Post-Game Talk: Canucks def. Jets - 3-2 (Horvat, Petan, Pearson)

[DRich82]

People here sometimes have this preconceived notion that theres top 6 and bottom six and god forbid a 60 pt guy plays on a 3rd line. This isnt 2007. Good teams have three scoring lines that are defensively reaponsible. The Canucks will attempt that this year, mark my words

Let's break it down further for everyone shouting "But Garland needs to play in the Top 6" or "Pearson is taking Garland's minutes."

There are 60 mins in a hockey game, and last year team's averaged 3 PP'S a game. So 6 penalties total = 12 mins. 48 minutes of even strength time

So, you give each top 9 pairing/line 14 mins while the 4th plays 6.

That's how Petey gets 18-20 a game and 4th line PKer gets 8-12

Pearson and Garland will get the same icetime if they're both on PP units.

If you want Garland to play more, you'd have to cut Horvat's minutes.

If a spare part can play with Petey and Brock (hello new-and-improved Jonah Gadjovich) that will help us immensely. What a great fit he could prove to be.
Playoff teams, especially top ones, have a third scoring line that is a matchup nightmare most of the time.

Gadj-Petey-Boeser
Pearson-Horvat-Hogz
Garland-Miller-Podz
Motte(PDG)-Dickinson-Sutter(Chiasson)

I love this approach/idea, and it probably is the best way to overcome our defensive deficiencies over an 82 game schedule. A strong third line with Miller & Garland will outscore the net difference of loading up the top line with Miller.

 

[Get North]

--Bowey: bye.
.

Bowey had a good game here. He had a nice give and go with Miller/Petan for the Vancouver #2 goal. At least he was more noticeable than Burroughs

 

[VanJack]

Bowey is an enigmatic player.....obviously ticketed for Abbotsford, and also pretty obvious that coaching and management see no future for him in the organization.... He was basically the equivalent of a waiver wire pickup from the Hawks, who didn't want to pay the second year of his contract. And of course the Canucks needed a d-man to expose in the expansion draft....

But based on his play tonight, he gets around the ice pretty well and seems to have a few offensive instincts. But basically flopped auditions in Washington, Detroit and Chicago, despite being a relatively high draft pick.

I hope he can go to Abbotsford and maybe rebuild his career. He's a right shot-man with decent size. But something's been missing in the NHL.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Bowey had a good game here. He had a nice give and go with Miller/Petan for the Vancouver #2 goal. At least he was more noticeable than Burroughs

And he was totally lost in his own zone half the time. I saw him completely abandon the play more than once. Felt bad for Rathbone being stuck with him.

 

[krutovsdonut]

my short takes

-all the safe bet veteran players look ready to go. almost a waste to keep playing them in pre season games.

-petan had a good enough offensive game when he got time and room, but he is not going to get that much in a real game. he is too easy to neutralize physically. a top 6 or bust guy who can be a top producer one level down but i am skeptical in the nhl.

-pod had moments of looking all world, but not nearly enough of them. he's on the bubble, but i think they keep him and feed him limited bottom six minutes and let him get comfortable.

-i never noticed focht. i feel bad because i wanted to watch him then forgot he was playing.

-rathbone had two really bad giveaways. sbisa level bad. he cannot do that. i think he makes the team but he just has not impressed me this pre-season the way he did last year. one problem is he is not using his skating enough. it's like he has the red light to skate the puck out. i think he needs to start in the ahl and tear it apart for a week or two and then come up.

-i can see di giuseppe being able to stick with the team. lockwood less so but he was definitely pissing off jets so maybe he draws in for motte.

-dowling i guess was ok. chiasson getting a ton of time but to me a non entity/ not in the veteran no brainer to start category at all.

-bowey had a good simple quiet game. if he played like that all the time, he could be an nhl regular.

 

[F A N]

With Sutter out, hard to see either Dowling or Petean not making the team. Think the edge goes to Dowling.

 

[Dough72]

People on here sometimes have this preconceived notion that theres top 6 and bottom six and god forbid a 60 pt guy plays on a 3rd line. This isnt 2007. Good teams have three scoring lines that are defensively reaponsible. The Canucks will attempt that this year, mark my words

good players are not happy being relegated to a 3rd line. Besides the obvious reasons like better stats and better linemates they also want to be treated like stars. They don't want to be sitting on the bench while coach puts out his top lines for important moments in the game, the exciting moments when fans are going bonkers and electricity is in the air and all that. They want to be on the ice too. Badly. It's quite the blow to the ego even for guys who probably know deep down they belong on the bottom lines. Also I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure every good team in hockey stacks their top lines. What teams are you thinking of who put their best player/s on their 3rd line?

