Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,175
- 6,891
With 28 games left they were still 11 points off of home ice advantage. They were (barely) in 8th place at the time, but they already had a month of crap play behind them.
I too think the team will likely bounce back a bit next year, but I don't think we can just write off half a season of being the worst team in the league. There are much longer trends that are concerning with this team, primarily the fact that they've had a near league worst offense for about 200 games now. Once you consider that they've traded away the 2 goalies that helped them overachieve from 2011-2013 it's not hard to see why some aren't particularly bullish on the Canucks' ability to compete next season.
Goaltending has been a massive reason that the team has succeed in recent years and the guys they had in net are both gone. You give the 11-12 or 12-13 the type of save percentage they got last year and they'd have finished much farther down the standings with 15th and 20th best goal differentials respectively in those years.
Those goaltenders are both gone, but there was a case to be made to want Luongo gone. The debates on his effectiveness were happening mid-year. So how much has the team suffered really?
For the larger picture, I'm not sure what value there is treating trends as static, when we know the team is going to change? Meaning, the same team with worse goaltending = X, but the same team with worse goaltending = Y... when we know the "same team" will not exist.
Last year, they were 8th overall for a bit, then dropped to a bubble team, and then bottomed out. What is their real level? I don't know. I don't know what Lack is going to do. I don't know how they will supplement their offense. Therefore, I think this talk is much better suited to when we know what they end up doing.
For now, back to Booth...