Post-Game Talk: Detroit 3 Vancouver 2, OT - We got a point! But still lost...

[Peen]

Still loling at the people who said Vrbata was the one who drove the sedins last year

 

[thepuckmonster]

Defense pairings staying the same thus far.

Thank baby Jesus.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

Those lines are so much better. Plus they still allow WD to easily bench all the kids when we're up by 2 in the third...

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

Dorsett/Prust have been overplayed for sure, but they've also been very good. They are not the problem with the team.

 

[Tinhorn1]

Yeah, Dorsett has been awesome. 1 point in 8 games (an EN goal), has been outscored 5-0 when he's on the ice, and has a 42% Corsi (worst on the team).

Okay.

 

[CanaFan]

Dorsett/Prust have been overplayed for sure, but they've also been very good. They are not the problem with the team.

Neither are the kids but lots of people seemed to jump on the "break up the kid line" bandwagon the other night. Considering they barely stepped on the ice there was a disproportionate amount of criticism aimed at them.

Dorsett and Prust were not any better but by virtue of having more minutes (more than double) every seems to think they did so much more. "What" they actually did to help us win is a puzzle to me, but they certainly got to be on the ice a lot.

 

[Peen]

While I can't argue with those stats, I've actually enjoyed Dorsett this season.

That being said, if he plays more than 12 minutes a night, he's then overexposed and ineffective because of the role he's put in.

 

[Intoewsables]

Yeah, Dorsett has been awesome. 1 point in 8 games (an EN goal), has been outscored 5-0 when he's on the ice, and has a 42% Corsi (worst on the team).

No, you misunderstood. He's awesome at things that don't win you hockey games, and apparently there's tremendous value in that.

edit: To be fair, I've had no problem with him so far as a 4th liner, but to suggest that he's been one of our best players so far ... yeesh.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

No, you misunderstood. He's awesome at things that don't win you hockey games, and apparently there's tremendous value in that.

edit: To be fair, I've had no problem with him so far as a 4th liner, but to suggest that he's been one of our best players so far ... yeesh.

Yahtzee.

Both Prust and Dorsett can offer effective value to a roster - from the fourth line. Maybe seeing spot duty on the 3rd on occasion. They're not fantastic hockey players, but they are far from plugs (or even the worst players we've seen in a Canucks' jersey).

The issue is their deployment and ice-time. It's too much. You can argue that the rookies we have may be just as - or even less - effective in that same time. But give them a chance to prove that before benching them. It's not like there was a game this year where we had a comfortable lead in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and promptly blew it. It's not like we had a close game in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and then lost.

From Game 1 this year, Willie's MO has been to bench them in the 3rd. It's frustrating. Give them an opportunity in that environment to show they are or aren't worth the trust. If they play better, or at least equal to what Dorsett and Prust have been offering (which isn't setting the bar especially high...) then at least we know we can continue with WD's preferred "rolling four lines" methodology in the 3rd period.

 

[Tinhorn1]

Yahtzee.

Both Prust and Dorsett can offer effective value to a roster - from the fourth line. Maybe seeing spot duty on the 3rd on occasion. They're not fantastic hockey players, but they are far from plugs (or even the worst players we've seen in a Canucks' jersey).

The issue is their deployment and ice-time. It's too much. You can argue that the rookies we have may be just as - or even less - effective in that same time. But give them a chance to prove that before benching them. It's not like there was a game this year where we had a comfortable lead in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and promptly blew it. It's not like we had a close game in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and then lost.

From Game 1 this year, Willie's MO has been to bench them in the 3rd. It's frustrating. Give them an opportunity in that environment to show they are or aren't worth the trust. If they play better, or at least equal to what Dorsett and Prust have been offering (which isn't setting the bar especially high...) then at least we know we can continue with WD's preferred "rolling four lines" methodology in the 3rd period.

Picking your post at random, in response to the generalized frustration over benching the kids. WD's rationale is in the public record:

2. Coach does have a plan
Before you get too anxious or worried about the kids’ playing time, Desjardins elaborated on his plans for them on TSN 1040 Friday.