 

[Melvin]

good players are not happy being relegated to a 3rd line. Besides the obvious reasons like better stats and better linemates they also want to be treated like stars. They don't want to be sitting on the bench while coach puts out his top lines for important moments in the game, the exciting moments when fans are going bonkers and electricity is in the air and all that. They want to be on the ice too. Badly. It's quite the blow to the ego even for guys who probably know deep down they belong on the bottom lines. Also I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure every good team in hockey stacks their top lines. What teams are you thinking of who put their best player/s on their 3rd line?

Stamkos pretty much played on the "3rd line" for Tampa in the playoffs. Ask him if he cares. That stuff matters to nobody except fans on Twitter.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Stamkos pretty much played on the "3rd line" for Tampa in the playoffs. Ask him if he cares. That stuff matters to nobody except fans on Twitter.

Exactly. Look at the good players "being wasted" on the 3rd line. Boy, they must have been PISSED.

2019:
Johnson- Stamkos - Gourde
Palat - Point - Kucherov
Joseph - Cirelli - Miller
Erne - Paquette - Callahan

2020:
Palat - Point - Kucherov
Killorn - Cirelli - Johnson
Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman
Maroon - Stephens - Paquette

2021:
Palat - Point - Kucherov
Killorn - Cirelli - Stamkos
Colton - Gourde - Coleman
Maroon - Johnson - Joseph

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Ask him if he cares. That stuff matters to nobody except fans on Twitter.

and cody and his dad of course

 

[Hit the post]

Stamkos pretty much played on the "3rd line" for Tampa in the playoffs. Ask him if he cares. That stuff matters to nobody except fans on Twitter.

Tampa deemed perhaps our most valuable forward (Miller) an expendable part because they were that deep. Depends on the situation where it would matter or not to a professional player. Look at "GM" Tom Brady. He's able to get free agents to sign in Tampa because those players want to play with him.

Yeah I'm Horvat & I don't mind having two slugs as wingers & be a checking center because we're a winning team.

 

[Melvin]

Tampa deemed perhaps our most valuable forward (Miller) an expendable part because they were that deep. Depends on the situation where it would matter or not to a professional player. Look at "GM" Tom Brady. He's able to get free agents to sign in Tampa because those players want to play with him.

Yeah I'm Horvat & I don't mind having two slugs as wingers & be a checking center because we're a winning team.

Well yes, I should have said nobody cares if the team is winning. Do we want to be Tampa or not? I want to be Tampa.

Everybody wants to be Tampa, but do we have the pure strength of will? I say we do. Now are we gonna let ourselves get beaten by an old lady?

 

[Hit the post]

Well yes, I should have said nobody cares if the team is winning. Do we want to be Tampa or not? I want to be Tampa.

Everybody wants to be Tampa, but do we have the pure strength of will? I say we do. Now are we gonna let ourselves get beaten by an old lady?

Give Jim Benning more time. We will be like Tampa in about 10 years.

 

[Dough72]

Stamkos pretty much played on the "3rd line" for Tampa in the playoffs. Ask him if he cares. That stuff matters to nobody except fans on Twitter.

I think you have it backwards, the only people it wouldn't matter to are fans. And I don't know if Stamkos is a great example as he is obviously past his prime. Guess it counts though.

 

[Melvin]

I think you have it backwards, the only people it wouldn't matter to are fans. And I don't know if Stamkos is a great example as he is obviously past his prime. Guess it counts though.

fans are the only ones who think that if you write down the lines in a particular order on the page that it confers some sort of deep and powerful meaning. It does not.

Who is our 1C? Everyone would say it’s Pettersson. If I wrote down lines in a way where he was 2nd people would get mad at me. But in reality he consistently plays less than Bo does. He is essentially 2C in terms of usage. It doesn’t matter. It literally doesn’t matter which line you call what.

 

[MS]

fans are the only ones who think that if you write down the lines in a particular order on the page that it confers some sort of deep and powerful meaning. It does not.

Who is our 1C? Everyone would say it’s Pettersson. If I wrote down lines in a way where he was 2nd people would get mad at me. But in reality he consistently plays less than Bo does. He is essentially 2C in terms of usage. It doesn’t matter. It literally doesn’t matter which line you call what.

It's actually a bit generous to even call a guy who didn't take faceoffs a C over the past two years.

