Post-Game Talk: Devils def. Canucks - 3-2

NoShowWilly

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
12,595
2,426
North Delta
Granlund and Sutter losing out 5on5 again?

Granlund hasn't been a positive player in any of his past 20 games. minus player in last 6 and 8/10.
 
Last edited:

Ozone

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
15,102
5,200
Gudbranson had a horrendous game from what I saw. I think the only hope here is a new GM that will come in and clean a lot of these players out. Doubt Benning will move these guys and admit his error.

Benning doubles down on his mistakes. Lawd, help us!
 

Ozone

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
15,102
5,200
Hutton 26:49 TOI

g600616996.gif
 

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
Granlund and Sutter losing out 5on5 again?

Granlund hasn't been a positive player in any of his past 20 games. minus player in last 6 and 8/10.

Gudbranson, Granlund, and Sutter all look to be in contention for the green jacket this year at -13, -12, and -12 respectively. Add Hutton and his -11, and you have 4 Canucks among the 7 worst +/- in the league.
 

Jimson Hogarth*

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
12,858
3
Gudbranson, Granlund, and Sutter all look to be in contention for the green jacket this year at -13, -12, and -12 respectively. Add Hutton and his -11, and you have 4 Canucks among the 7 worst +/- in the league.
Can they match Edlers epic -39 from a couple years back tho?
 

Tinhorn1

Registered User
Aug 7, 2007
1,119
345
Who cares? One of them was 5 on 3

The whole Sedin thing on this thread started when a poster said they have not always shown enough pushback and got ganged up on by all the sensitive Sedin defenders.

If people cannot admit the Sedins did not show enough pushback in the Cup Finals than they have lost objectivity. To be fair they are not as soft as some call them out for but they have also not always showed enough pushback either.

No fan should be blamed because they are ready for change after 16 years of the same thing and want bigger, faster and grittier players in the top 6. They do exist.

It's a shame that no one on that entire 2011 team, top to bottom, could find the back of the net in that series. It would have spared us all this tired old argument. The biggest problem in that series was the Canucks powerplay going quiet, not the Sedins forgetting to put their man pants on.

On the other hand, it's understandable to want to move on at this point and see something new. Sports is a vicarious activity, from a fan's perspective. Fans actually feel the same thrills and agonies as the players. After watching so much heartbreak personified by the Sedins, it's natural to want to turn the page and feel the heartbreak with somebody knew (us being Canucks fans, I wouldn't expect to feel the thrill of victory any time soon). I just don't think it has much to do with the Sedins themselves.
 

polarbearcub

Registered User
May 7, 2011
13,845
1,903
Vancouver
Intresting henrik mentioned 2-3 times that the d aren't getting involved enough and said after the game," sitting back too much.. From the backend all the way up"
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
23,620
7,755
Wow Gudbranson looks alright in sheltered/limited minutes, but he turns into a tire fire when he's relied on to be more than a depth guy.
 

Red

Registered User
Dec 14, 2002
14,036
4,787
VanCity
Visit site
Intresting henrik mentioned 2-3 times that the d aren't getting involved enough and said after the game," sitting back too much.. From the backend all the way up"

Well the only one of that lot even capable of driving any offense is Stecher. The rest probably should sit back.
 

Ozone

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
15,102
5,200
Intresting henrik mentioned 2-3 times that the d aren't getting involved enough and said after the game," sitting back too much.. From the backend all the way up"

Not necessarily the first time Hankie has mentioned this, though..

To me, it's a small jab - at more than one person and/or coach - to play less scared and defensive, and open it up a bit.

Heck, what do we have to lose?
 

Ozone

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
15,102
5,200
Wow Gudbranson looks alright in sheltered/limited minutes, but he turns into a tire fire when he's relied on to be more than a depth guy.

He's had more than a bit of a rough go lately. Yet, he looked so much more confident and better at the beginning of the season. Hmmmm...

Confidence? Only 24, and first time in the big spotlight? Maybe he's got his confidence shaken a bit lately? Too many question marks typed in this paragraph?

I think he'll bounce back.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,540
14,939
There's no denying it....Gudbranson may be a stand-up-guy, but he's an unmitigated catastrophe in his one zone. He's Andrew Alberts bad. And while you pray Philip Larsen is OK, the reality is, he just isn't physically strong enough to be an NHL d-man. I was worried about the punishment he was taking in pre-season.

.....And to think these two guys cost us a former first rounder (McCann), a high second rounder a fourth rounder and a fifth rounder. Four draft picks flushed away for a fifth pairing d-man and a guy who's undoubtedly heading back to Europe. As a Canuck fan it's enough to make you sick to your stomach.
 

polarbearcub

Registered User
May 7, 2011
13,845
1,903
Vancouver
Not necessarily the first time Hankie has mentioned this, though..

To me, it's a small jab - at more than one person and/or coach - to play less scared and defensive, and open it up a bit.

Heck, what do we have to lose?

I think hank is jabbing at the coaching staff personally. Fair. From a future 1000 point hall of famer
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad