Post-Game Talk: Canucks 2, Ducks 1: Southern California gets trolled

[The Canuck]

Wouldn't doubt the twins are done at years end. The team is a dumpster fire full of kids and no talent. They are old and slow and don't produce. Pass the torch, let the rebuild happen. Gonna be 6-8 years of being bad ala Edmonton/Toronto. We are in year 2. I think 4-5 more years of this.

LOL I will wager on that

 

[n00bxQb]

At this point, and especially after last year's draft lottery, I don't care where we finish as long as it's in the bottom 7. We should have had Laine last year, but the Jets won our spot. It's a crapshoot.

I like seeing the young guys trying their hearts out, and occasionally getting rewarded for it by beating teams like the Kings and Ducks - teams that thought they could take a night off against us. It's a major learning experience for our young guys that will pay dividends in the future. Onwards and upwards.

Not to nitpick, but Winnipeg got Edmonton's spot (2nd) and Columbus got ours (3rd).

I shudder to think that, had there not been a lottery last year, Edmonton would be rolling Laine alongside McJesus.

 

[Pastor Of Muppets]

Scrape out another one against a team that mailed it in. Could see early the Ducks thought they could simply show up and win. Canucks have that going for them now. Look at the roster and you figure we'll be a push-over so can play it loose. Wake up late but by that time it is too late.

Good

Horvat- not just the offense but broke up many plays in his own end. Emerging as a stud.

Bachman - can play like this in the short term. Has shown he is, at times, NHL standard but never has been able to sustain over the long run. If Miller doesn't come back you wonder if Bachman can carry some of the load in Vancouver next year. Has maintained a good save percentage in past stints in the NHL.

Sutter - doing tons to help the team. Good on the PK, excellent on the back check. Dead honest and smart player who stays on the defensive side of the play and breaks up the play before other teams can fully develop them. Made a number of clutch defensive plays in this game.

Edler - logging tons of times. Is clearly the best defense man and playing as well in his end as he ever has.

Hutton - continues a run of good play. Seems much stronger at rushing the puck out of his zone. Quick with his stick and able to continually beat the first fore checker. Shot from the blue line is controlled and creating problems around the goal mouth. Real jump and poise in his game ATM.

Sbisa - with Tanev was effective. Plays hard minutes for the team.

On Sbisa .When you look at the Kesler trade, you have to say it hasn't worked out too bad. Kesler still the best player in the deal but Canucks end up with Sutter (solid NHL player) , Gudbranson (still has potential to be decent NHLer with toughness), Sbisa (at least a decent NHL defenseman), Lockwood (good prospect), and Dorsett. Canucks lost some other draft choices (none of these have really worked out for the other teams yet) but the trade is seemingly better than many have initially viewed it.

Other points

Wagner check was at a minimum a penalty. From viewing it, I think it is charley horse or groin. At least affords Boucher a better chance to show what he has.

Granlund struggled at times but again showed the ability to put the puck in the net. Has deceptively heavy shot. Still needs to work harder in his own zone but I think this will come. Given his experience, age and goal scoring this season, I believe you would have to see this season as a success. To me, he plays like Steen. Steen took a few years to get established before becoming a good two way NHL center. That's hopefully what will happen to Granlund.

Remember last year when I questioned Shinkaruk's upside and got tons of negative comment. Well right now Shinkaruk has 8 goals in the AHL and is seeming top out at that level. Granlund now has 17 in the NHL and the trade has to be seen as a steal.

Gaunce had a up and down game. Showed a few spurts and mostly kept in the play. However, got checked off the puck too easily with possession in the offensive zone and got over-whelmed in his own end when the Ducks brought late pressure. Must improve his play traffic. And this is the chief concern with Gaunce. Can he be quick and agile enough or protect the puck well enough in traffic. Jury is out out that but he hasn't shown it yet.

Goldobin got shoved around a bit but his stick work and creativity is obviously good. Some players can get by on guile (which this player obviously has) but will have to show he can make a play when he is pressured and people are leaning on him. So far has like a dangerous players and the Canucks desperately needs this.

Great unbiased analysis....Keep it up.

 

[n00bxQb]

I love Horvat, but thus far, there's no reason to talk about a future Selke. We're basing that on his junior reputation. At the NHL level, his defensive play is currently very suspect.

I agree that he's no Malhotra or Kesler in the D zone, but I wouldn't go as far as saying his play there is very suspect. He's decent most of the time.

 

[Zombotron]

Thread that needle like it's a too-tight vietnamese business suit

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

That pass to Sbisa was almost perfect. Only problem was that it was to Sbisa.

 

[Pastor Of Muppets]

That pass to Sbisa was almost perfect. Only problem was that it was to Sbisa.

Watch it again...the puck was bobbling all over the ice..it went over his stick..

 

[denkiteki]

Not sure if i should be happy or not with the last 2 wins... we have basically no chance of making the playoffs so logically i should want the team to lose but i was cheering for them to win (during the moment)...

Bachman probably had one of his best games in his entire career and that's pretty much the only reason we won. Horvat's line was again the best line but that seems to be the case more often than not.

I think Sbisa more or less reconfirm that he'll he gone next year unless we trade Edler or Tanev (doubt we move Gud considering the price we paid/what we would get back after 1 year). Gaunce might be an option but since he seems like (at best) a 3rd liner, his upside probably isn't worth it for Vegas. There really isn't anyone else worth considering (except praying they like Dorsett...).

 

[Zarpan]

Granlund is a Finnish Vey. Of course his point totals are trending upwards, the guy's always on the bloody ice. Shot's not bad, but damn am I ever sick of watching him losing puck battles and passing to nobody and getting shoved off loose pucks.

I'd say that Vey's in a different (lower) class. Granlund isn't great, but he is 6th on the team for 5v5 points per 60 minutes, while I think Vey was at 14th.

As well Granlund has around 3x the 5v5 goals per 60 minutes that Vey had.

 

[WTG]

Granlunds growing on me

I still think he'll regress but what ever, he's young and he scores.

Still really like baertschi he's underrated, he's been absolutely fantastic at even strength this year.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'd say that Vey's in a different (lower) class. Granlund isn't great, but he is 6th on the team for 5v5 points per 60 minutes, while I think Vey was at 14th.

As well Granlund has around 3x the 5v5 goals per 60 minutes that Vey had.

Shh. We only accept hyperbole here.

 

[DFAC]

Granlunds growing on me

I still think he'll regress but what ever, he's young and he scores.

Still really like baertschi he's underrated, he's been absolutely fantastic at even strength this year.

Gonna eat huge crow because I was not happy with the Sven and Granlund trades at the time. They've both been pleasant surprises (yeah, yeah I know Granlund has terrible advanced stats but seriously, who on this team doesn't?)

Granlund has been scoring, period and will most likely hit 20 goals. Maybe even flirt with 25 if he gets hot. That's a win in my books.

Baertschi and Granlund trades are looking very solid atm

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Granlunds growing on me

I still think he'll regress but what ever, he's young and he scores.

Still really like baertschi he's underrated, he's been absolutely fantastic at even strength this year.

It kind of blows my mind that he gets as much flak as he does. He gets generous minutes, yes, but he makes less than $1m and is on pace for 20 goals. Pretty far down the list of this team's issues, IMO.

 

[MikeK]

Agreed. I didn't care for the trade at the time but I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong.

 

[y2kcanucks]

It kind of blows my mind that he gets as much flak as he does. He gets generous minutes, yes, but he makes less than $1m and is on pace for 20 goals. Pretty far down the list of this team's issues, IMO.

He doesn't get any flak. People prop him up as a useful player whenever he gets a goal. Then people who understand the stats cite those stats and a bunch of people get upset. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I'll say it again: 28 points for a player who has gotten the icetime Granlund has received is awful. If you're going to play him like a 1st or 2nd liner then he should be compared to other 1st and 2nd liners, and in that regard a 28 point season is among the worst in the league.

 

[Tinhorn1]

He doesn't get any flak. People prop him up as a useful player whenever he gets a goal. Then people who understand the stats cite those stats and a bunch of people get upset. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I'll say it again: 28 points for a player who has gotten the icetime Granlund has received is awful. If you're going to play him like a 1st or 2nd liner then he should be compared to other 1st and 2nd liners, and in that regard a 28 point season is among the worst in the league.

