deadinthewater
Registered User
- Jan 14, 2012
- 10,069
- 520
I don't really get how some people are saying the loss is due to lack of trying. I don't see it that way at all.
Post-Game Talk: Game #1: Sharks defeat Canucks 4-1 - Part II
- Thread starter PG Canuck
- Start date
- Status
Same we just couldn't score. Our third and fourth line is again our weakest link, good luck getting any contribution from these lines come playoff.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,056
- 6,632
That's fine, but Mathieu Perrault is an NHL player right? If so, then why would JS need to go to Europe if he tops out the same?
Tenacity is not the make or break factor. I've heard this before, but I don't buy it because Desharnais isn't tenacious, nor is Whitney or other similar players. JS is stronger than these types with solid balance on his skates. So he's got enough. It's just conversion, and he's going to need to put up some points.
The 3rd line need not be a checking role either. If the team goes head to head then he needs to beat his depth competition, not the top lines on the other team.
Last edited:
WinterEmpire
Unregistered User
Can we please not jump all over the depth of our bottom six after game one when we are missing two top nine forwards?
Sedins looked dangerous on most shifts, and the rest of the team looked the same as before. At least we're dealing with the same problems as before instead of new ones. We'll need 10-15 games to know what we have and Gillis likely won't make any moves until mid-November or later.
SgtToody
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2013
- 1,215
- 30
Agreed. Fight and compete are very important, and something that has seemingly disapeared since that game in Boston two Januarys ago. I dont know if we truely have what it takes to make it all the way this year, but it always was going to be a transition year with the drastically lowered cap.
I know looking for patience from this fan base is hopeless, as we are all frustrated with our long, storied history of post season failure. That is no reason to look at the first regular season game of the season utilizing a new system, under a new coach and predict total, unmittigated disaster overall, especially when we are missing two players who will shift the dynamic of the bottom 6. Or we could put the Sedins on the 4th line and permanently solve the bottom six issue.
Yeah, I know patience is my shortcoming, however it was honed over many frustrating years of Lever, Guevermont, Gillis (of Jere), Krutov et al... Well, if Brendan Gallagher would just develop fas... Oh, right, we picked Polasek. D'oh!
How long do you project your oilers give Eakins with that team? What's are the expectations of your oiler fan base this year? Playoffs?
SgtToody
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2013
- 1,215
- 30
Who are we missing? Schroeder? He's not a lock NHLer yet. Kassian? Jury's out on his exact fit, too. Maybe you meant Booth? Oh, he played? Well if miracles never cease...
It's one game dude, one game. I can't believe how many irrational hysterical posts there have been about this game.
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
True. My main issue is that we knew the bottom 6 was in bad shape, and they got ventilated accordingly. Gillis should've done something to address this.
And yes - we did not have cap space. That's entirely of his doing however, just as it was with Nonis' last season here.
Great PK last night, but not so good of a PP despite the Garrison goal. SJ got their usual advantage in number of PP's at home, but the penalties were for the most part legit and the Canucks even got a phantom PP that lead to the Garrison goal. Canucks just have to be more disciplined on the road. A couple of lapses lead to the loss; Higgins, Hamhuis and Garrison, guys that are usually quite reliable defensively. No need to push the panic button here. Even Booth looked alright out there, I thought he was using his body well to establish position.
Luongo looked great, bailed the team out on some odd-man rushes. Maybe he would have liked to have one of those short-side ones back, but those were pretty hard shots.
Oh well, time to get back on track against the Oilers.
Luongo looked great, bailed the team out on some odd-man rushes. Maybe he would have liked to have one of those short-side ones back, but those were pretty hard shots.
Oh well, time to get back on track against the Oilers.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
Nonis had plenty of cap space in his last season. He just deluded himself into thinking he had a realistic chance at signing Forsberg mid-season so he kept a bunch of space open even though the Canucks desperately needed upgrades.
BloatedGuppy
Registered User
And consequentially there are always going to be holes. That's why injuries suck. They leave holes in the lineup.
Which is why when you analyze, you analyze the healthy lineup. So you can say things like "Good thing we have depth at position X in case of injuries".
Frankly there's only one major issue with the lineup as it stands, and it's the lack of a reliable, incumbent 3C. A 20/20 guy there would go miles towards stiffening the team, but we lack the cap and the assets to acquire such a player, so we're auditioning a variety of placeholders instead. You might also wish for a brawny sniper for the top two lines, or a bondafide #1 D, but these are "I want the best lineup in the league!" wishes, not "I want a competitive team" wishes.
Canucks have a lineup that could and should place anywhere from 3rd to 5th in the division, depending on how certain players perform and how the roster holds up to Tortorella's symphony of shot blocking. Which is pretty much exactly what everyone should have been expecting, given the age of the core and the cap pinch the rollback put us in.
Anyone wanting a return to the giddy heights of 2011 is going to need a time machine that takes Kesler, Luongo and the Sedins back to the prime of their careers. A marginal upgrade on Richardson or Weise is not going to catapult us to the land of cup favorites.
Certainly a good/excellent 3rd line center would go a long ways to helping the team but as with last year the issue last night really boiled down to mistakes. Not talent per se but mistakes that shouldn't be made.
Anyways....while they don't have that third line now I do think Gillis is trying to operate under the cap for the purposes of allowing him to take on such a salary later on in the year. Or wait until he is at the cap and maybe has some LTIR space to use (presuming a long term, season ending type injury of course).
They might just be content for the first 30-40 games to see if Santorelli, Richardson, Dalpe or Schroeder can grab that spot. If not then I suspect they will move Schroeder+ for that player.
Anyways....while they don't have that third line now I do think Gillis is trying to operate under the cap for the purposes of allowing him to take on such a salary later on in the year. Or wait until he is at the cap and maybe has some LTIR space to use (presuming a long term, season ending type injury of course).
They might just be content for the first 30-40 games to see if Santorelli, Richardson, Dalpe or Schroeder can grab that spot. If not then I suspect they will move Schroeder+ for that player.
StIllmatic
Registered User
According to twitter, Torts says that he thought two of Kesler's penalties were undeserved and Pavelski snapped his headback
Royal Canuck
Taco Enthusiast
StIllmatic
Registered User
He did. I do like that he's calling them out on their poor officiating, but I'm worried it will effect the playoff officiating. Knowing how poorly the NHL is run, it likely will.
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but its hard to deny that Canucks always get the short end of the stick.
Honestly can it get any worse? I'm not worried, it can't get much worse than last post season mockery
We're cool.
On the Comcast reverse angle replay it was a clear elbow by Kesler to the back of Pavelski's head. Looked like a penalty.
The first penalty for goaltender interference was questionable as Kesler was being driven into Niemi by a defender.
An elbow to the back of a head sends it forward though, not snapping backwards. Probably had a great "aaarrrgh" accompanying it too.
- Status
