Post-Game Talk: Game #1: Sharks defeat Canucks 4-1 - Part II

[Trelane]

Not an auspicious start but no tragedy either.

Outplayed them in the first but even then I just knew we wouldn't be able to maintain that murderous playoff type pace for very long. Too many PKs killed the momentum in the 2nd, and when it became a 2 goal deficit they give up in true Nuck fashion (maximum minimalists).

SJ is a beast of team. Likely class of the division. Superb Robinson coached D didn't yield too many chances to our 2 man forecheck. We didn't get so much outworked as out muscled.

Team's really missing the big bodies of Samuelson, Malhotra, and Torres. Our bottom 6/2 needs to step up, otherwise Tort will put the vets through a death march and they'll be spent down the wire.

System is still full of kinks, leading to turnovers and odd man rushes. Hopefully won't take too long to correct.

PS: Anybody thinking the kids recently shipped to junior would have made a difference is dreaming. The pace of this game was another step up from the preseason where they failed to match the intensity and puck battling ability of the likes of Santorelli and Richardson, unremarkable as those two were tonight.

 

[Tiranis]

Looking at the shot attempt numbers I can see why Tanev had so many blocked shots. He (and Stanton) got absolutely slaughtered out there. The team was outshot 17-3 with Tanev on the ice and in terms of shot attempts it was 28-7. Might be more of a function of who they were on the ice with though.

In terms of possession numbers, the top 6 and top 4 did fairly well (the Sharks didn't even register a shot with H. Sedin on the ice) while the depth players got murdered.

Yikes. Were they out there mostly with the bottom 6?

 

[RobertKron]

Huh? What? I meant that if things had worked out in Vancouver I'm pretty sure he would have gradually improved in his own end. Maybe he's not getting the right coaching in Buffalo. I don't know. All I know is that one of the good qualities of this organization is that they've been able to develop players from their system well. AV and his staff deserve a nod for that. I do believe that Hodgson would have improved his play in his own end if he wasn't traded. That's all I'm trying to say.

He'd have either continued to play a third line, sheltered role and had a tantrum about it like he did, or the Canucks would have caved and moved him up the lineup to get manhandled like he is in Buffalo.

 

[NuxFan09]

No one is giving Kassian a pass. We are simply highlighting the flaws in Hodgson's game because he was enormously overrated here. We are talking Price equating Roy degrees of overrated. There is little need to reference Kassian's deficiencies when a vocal portion of this board takes every opportunity to specify them ad nauseum.

We do not miss him. Talented or not, he is no longer a Vancouver Canuck and most of us have moved on. Living in past delusions is the habit of a very vocal minority. Were we excited about the possibility of his accession in the lineup? Sure, just as we are about Kassian, who is routinely underrated or outright lambasted as a failure simply for not being our lord and savior, Godson.

Citing Hodgson as a defensive liability is merely an accurate analysis, especially when the context of many posts who insist on mentioning him, insinuate he would be useful in a defensive role, i.e. a third line centre.

I don't really disagree with any of this, although I personally don't think he was overrated. I think he was the real deal. It just didn't work out and I have moved on.

I'm just pointing out that I didn't hear much in the way of complaints that he was overrated before. Of course, I'm hearing a lot of that now that he's gone. I heard critiquing of his game, naturally, because we do that with every player on the team. I just find the indifference now a bit humorous.

Anyway, moving on.

 

[Samzilla]

...so we didn't win the cup?

 

[BrandonL]

He didn't stand out in a glaring way which I think is good but the few times he had the puck I thought he made the simple play, and he did make that through-the-legs back pass in his own end to get the puck moving. Didn't expect that from him!

Of course it's only 1 game but I thought he already looked better than Alberts, which doesn't bode well for the latter...

You know it's a rough opening night when the main positive was the play of the #6 D-man.

 

[Outside99*]

I liked Stanton's game as well.

Especially considering no pre-season with Canucks, 2nd NHL game, against the Sharks of all teams and the pressure to make a good impression right away - there's no "defencemen take years to develop" narrative for him - a few bad games and he could be back on the waiver wire.

 

[jigsaw99]

I thought I noticed it was often the 3rd and 4th lines who were out there with them when we were getting hemmed in our own zone.

that's what happens when you take 3 players who last season played a combined 38 games and scored a combined 2 goals and make them into your 3rd line.

Richardson is not a 3rd liner and is a 13th forward in any cup contending team.

i am not gonna even talk about the 4th line they didn't even play past 3 min tonight it seems.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Looking at the shot attempt numbers I can see why Tanev had so many blocked shots. He (and Stanton) got absolutely slaughtered out there. The team was outshot 17-3 with Tanev on the ice and in terms of shot attempts it was 28-7. Might be more of a function of who they were on the ice with though.

In terms of possession numbers, the top 6 and top 4 did fairly well (the Sharks didn't even register a shot with H. Sedin on the ice) while the depth players got murdered.

As per usual, it comes down to depth. An area this team has bizarrely ignored for several years now. Santorelli, Dalpe..Richardson are all crap. We are going nowhere with other teams castoffs.