“Fans watch them and wonder how they got played (against Washington), but you’ve got to work them in in the right way,†he said. “You can’t put them in spots where they may not succeed because that’s tough on their confidence. It’s no different than we did with Bo last year – in his first 8-10 games he averaged more than 10 minutes once. These guys are averaging more than Bo did probably at the start of his career.â€

Willie was asked if he’s worried if playing the veterans will tire them out over the season.

“That’s what you have to do to develop the young guys,†he said. “Do we not do that and send them home? Take them right out of the lineup? That’s your option. Or do you think we find ways to put them in the lineup when we need them and bring them along?â€

And further:

“I’ve always liked to play four lines, but I think this is a unique situation. We want to bring these guys along. We see these guys as being a real big part of our future and we want to try to bring them along as best we can this year.â€

Despite their lack of playing time, you have to see some positives here. From what he’s saying, it sounds like Desjardins plans to have both rookie forwards here past their nine-game window, for the entire season. Need more? He was asked if he thinks the vets’ll get fatigued.

“No because the young guys are going to get more experience as we go and they’ll log more ice time as we go. There are some games where they’ll come back (meaning where their minutes will be dialed back). I think they’ll just get better and I’ll be able to use them in more and more situations as we go forward.â€

Sure sounds like they’re staying.

Source here.

You can argue whether or not WD's strategy is the right one, but for anyone who is interested to know what is actually happening, there is it. WD's stated strategy is not to torpedo the rookies' confidence and put them on the first bullet train back to juniors, nor to feud with the GM and President of the team, nor even to slip his comforting arms around the grinders he loves best. It's to build a platform of confidence on which to build greater, lasting effectiveness.

 

[Peen]

Well if the management team has already decided that they're going to keep them both past the 9 game mark, I'm fine with the fact they're playing 8 minutes now as long as that progresses to 13-14 minutes a game by the end of the year.

 

[VanJack]

I know the media and many posters are giving Miller a free pass so far, because he has been good....but when you look at the replays on the Wing's goals, two of three went through him, including the OT winner.....the first one on a breakaway, but the guy was being hounded from behind by Hutton and all he could do was shoot into Miller's body...on the OT winner the puck hit his glove first before going in under his arm...as any goalie will tell you, they can accept the pucks that get deflected or hit the corner of the net....harder to justify pucks that get through the equipment...just sayin'

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

I know the media and many posters are giving Miller a free pass so far, because he has been good....but when you look at the replays on the Wing's goals, two of three went through him, including the OT winner.....the first one on a breakaway, but the guy was being hounded from behind by Hutton and all he could do was shoot into Miller's body...on the OT winner the puck hit his glove first before going in under his arm...as any goalie will tell you, they can accept the pucks that get deflected or hit the corner of the net....harder to justify pucks that get through the equipment...just sayin'

Don't blame the goalie in OT, 3 on 3 is a torture for goalies

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

The end of a line that was hardly ever played?

Thought I must admit I don't dislike the looks of these new lines. Kind of a bummer to see McCann saddled with two useless wingers though. I'm hoping the kids get more than 5-6 minutes of ice-time.

Prust and Dorsett are not useless.....but don't think you'll ever agree so nvm

 

[Tinhorn1]

BTW I hear what everyone is saying about my apparently stupid comment that Prust and Dorsett have been among the Canucks' best players. I guess I'm not the first person on this message board to make an overstatement. I'll maintain that I've been happy with them, though, despite what the Corsi Warriors might have to say, and I think it's a decent place for McCann right now.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

BTW I hear what everyone is saying about my apparently stupid comment that Prust and Dorsett have been among the Canucks' best players. I guess I'm not the first person on this message board to make an overstatement. I'll maintain that I've been happy with them, though, despite what the Corsi Warriors might have to say, and I think it's a decent place for McCann right now.

Absolutely, Prust and Dorsrtt are much better than any wingers McCann had in juniors.

 

[fancouver]

So we're 10% into the season and lines haven't been set yet.

 

[Josepho]

**** yeah hansen and horvat reunited.

 

[CanaFan]

Picking your post at random, in response to the generalized frustration over benching the kids. WD's rationale is in the public record:



And further:



Source here.

