like Patrick Kane.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Um, I guess that same switch got flipped-off after G3 against the Hawks?

Let's not forget that the Canucks were 1 goal away from completing the biggest tank-job in sports history that same year.

You would think that series would have been a good learning experience for you, in that it showed that even though the canucks were running rough-shod over the Hawks physically it didn't do a lot for them on the scoresheet.

I hope you're not implying the Canucks weren't an exceptionally physical team in the playoffs in 2011 and much moreso than they were during the regular season? You're just not going to make that fly here. Too many knowledgeable fans around these parts.

 

[RobertKron]

Nah, I don't think there's anything wrong with the Sedins' leadership. The issue is that they're largely surrounded by a bunch of mild-mannered and well-behaved gentlemen, guys like Raymond, Higgins, Roy, Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison, Tanev, Ebbett/Schroeder, etc., etc. Bieksa's a known spot-picker around the league. Guys like Burrows & Hansen play hard, but I wouldn't think that they're very hard to play against. They don't hit. Kassian's typically on another planet during most games. Kesler's really our only guy with some legitimate and consistent grit to his game in our top-nine that I can think of.

That's exactly why a Ryane Clowe and/or a Raffi Torres should've been acquired. A loud, brash, SOB like either/both would've had a serious effect on this team IMO.

Don't blame the Sedins' leadership, blame a lack of leadership/foresight from our management.

Holy ****, what universe are you in?

 

[Gormo]

Im concerned about this probably more then anything.

Based on events over the past couple seasons, how is this team going to react if Schnieder gets run, or a liberty is taken on one of the Sedins?

Will our team respond in a way that the opposition will acknowledge by running their goalie, or taking a liberty on one of their stars? Will they respond by rallying together and playing with more intensity? I have my doubts.

I dread it will be just a token gesture and nothing more, because thats all Ive been seeing. This passive philosophy made sense when the Canucks had a lethal powerplay.

 

[King of the ES*]

Anyone who knows a lick about the West knows the Hawks are soft. Go ask they're own fans - they will be the first to tell you they are an easy team to play against physically.

The Canucks are a hell of lot 'tougher' than the Hawks. Tougher to play against? Depends if you mean physically or more dfficult to beat. The Hawks are tougher to beat, the Canucks much tougher with their fists and physical game.

Can't believe you're trying to convince me the Hawks are tough because they have 'gritty North Americans' like Patrick Kane.

Thanks, but I live in Chicago and am pretty familiar with them. They're not soft and the fanbase does not think that they're soft. They consistently play with an energy that Vancouver just doesn't. That is what wins games in playoffs, not "fists" (and has Tom Sestito or Dale Weise ever even won an NHL fight, anyway?).

Bringing up Patrick Kane, forgetting about Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Sharp, Bolland, Bickell, etc. The Chicago Blackhawks are not soft.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Nah, I don't think there's anything wrong with the Sedins' leadership. The issue is that they're largely surrounded by a bunch of mild-mannered and well-behaved gentlemen, guys like Raymond, Higgins, Roy, Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison, Tanev, Ebbett/Schroeder, etc., etc. Bieksa's a known spot-picker around the league. Guys like Burrows & Hansen play hard, but I wouldn't think that they're very hard to play against. They don't hit. Kassian's typically on another planet during most games. Kesler's really our only guy with some legitimate and consistent grit to his game in our top-nine that I can think of.

That's exactly why a Ryane Clowe and/or a Raffi Torres should've been acquired. A loud, brash, SOB like either/both would've had a serious effect on this team IMO.

Don't blame the Sedins' leadership, blame a lack of leadership/foresight from our management.

Tough to argue with this logic as it makes a lot of sense. The only thing I disagree with is that the Sedins don't lack leadership. Far too often I've seen them disappear in big games when everyone else disappears too and could use an inspiring performance from the Sedins to get going.

 

[Pip]

Thanks, but I live in Chicago and am pretty familiar with them. They're not soft and the fanbase does not think that they're soft. They consistently play with an energy that Vancouver just doesn't. That is what wins games in playoffs, not "fists" (and has Tom Sestito or Dale Weise ever even won an NHL fight, anyway?).

Bringing up Patrick Kane, forgetting about Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Sharp, Bolland, Bickell, etc. The Chicago Blackhawks are not soft.

The Hawks are soft, every other Western team in the playoffs right now is tougher. The Blackhawks are still an incredibly hard team to play against, but in terms of size and grit, they are very soft. Tough teams imo are the Ducks, Kings and Blues.

 

[Smokey McCanucks]

Okay, Leafs-Habs on Hockey Night in Canada, they might meet in the playoffs couple weeks from now, that's what you have on the one hand, now on the other you have a matinee in the high altitude against the bottom-dwelling Avs. Not to mention the Canucks are resting guys that are hurting, and Vigneault is mixing up the lines with all these pre-playoff experiments. It's a little bit different, isn't it? I'm sure there will be a bit of emotion on the upcoming homestand, with Detroit, Chicago and Anaheim all in Van.

 

[vancityluongo]

You'd think by now that people would've dispelled the ridiculous myth of "clutchness" in sports. It doesn't exist.

The Canucks got destroyed by Boston for two reasons. The primary was obviously the lack of offense. Which was probably caused by either injuries, or the fact that Boston was in the Canucks heads since game 3. They got too emotional. See Luongo after game 5.

Also, to y2k and others; there's a reason why Kesler or Bieksa are not the captain of the Canucks are Henrik Sedin is. Rah rah leaders aren't always the best, they just make for the best headlines. Give me Nick Lidstrom as a captain over Mark Messier any day.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You'd think by now that people would've dispelled the ridiculous myth of "clutchness" in sports. It doesn't exist.

The Canucks got destroyed by Boston for two reasons. The primary was obviously the lack of offense. Which was probably caused by either injuries, or the fact that Boston was in the Canucks heads since game 3. They got too emotional. See Luongo after game 5.

Also, to y2k and others; there's a reason why Kesler or Bieksa are not the captain of the Canucks are Henrik Sedin is. Rah rah leaders aren't always the best, they just make for the best headlines. Give me Nick Lidstrom as a captain over Mark Messier any day.

Messier had 6 Stanley Cups, Lidstrom had 4.

But that's beside the point.

How exactly did Luongo get too emotional after game 5? I think you've fallen victim to the media circus making an issue out of something that really was a non-issue.

I'm not even talking about rah rah leaders, although I do prefer them. I'm talking about leaders who have the ability to take their game to another level and take the team on their back in its moment in need. We don't have that. When the team struggles the Sedins disappear and everything goes to hell. I've only seen the Sedins take control of one playoff series in their entire careers, and it came against a team that is notorious for choking in the playoffs.

 

[me2]

If they felt no team would take him, why would they? I'm not saying that's the case but you're speaking with unwarranted certainty.

Wait wait. So you are saying the Habs were so confident that 29 other teams didn't have Gallagher on the radar in the mid-later rounds pick that they that they were prepared to risk losing him to draft worse players for what amounts to an exchange of a 4th round pick for a 5th round pick.

 

[Cocoa Crisp]

Im concerned about this probably more then anything.

Based on events over the past couple seasons, how is this team going to react if Schnieder gets run, or a liberty is taken on one of the Sedins?

Will our team respond in a way that the opposition will acknowledge by running their goalie, or taking a liberty on one of their stars? Will they respond by rallying together and playing with more intensity? I have my doubts.

I dread it will be just a token gesture and nothing more, because thats all Ive been seeing. This passive philosophy made sense when the Canucks had a lethal powerplay.

Our PP is terrible this year. Since they can't expect the refs to help with the offense, I expect a lot more retaliation.

 

[LiquidSnake]

Thanks, but I live in Chicago and am pretty familiar with them. They're not soft and the fanbase does not think that they're soft. They consistently play with an energy that Vancouver just doesn't. That is what wins games in playoffs, not "fists" (and has Tom Sestito or Dale Weise ever even won an NHL fight, anyway?).

Bringing up Patrick Kane, forgetting about Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Sharp, Bolland, Bickell, etc. The Chicago Blackhawks are not soft.

Maybe cheer for the Hawks then if they are sucha great team. Don't torture yourself with Vancouver

 

[vancityluongo]

Messier had 6 Stanley Cups, Lidstrom had 4.

But that's beside the point.

How exactly did Luongo get too emotional after game 5? I think you've fallen victim to the media circus making an issue out of something that really was a non-issue.

I'm not even talking about rah rah leaders, although I do prefer them. I'm talking about leaders who have the ability to take their game to another level and take the team on their back in its moment in need. We don't have that. When the team struggles the Sedins disappear and everything goes to hell. I've only seen the Sedins take control of one playoff series in their entire careers, and it came against a team that is notorious for choking in the playoffs.

You're right, Messier vs. Lidstrom is a whole different discussion altogether.

I personally am not falling victim to the media circus, but IMO the Canucks did in that series, particularly Luongo. The Canucks are simply not built to win games by being emotional. This team operates on calculated strategies and skill. There's a reason why eight seeded cup winners like LA only win once in a lifetime (due to insane injury luck and "clutch performances.") and why teams like Detroit (who never show any emotion) are consistently in the top tier of teams every single year.