Perhaps this year will be the year that this organization finally realizes that depth is important - however given how Pejorative Slured each and every decision has been since 2011 I highly doubt it.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I don't really disagree with any of this, although I personally don't think he was overrated. I think he was the real deal. It just didn't work out and I have moved on.

I'm just pointing out that I didn't hear much in the way of complaints that he was overrated before. Of course, I'm hearing a lot of that now that he's gone. I heard critiquing of his game, naturally, because we do that with every player on the team. I just find the indifference now a bit humorous.

Anyway, moving on.

To be fair, I suspect it is intentional as a response to incessant nitpicking directed toward Kassian. Personally, I would prefer we focus on the roster we do have, whether good or bad.

If you want a objective analysis. Hodgson has the upswing to be a good second line centre in the mold of Derek Roy, albeit with more offensive focus and suspect defensive play. He is not someone to be necessarily relied upon, but good as a catalyst for secondary scoring, provided he is somewhat sheltered and will be his most effective on the powerplay. The uptempo nature of the east will definitely favor his skillset more than the west.

 

[Wilch]

RE: MS's post on Booth being inserted into the Sedin line.

I think Booth's appearance on the Sedin line in the third had something to do with Burrows logging major minutes in the PK.

Had Burrows continued to play with the Sedins on the ES in the third, we're probably looking at him logging 25+ minutes this game.

Anytime we get a huge string of penalties and overwork our PKers, we'll see lines get juggled.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

If we made the playoffs this year and thats a huge if, SJ would literally beat us in 3 games.



Men vs boys.

 

[jigsaw99]

If we made the playoffs this year and thats a huge if, SJ would literally beat us in 3 games.



Men vs boys.

i rather take the higher draft pick

 

[RobertKron]

To be fair, I suspect it is intentional as a response to incessant nitpicking directed toward Kassian. Personally, I would prefer we focus on the roster we do have, whether good or bad.

If you want a objective analysis. Hodgson has the upswing to be a good second line centre in the mold of Derek Roy, albeit with more offensive focus and suspect defensive play. He is not someone to be necessarily relied upon, but good as a catalyst for secondary scoring, provided he is somewhat sheltered.

I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be sitting here talking about Hodgson's defensive game if it weren't for the fact that Hodgson gets brought up as the solution to the team's problems in basically every thread ever.

 

[canuck4life16]

To be fair, I suspect it is intentional as a response to incessant nitpicking directed toward Kassian. Personally, I would prefer we focus on the roster we do have, whether good or bad.

If you want a objective analysis. Hodgson has the upswing to be a good second line centre in the mold of Derek Roy, albeit with more offensive focus and suspect defensive play. He is not someone to be necessarily relied upon, but good as a catalyst for secondary scoring, provided he is somewhat sheltered.

I think Schroeder is likely more in the Derek roy same size....but maybe not as good offensively?

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be sitting here talking about Hodgson's defensive game if it weren't for the fact that Hodgson gets brought up as the solution to the team's problems in basically every thread ever.

Pretty much. That is among the reasons people are quite to criticise him - rightly or wrongly.

I think Schroeder is likely more in the Derek roy same size....but maybe not as good offensively?

Possibly, but Schroeder is a bit too raw an assess to say what his potential will be. He certainly has the toolset, and I agree. He is likely to be a more balanced contributor, assuming he can produce at the NHL level.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

RE: MS's post on Booth being inserted into the Sedin line.

I think Booth's appearance on the Sedin line in the third had something to do with Burrows logging major minutes in the PK.

Had Burrows continued to play with the Sedins on the ES in the third, we're probably looking at him logging 25+ minutes this game.

Anytime we get a huge string of penalties and overwork our PKers, we'll see lines get juggled.

Burrows was apparently wincing and had a serious limp according to a tweet earlier. That is likely what sparked Booth replacing him on the Sedins' line. I hope it does not become a consistent go to because he simply cannot play with them.

 

[canuck4life16]

think a line of Booth Schroeder Kassasin will work?

 

[Wilch]

Hansen was AV's choice to replace Burrows on the Sedin line last year. Hopefully Torts will find someone better than Booth. His skill set is not very well suited to play with the Sedins.

 

[WinterEmpire]

think a line of Booth Schroeder Kassasin will work?

That would certainly be an odd mix of players

 

[canuck4life16]

That would certainly be an odd mix of players

two big bodies with a smaller forward..........work for montreal

 

[BeardedCanuck]

think a line of Booth Schroeder Kassasin will work?

There is a vocal portion of these forums that think all three are useless, so I'd like to see it just to see how insane those people got.

 

[canuck4life16]

There is a vocal portion of these forums that think all three are useless, so I'd like to see it just to see how insane those people got.

it would be nice to prove people wrong and produce......hopefully Torts does it at some point

 

[Jyrki]

think a line of Booth Schroeder Kassasin will work?

Booth Schroeder sounds good. Not sure if Kassian can keep up.

 

[CherryToke]

i rather take the higher draft pick

let the Sedins walk and McDavid is ours.