You can argue whether or not WD's strategy is the right one, but for anyone who is interested to know what is actually happening, there is it. WD's stated strategy is not to torpedo the rookies' confidence and put them on the first bullet train back to juniors, nor to feud with the GM and President of the team, nor even to slip his comforting arms around the grinders he loves best. It's to build a platform of confidence on which to build greater, lasting effectiveness.

Thanks for this. While I'm not sure I agree with the degree to which WD is executing this - 7 minutes goes beyond 'sheltering' a player IMO - it is a bit of a relief that his intentions are focused on development rather than an obsession with over-playing marginally-better vets for regular season points. At least it gives me some hope that this situation is temporary and at some point (soon hopefully) we will see it resolved, either through returning one or both kids to jr or a more regular dosage of minutes on the ice.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Picking your post at random, in response to the generalized frustration over benching the kids. WD's rationale is in the public record:



And further:



Source here.

You can argue whether or not WD's strategy is the right one, but for anyone who is interested to know what is actually happening, there is it. WD's stated strategy is not to torpedo the rookies' confidence and put them on the first bullet train back to juniors, nor to feud with the GM and President of the team, nor even to slip his comforting arms around the grinders he loves best. It's to build a platform of confidence on which to build greater, lasting effectiveness.

OK, I'll add this caveat to my post (and feel free to pick on mine any time ) - if the plan is to develop them in a similar format to Horvat, I am fine with that. This is to say that they will be kept beyond the 9-game marker and eased into situations. However, I do still think there is some merit to at least letting them try in those scenarios before coming to the conclusion that it's bad for their confidence. Children skin their knees a bit, but they learn to get back up. Professional hockey players should be able to do some of the same. Obviously there comes a point where it's too much - but letting them whet their feet a bit (i.e.--more than 1 minute of ice in a period) shouldn't be too big of an ask.

My greater concern is that we are basically keeping them here for 9 games and barely letting them sniff the ice in that time. I wouldn't find that particularly productive to their confidence or their development.

 

[MS]

Yahtzee.

Both Prust and Dorsett can offer effective value to a roster - from the fourth line. Maybe seeing spot duty on the 3rd on occasion. They're not fantastic hockey players, but they are far from plugs (or even the worst players we've seen in a Canucks' jersey).

The issue is their deployment and ice-time. It's too much. You can argue that the rookies we have may be just as - or even less - effective in that same time. But give them a chance to prove that before benching them. It's not like there was a game this year where we had a comfortable lead in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and promptly blew it. It's not like we had a close game in the 3rd, iced the rookies a ton, and then lost.

From Game 1 this year, Willie's MO has been to bench them in the 3rd. It's frustrating. Give them an opportunity in that environment to show they are or aren't worth the trust. If they play better, or at least equal to what Dorsett and Prust have been offering (which isn't setting the bar especially high...) then at least we know we can continue with WD's preferred "rolling four lines" methodology in the 3rd period.

Yup.

It's one thing if they fail in 3rd period icetime and then this is an adjustment.

It's another to just not give them a chance. And somehow, pretty much every other time finds a way to give their guys a chance.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Prust and Dorsett are not useless.....but don't think you'll ever agree so nvm

They are awful hockey players in terms of the areas that lead to a winning hockey team.

 

[a Fool]

they seem to compensate for some of McCann's deficiencies. The line has looked good two games in a row.

Agreed that Prust-McCann-Dorsett have been very good in the 2 games together. I wouldn't mind if that's the 4th line going forward.

I think the extra minutes that Prust/Dorsett get over the course of the game are a bit much though.

edit: don't dicount the Corsi Warriors either. They can back you up on this one. That line has been getting defensive zone starts and breaking even in shot attempts

 

[coldsteel79]

Listening to willie it sure sounds this year is a try hard year with no guarantee for playoffs and possibly a good pick

 

[Verviticus]

I think Daniel centering any line would be unplayable as he's played wing his entire career.

Miller getting rest is based off him starting a couple games that normally would have gone to Markstrom. The Sedins couldn't get similar treatment because they're expected to play every game. I think cutting games for the sake of rest would make them a little inconsistent.

burrows centred a line for like 9 games in 2013 and he ****ing killed it. good players are good players.