While yes, as a fan it would be nice to have Henrik fight in the finals as a fan, similarly to Lecavalier vs. Iginla back in 2004, on the ice it would just mean our number one centre is off for five minutes after probably getting his ass kicked. Really, that's the only way I can see the Sedins raising their level of play, and that would be stupid. If anyone is falling victim to media portrayals, it's anyone who insists that there is still a clutch factor and that players can suddenly step things up a notch and carry a team. Only way that's possible is if they weren't trying 100% in the first place. Or if they are situationally performing at above attainable shooting percentages for a stretch at exactly the right time (Henderson, Pisani, Druce, etc.)

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

All I have to say is our team needs to get in the other teams face. Burrows has been causing trouble in front of the net more often and I like that. This team has to get into playoff mode and get physical and ready to scrum with other teams such as Anaheim, LA, Chicago etc. We also need more secondary scoring being delivered. Hope that Roy/Kes line works out then we can call Schroeder up to re-establish that speedy third line and then we have Roy to back it up if anything fails.

EDIT: Forgot one more thing shoot more on the PP and crash the net have a second player near the net Sestito is like a light Dustin Byfuglien but same height.

 

[Fat Tony]

Wait wait. So you are saying the Habs were so confident that 29 other teams didn't have Gallagher on the radar in the mid-later rounds pick that they that they were prepared to risk losing him to draft worse players for what amounts to an exchange of a 4th round pick for a 5th round pick.

If they felt no team would take him, why would they? I'm not saying that's the case but you're speaking with unwarranted certainty.

Bolded for emphasis.

Canucks took Edler in the third round. If they didn't catch wind that Detroit was interested, they may have left him until the later rounds. Few other teams scouted him heavily, which is why it was relatively safe not to take him earlier.

 

[me2]

Bolded for emphasis.

Canucks took Edler in the third round. If they didn't catch wind that Detroit was interested, they may have left him until the later rounds. Few other teams scouted him heavily, which is why it was relatively safe not to take him earlier.

Edler was almost an unknown, even the teams that knew about him barely knew anything about him. If either Detroit or Vancouver were confident in his abilities he wouldn't have been there in the 3rd, even with no other teams lurking about. Vancouver used their highest pick after the 1st round.

Now compare that to the giants - 30 teams scouted the giants/WHL and scouted it in detail. There is no way a team would leave Gallagher to the 5th if they believed he would be this good. He wouldn't have made it passed their 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks even if Montreal didn't think other teams were that interested you don't take that risk. No team takes that big a risk in a heavily scouted area, Montreal would have needed a mole inside 29 other teams scouting departments to fell confident to let him fall. They may have liked him, but they liked other players more.

 

[me2]

Im not saying they should be in every scrum, but are the "heart and soul" players on this team, and even during our years when we won PTs, they both play a high energy, emotional game and stayed away from the nonsense.

Kesler seems to be playing physical, and is making things happen that his linemates can build off of. That is what I am talking about for those guy, leave the yapping to Lapierre and Sestito. They played disciplined during those years you specified, not emotionless

Anyways, we really can't take too much from this last stretch of games seeing as most teams can't bring emotion into games against non-rivals and basement dwellers

The last few games against the fellow playoff teams will be the most telling.

 

[Fat Tony]

Edler was almost an unknown, even the teams that knew about him barely knew anything about him. If either Detroit or Vancouver were confident in his abilities he wouldn't have been there in the 3rd, even with no other teams lurking about.

That was the point. Canucks didn't have a second round pick that year. They had two ways to go about this; 1) Use their 1st rounder on the unknown Edler and let someone else take the more highly touted Schneider or; 2) Take Schneider and hope that Edler is still around in the third round.

The draft is about playing the odds, both in a player turning out and in making your selections to try to get as many players on your wishlist as possible.

 

[Addison Rae]

So Jonathan Toews and Dave Bolland are hard to play against while Burrows and Hansen aren't? Um okay lets not forget the Canucks have the likes of Kassian, Weise, Sestito and Bieksa as "Heavy Weights" While also have Hansen, Burrows, Kesler, Ballard ETC who also play with bite.

 

[Pip]

That was the point. Canucks didn't have a second round pick that year. They had two ways to go about this; 1) Use their 1st rounder on the unknown Edler and let someone else take the more highly touted Schneider or; 2) Take Schneider and hope that Edler is still around in the third round.

The draft is about playing the odds, both in a player turning out and in making your selections to try to get as many players on your wishlist as possible.

Or they believed that Schneider was worthy of a first round pick and Edler was not?

Just because Edler turned out to be a steal in the third round doesn't mean that we thought we was a first round talent from the get go