How does he stack up against other 23-year-old third liners, which is probably where he's probably at developmentally? I agree Granlund needs to get much stronger, better on the boards, etc. He isn't a first or second liner and not great defensively. Still, I'd have more of a problem with him if I felt he was pushing more deserving players down the lineup. I think Bo is about the only one you could say that about, and he's getting his minutes now anyway. This is a bad team and Granlund can at least score. May as well develop him.

 

[TruGr1t]

It kind of blows my mind that he gets as much flak as he does. He gets generous minutes, yes, but he makes less than $1m and is on pace for 20 goals. Pretty far down the list of this team's issues, IMO.

It's just that the situation is symptomatic of the wider problems with the organization that triggers people, I'd think. Granlund is a fine player who is tracking well, though it's impossible not to link his production to the fact he's been playing nearly first-line ice time for a lot of the year. And he's not bringing much to the table outside the goals (though on this team that's a big deal obviously); his advanced stats aren't good, he's a -17, and has less assists than all-star playmaker Sutter.

It's not hard to figure that this team is bad because a lot of these players are getting "generous minutes." Gralund, Sbisa, Megna ... pick your poison. If management just straight up used the term "rebuild" that would make sense, because having a guy like Granlund on your top line should only ever happen if you're rebuilding.

 

[y2kcanucks]

How does he stack up against other 23-year-old third liners, which is probably where he's probably at developmentally? I agree Granlund needs to get much stronger, better on the boards, etc. He isn't a first or second liner and not great defensively. Still, I'd have more of a problem with him if I felt he was pushing more deserving players down the lineup. I think Bo is about the only one you could say that about, and he's getting his minutes now anyway. This is a bad team and Granlund can at least score. May as well develop him.

I'll look into those numbers, but if you want to compare his production to 23 and younger 3rd liners we'll be looking at his per 60 production so we have a common denominator. And I can tell you by memory that his ES points/60 was toward the bottom of the league.

 

[Shareefruck]

He puts up decent offense that would be worthy of SOME optimism if he were still a young prospect, or if he were not a defensive liability.

But he hurts the team more than helps it right now (which admittedly, may be a good thing for a tank), despite his goal output, the actual improvement he's shown is actually pretty marginal when you look at the minutes he's given, and he's had enough time in the NHL stagnating/getting to an age where it's hard to see significant steps forward.

"May as well develop him" may be true, and I have no opinion one way or another about keeping him or getting rid of him (especially if there's a coaching change), but that doesn't mean you shouldn't point out your pessimism about him when it exists, especially when people pump his tires to a degree that is disagreeable given his actual play.

Gaunce has actually played better, despite being on the opposite end of the spectrum as a guy who hasn't produced any offense but has been effective nonetheless. And he's one guy that it does seem like Granlund takes icetime from. The fact that alot of people look at the stats and see it as being the other way around is what makes us vocal about it.

 

[Uhmkay]

He doesn't get any flak. People prop him up as a useful player whenever he gets a goal. Then people who understand the stats cite those stats and a bunch of people get upset. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I'll say it again: 28 points for a player who has gotten the icetime Granlund has received is awful. If you're going to play him like a 1st or 2nd liner then he should be compared to other 1st and 2nd liners, and in that regard a 28 point season is among the worst in the league.

He's on pace for 22 goals and he makes 900k/year. You get a player who is scoring 22 goals a year (on pace) for that rate... you take it and run.

There isn't a GM in the league that doesn't take this player at that clip. He's the #6 forward on the team in terms of TOI. He should, and has for most of the year, been playing on the third line. However he has shown the ability to play up the lineup with the Sedins at times when Hansen was out. Otherwise he's been stapled to the third line with Sutter.

He's a 23 year old forward making 900k for this year and next. We stole this player from Calgary. Shinkaruk isn't even scoring at the same clip at the AHL level and doesn't look at all like he's going to be an effective professional player.

Does the guy make some defensive errors, yes. But he's a young guy who is improving. If he can be a 20 goal guy and tighten up defensively, then we got a great deal with this guy.

 

[Shareefruck]

He's on pace for 22 goals and he makes 900k/year. You get a player who is scoring 22 goals a year (on pace) for that rate... you take it and run.