 

[MS]

That was a really boring game. The bad Jets roster was filled with big, slow low-event bodies so it was just a grind. Was there an odd-man rush either way all game? Easy game for our blueline with nothing dynamic to defend against.

- best news was how well Horvat skated. Looked terrific, and having Hoglander on his wing instead of Chiasson helped. And helped Hoglander too who looked much better. That line was on a different level than anyone else in this game.

- Miller was on total cruise control. Petan looked much better and had some good PP shifts ... but what's the point? I'd assumed that Chiasson would be getting signed but wow was he invisible last night.

- Garland showing some grit was fun, but I'm not sure what the point was of sticking him with Di Guiseppe and Dowling instead of trying to generate chemistry with Miller. Neither of those two really did anything to distinguish themselves against weak opposition.

- Podkolzin ... poor. Puck management was atrocious. Lots of poor distribution and turnovers. Shows bursts of energy but displayed lacking hockey sense. Barring a big turnaround in the last couple games, he needs to go to the AHL. Probably the biggest disappointment of preseason so far. Putting him with Focht and Lockwood was a statement that Green feels similarly.

- Lockwood displays energy and is throwing his weight around but accomplishes little.

- Focht looked weak and easily eliminated from the play.

- OEL-Poolman were pretty anonymous save for one excellent PP shift for OEL. Poolman got caught looking a bit bambi-legged on a few occasions. Looks like a nice, reliable low-event 3rd pairing guy. And against AHLers, great. But I don't have a lot of confidence that this player will excel when forced into Tanev-type minutes which is what's going to happen.

- Burroughs-Hunt were pretty solid - on for two goals but neither was really a positioning error from the blueline and one was straight off a lost faceoff. Burroughs continues to look better than Schenn ... although again when evaluating fringe players like this is difficult when they're playing guys at their level instead of proper NHLers.

- Rathbone looked more energetic and dynamic than the previous game ... but made so, so many errors. Looked like a guy who had the yips from the pressure of trying to make the team. Just way too many poor passes and turnovers.

- I've seen enough of Bowey back to the WHL to know he sucks, but that was a pretty good game for him. Really nice movement on the 2-1 goal.

- neither goalie was really tested much.

 

[Hit the post]

That was a really boring game. The bad Jets roster was filled with big, slow low-event bodies so it was just a grind. Was there an odd-man rush either way all game? Easy game for our blueline with nothing dynamic to defend against.

- best news was how well Horvat skated. Looked terrific, and having Hoglander on his wing instead of Chiasson helped. And helped Hoglander too who looked much better. That line was on a different level than anyone else in this game.

- Miller was on total cruise control. Petan looked much better and had some good PP shifts ... but what's the point? I'd assumed that Chiasson would be getting signed but wow was he invisible last night.

- Garland showing some grit was fun, but I'm not sure what the point was of sticking him with Di Guiseppe and Dowling instead of trying to generate chemistry with Miller. Neither of those two really did anything to distinguish themselves against weak opposition.

- Podkolzin ... poor. Puck management was atrocious. Lots of poor distribution and turnovers. Shows bursts of energy but displayed lacking hockey sense. Barring a big turnaround in the last couple games, he needs to go to the AHL. Probably the biggest disappointment of preseason so far. Putting him with Focht and Lockwood was a statement that Green feels similarly.

- Lockwood displays energy and is throwing his weight around but accomplishes little.

- Focht looked weak and easily eliminated from the play.

- OEL-Poolman were pretty anonymous save for one excellent PP shift for OEL. Poolman got caught looking a bit bambi-legged on a few occasions. Looks like a nice, reliable low-event 3rd pairing guy. And against AHLers, great. But I don't have a lot of confidence that this player will excel when forced into Tanev-type minutes which is what's going to happen.

- Burroughs-Hunt were pretty solid - on for two goals but neither was really a positioning error from the blueline and one was straight off a lost faceoff. Burroughs continues to look better than Schenn ... although again when evaluating fringe players like this is difficult when they're playing guys at their level instead of proper NHLers.

- Rathbone looked more energetic and dynamic than the previous game ... but made so, so many errors. Looked like a guy who had the yips from the pressure of trying to make the team. Just way too many poor passes and turnovers.

- I've seen enough of Bowey back to the WHL to know he sucks, but that was a pretty good game for him. Really nice movement on the 2-1 goal.

- neither goalie was really tested much.

