Canucks General Strategy/System ??
- Thread starter SaSaShi
- Start date
score goals
give up fewer goals than you score
fin.
give up fewer goals than you score
fin.
Didalee Hed
I’m trying to understand
- Sep 14, 2019
- 1,963
- 2,005
Today I learned the Canucks coached by “Boughner” and used to have some “Sedan” in their past.
HAHAHA you crack me up!....my bad. I got Boughner and Green mixed up. But I still would appreciate the answers to my question.
And Sorry....those Swedish twins were definitely Mclarens
Didalee Hed
I’m trying to understand
- Sep 14, 2019
- 1,963
- 2,005
I’m going to let someone else here give you the hard details on green’s system, because much of the time I am pretty sure there isn’t one.HAHAHA you crack me up!....my bad. I got Boughner and Green mixed up. But I still would appreciate the answers to my question.
And Sorry....those Swedish twins were definitely Mclarens
Travis just made a comment about insanity. He’s nailing his own coffin
Canuck system :
1) Get hopelessly outplayed and bleed shots and chances all over the ice.
2) Hope you get Vezina-calibre goaltending and that the talented kids score on the PP.
1) Get hopelessly outplayed and bleed shots and chances all over the ice.
2) Hope you get Vezina-calibre goaltending and that the talented kids score on the PP.
Bojack Horvatman
IAMGROOT
- Jun 15, 2016
- 4,102
- 7,217
Like I said before, Homer's boxing strategy and hope you don't run into Drederick Tatum.
Green's system is to give up possession all over the ice and then try to recover it so they can give it up again. The result is to be hopelessly out chanced in most games over the course of the last 4 years. That's it, that's the post.
Svencouver
Registered User
Rumsfeld
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2020
- 423
- 854
Bubbles
Die Hard for Bedard 2023
Rope a dope defense, except we are more the dope. Rely on Vezina level goaltending.
Our PK is always passive and zone. I've never seen our PKers attack the puck carrier.
Our PK is always passive and zone. I've never seen our PKers attack the puck carrier.
RebuildinVan
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2017
- 2,253
- 2,095
In a more structured and defensive system the player's point numbers would go down. The casuals will jump off the bandwagon when no player goes over 60 points in 82 games. Then, there will be no more talk in the media how the rebuild is over and we have such a bright future. As bad as Myers, Benn , Hughes and Chat/Olli are on defence most of our top forwards minus Petterson and Horvat can't/don't defend to save their lives. Add to this the fact that they give away the puck like candy.
Last edited:
we have no system. its just let first line score if they are quiet the bottom lines contribute, or horvat's line. goalie saves their beacon most of the time and get the W.. the roster isn't built the way green wants them to play. he wants dman to jump up but most of their guys are too slow therefore pucks get turned over. rinse repeat.
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
Diversification
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2019
- 3,000
- 3,718
I get that you're upset, but this is just stream of consciousness rambling. If I'm unpacking this correctly, you're saying that adding a defensive structure will:
a) severely depress the offensive output of our stars
b) lead to a mass exodus of casual fans who are apparently loving this kind of hockey
c) lead to the casuals breaking out the pitchforks
d) expose the fact that EP and BH cannot play defense
... when in fact, adding a structured defense will:
a) maximize the effectiveness of our more limited personnel
b) keep us in games on a consistent basis so that the game breaking talent we have can be difference makers
c) result in a steadier stream of wins, which the scoreboard-watching casuals love
d) show that both EP and BH (who are both high IQ players) can play defense like we've seen them do in the past before Green lost the room.
First of all English is not my first language.
Playing a more defensive system will not guarantee more wins. We probably won;t lose games with 6-2 or 7-3. The excitement factor wich appeal to the casual fan will diminish. Imagine Torts coaching this team. The personnel problem will still be here. The defence will still be bad but not as bad as it is today. We won't score as much but we also won't concede as much.
I said that most forwards minus EP and Bo can't / won't play defence. That means that EP and Bo are the only top forwards who have complete game. I don't know how you could understand anything else from what i wrote.
Casuals want to be entertained . They like high scoring games.
The canucks are like a "Glass Cannon".
Playing a more defensive system will not guarantee more wins. We probably won;t lose games with 6-2 or 7-3. The excitement factor wich appeal to the casual fan will diminish. Imagine Torts coaching this team. The personnel problem will still be here. The defence will still be bad but not as bad as it is today. We won't score as much but we also won't concede as much.
I said that most forwards minus EP and Bo can't / won't play defence. That means that EP and Bo are the only top forwards who have complete game. I don't know how you could understand anything else from what i wrote.
Casuals want to be entertained . They like high scoring games.
The canucks are like a "Glass Cannon".
Last edited:
Diversification
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2019
- 3,000
- 3,718
Now that I re-read your post, you do indeed state that EP and BH are the only forwards that can play D. But I disagree on that point as well. Many of our forwards can play defensive hockey, especially when bolstered by better defensive structure.
And you're right. A better defensive system does not guarantee more wins. But it keeps you in the running for your best players to win the game for you.
Third, no one likes watching their team lose 6-1 or 7-3. It's not exciting, it's depressing. Just ask Sens fans.
And you're right. A better defensive system does not guarantee more wins. But it keeps you in the running for your best players to win the game for you.
Third, no one likes watching their team lose 6-1 or 7-3. It's not exciting, it's depressing. Just ask Sens fans.
I mean we do have the firepower to win some of those games with 6-1/7-3 unlike the senators who could not score in the Amsterdam Red District. The first team that can actualy play defence(Montreal) is snuffing us out. Don't be fooled by 6-2 score it coud have been 10-2 but they took it easy in 3rd.
We've had the same problems last year but Marky won us games that we had no business winning.
We've had the same problems last year but Marky won us games that we had no business winning.
Last edited:
Diversification
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2019
- 3,000
- 3,718
We have the firepower to win tighter games because our forwards have game breaking abilities, especially EP and QH.
The the only problem is to keep the games tight. Easier said then done.
We will make the playoffs. Outside of Montreal and Flames the other teams have tire fire defences. The problem is we won;t make any noise and it will just buy Jimbo another year. As i said before i would keep Jimbo for scouting but we need another GM/President to handle the business and build the team.
We will make the playoffs. Outside of Montreal and Flames the other teams have tire fire defences. The problem is we won;t make any noise and it will just buy Jimbo another year. As i said before i would keep Jimbo for scouting but we need another GM/President to handle the business and build the team.
The team needs to hire a President to make these decisions. FA appears to have tasked himself in this role and it isn't working.