There isn't a GM in the league that doesn't take this player at that clip. He's the #6 forward on the team in terms of TOI. He should, and has for most of the year, been playing on the third line. However he has shown the ability to play up the lineup with the Sedins at times when Hansen was out. Otherwise he's been stapled to the third line with Sutter.

He's a 23 year old forward making 900k for this year and next. We stole this player from Calgary. Shinkaruk isn't even scoring at the same clip at the AHL level and doesn't look at all like he's going to be an effective professional player

Does the guy make some defensive errors, yes. But he's a young guy who is improving. If he can be a 20 goal guy and tighten up defensively, then we got a great deal with this guy.

The fact that he could possibly improve, is cheap, and is relatively young (though not young/raw enough that I would expect him to still have too much untapped promise) and the fact that the guy we traded for him has played worse is no reason not to point out how weak has been right now, though. Being displeased with his current performance is no reason to assume that someone is demanding that he be gotten rid of, either.

With the way we don't have a sane coach that has a meritocracy, it' very problematic to give bottom lines like "He's on pace for 22 goals. That's good no matter what." No, that's good, all other things being equal. That's one factor that can be outweighed by a million other factors, and in Granlund's case, it arguably has.

If Virtanen were getting a disproportionately getting a high number of hits, despite playing as poorly and as lackadaisically as he has at the NHL, there might be reason to be optimism due to his age, but it would not be sensible to say "He has so many hits. You get a player with so many hits, you take it and run."

 

[tantalum]

The argument isn't whether he's on pace for 22 goals. That's a fact. The argument revolves around whether a player getting his icetime should be on pace for more offense (despite what people think assists do also matter) and if his total contribution is up to par for the role he's been given. You have two camps:

camp 1: he is going to score 20 goals...take it and run

camp 2: yes he's going to score 20 goals but is only on pace for 35 points which is, compared to his peers, at the lower end of guys getting his type of ice. 5-on-5 the output is very low compared to peers. Questions on what else he brings to the table.

Camp 1 will point to further development. Camp 2 will point to how that is the exact reason why the team sits where they do in the standings. Guys like Granlund getting so much ice (and granlund not being the only one in that situation). And that if he was played more appropriately the totals would not be good. Not good at all. Notice that camp 2 doesn't say a guy shouldn't be developed.

IN short even the worst NHL teams in the league score 200 goals a year. Those teams are at the bottom of the standings for tangible reasons...usually the roster is full of players being asked to play minutes they aren't truly capable of playing. Be they young or old. 200 goals has to come from somewhere..somebody is going to score. There is more to it than 22 goals. There has to be.

 

[Tinhorn1]

I'll look into those numbers, but if you want to compare his production to 23 and younger 3rd liners we'll be looking at his per 60 production so we have a common denominator. And I can tell you by memory that his ES points/60 was toward the bottom of the league.

Mm. I should look it up myself and not make others do my work for me. That doesn't sound good, though. Oh, well. If the Canucks scrape some decent prospects together and he starts getting in their way I'll start to flap my arms about in an alarmed fashion.

 

[Shareefruck]

Mm. I should look it up myself and not make others do my work for me. That doesn't sound good, though. Oh, well. If the Canucks scrape some decent prospects together and he starts getting in their way I'll start to flap my arms about in an alarmed fashion.

Some of us think that Gaunce has shown more promise and reason for optimism than Granlund, so that's one thing to consider regarding the reaction. Unlike Granlund, he has helped the team more than hurt it and his defensive play combined with it being his first full year, the fact that he's getting impossibly low minutes, and the fact that he's improved at a decent pace every year is greater reason for optimism.

But even if he wasn't blocking anyone, I would have a similar assessment.

 

[Tinhorn1]

Some of us think that Gaunce has shown more promise and reason for optimism than Granlund, so that's one thing to consider regarding the reaction. Unlike Granlund, he has helped the team more than hurt it and his defensive play combined with it being his first full year, the fact that he's getting impossibly low minutes, and the fact that he's improved at a decent pace every year is greater reason for optimism.

But even if he wasn't blocking anyone, I would have a similar assessment.

Okay. There's something to be said for actually converting occasionally on the chances you generate, but I have nothing against Gaunce getting more minutes. There are a few players who could stand to have their minutes reduced before Granlund, though.