Poolman seems to be a better version of Aaron Rome. This isn't a knock against Poolman as Rome tends to get underrated here. Reliable depth defenseman who knew his role (to quote the Rock) and could & did play under a system the coaching staff wanted to see.

 

[MS]

Poolman seems to be a better version of Aaron Rome. This isn't a knock against Poolman as Rome tends to get underrated here. Reliable depth defenseman who knew his role (to quote the Rock) and could & did play under a system the coaching staff wanted to see.

In a perfect world, Poolman is probably best-suited on the 3rd pairing as a bit of an upgrade on Jordie Benn.

Putting him in high-leverage shutdown minutes is going to be fascinating.

 

[Hit the post]

Putting him in high-leverage shutdown minutes is going to be fascinating.

We already saw that with Schmidt last season.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Poolman seems to be a better version of Aaron Rome. This isn't a knock against Poolman as Rome tends to get underrated here. Reliable depth defenseman who knew his role (to quote the Rock) and could & did play under a system the coaching staff wanted to see.

i still do not have a read on poolman. he seems more mobile and crisp than your average #6 dman, but the going has not gotten tough yet.

 

[Hansen]

Frankly I just don't see any defender succeeding here defensively without a major overhaul to our systems and coaching, especially with our current roster

 

[Dough72]

fans are the only ones who think that if you write down the lines in a particular order on the page that it confers some sort of deep and powerful meaning. It does not.

Who is our 1C? Everyone would say it’s Pettersson. If I wrote down lines in a way where he was 2nd people would get mad at me. But in reality he consistently plays less than Bo does. He is essentially 2C in terms of usage. It doesn’t matter. It literally doesn’t matter which line you call what.

nothing deep or powerful about it but 1st/2nd/3rd line does convey meaning and fans are right to use it. NHL coaches and players use these phrases all the time. And it's not based on usage it's based on coaches putting the best players together on a line and then putting that line on the ice for the most important shifts. If there is equal overlap between bo and petey's lines then sure, there really isn't a top line and fans still using the phrase are trapped in a silly box of words or whatever. But I don't think that's how it will play out and I certainly don't think there will be 3 lines treated equally.

 

[MS]

nothing deep or powerful about it but 1st/2nd/3rd line does convey meaning and fans are right to use it. NHL coaches and players use these phrases all the time. And it's not based on usage it's based on coaches putting the best players together on a line and then putting that line on the ice for the most important shifts. If there is equal overlap between bo and petey's lines then sure, there really isn't a top line and fans still using the phrase are trapped in a silly box of words or whatever. But I don't think that's how it will play out and I certainly don't think there will be 3 lines treated equally.

Sometimes an all-situations #2C will play more than a PP/ES-only #1C and in that case it's probably fair to still call the lower-minute guy the #1C.

Sometimes the lines are just labelled totally wrong, though. For the last two seasons, *everyone* in the fanbase and media consistently called Gaudette's line the '3rd line' and Beagle's line the '4th line' when in terms of usage it was glaringly obvious to anyone who bothered to take a moment that Beagle was actually the #3C playing high-leverage minutes, and Gaudette was the #4C playing fewer, lower-leverage minutes with scrap linemates.

 

[Melvin]

nothing deep or powerful about it but 1st/2nd/3rd line does convey meaning and fans are right to use it. NHL coaches and players use these phrases all the time. And it's not based on usage it's based on coaches putting the best players together on a line and then putting that line on the ice for the most important shifts. If there is equal overlap between bo and petey's lines then sure, there really isn't a top line and fans still using the phrase are trapped in a silly box of words or whatever. But I don't think that's how it will play out and I certainly don't think there will be 3 lines treated equally.

Yes, there is value in being able to communicate certain concepts colloquially, as in saying that someone is in a top-six role vs bottom-six, calling someone a 4th liner or a top-pairing defender, etc. There is value in these terms from a communication perspective. That's not really my point. My point is just that Travis Green isn't going to give two shits if you label something the "2nd line" or the "3rd line" or whatever. He has the players he is going to play when there's an o-zone faceoff, the players he will play for a d-zone faceoff, the players he will play in this situation, players who will play when defending a lead to McDavid, and etc. And that applies to every coach except Willie D.

So when fans write their cute little lineups online and people freak out because omg you put Garland on the "3rd line!" simply because it was literally the third line of your post, that's just not relevant at all. What's relevant is who you have him playing with and what situations he is going to be used in. Like I said, fans will never ever write their little lineups with Horvat 1st but you can easily make the argument that he is used like a 1C more than Pettersson is.