Post-Game Talk: Game #45: Canucks 1 @ Lightning 4 || Save us Frankie.

[Serac]

I'm not really a Kassian fan (I don't mind him, but I'm not enamoured with him)
But I've always been impressed with his playmaking
I wouldn't mind him trying to focus on that, if he gets some linemates that may be able to finish

Part of why it intrigued me so much when he was briefly on the point during a PP a while back

 

[KDizzle]

I'm willing to wait around for the young guys to do it. This team is currently at least 3 really good pieces away form being a contender. That's too many to patchwork together now.

The problem, though, is that our best players are aging. So when the young guys are ready to be those 3, all of a sudden there are bigger holes opening up due to the decline of players.

Of course, we can mitigate that somewhat by good hockey trades and saavy free agent signings, but the ****tiness of our 2006-2010 drafts have really left a large gap between the older players and the next generation.

 

[Scurr]

The problem, though, is that our best players are aging. So when the young guys are ready to be those 3, all of a sudden there are bigger holes opening up due to the decline of players.

Of course, we can mitigate that somewhat by good hockey trades and saavy free agent signings, but the ****tiness of our 2006-2010 drafts have really left a large gap between the older players and the next generation.

They can't wait forever. They should definitely be going after longterm solutions. They aren't close enough to be trying to patch it together at the deadline, though.

I was expecting a retool to involve a step back this season, a step forward next season and the season after. Three year plan ending with a better, younger team. This team has done a little better than I expected but is still a couple seasons away.

 

[Pip]

How are we supposed to take a step forward next year? Assuming we are going to integrate more youth next year I would assume we would be worse.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I'm willing to wait around for the young guys to do it. This team is currently at least 3 really good pieces away form being a contender. That's too many to patchwork together now.

I disagree. If we made a play for a defenseman (Krug/Franson) and a decent top six forward, we would be in the running. Three years from now and our only offensive guns will be nearly ready to retire while our defense outside Edler/Tanev will be pushing late 30s. If we want any chance at a playoff run, it's this year or next.

 

[Scurr]

How are we supposed to take a step forward next year? Assuming we are going to integrate more youth next year I would assume we would be worse.

You expecting two rookies again? I think the young guys that are playing keep getting better and I hope Benning will make roster improvements. This team desperately needs more help down the middle.

I disagree. If we made a play for a defenseman (Krug/Franson) and a decent top six forward, we would be in the running. Three years from now and our only offensive guns will be nearly ready to retire while our defense outside Edler/Tanev will be pushing late 30s. If we want any chance at a playoff run, it's this year or next.

The team will be better at next years deadline and even better the deadline after that. The twins have that left in them imo.

 

[arsmaster*]

Higgins isn't a great scorer but if he had 9 goals there wouldn't be as many people claiming he does "nothing" with the "prime" icetime he gets. It's not his fault they can't find anyone better. If he was ever the third best player on the line, like he was with Bonino and Burrows earlier in the year, the line would be really good.

If he had 9 goals people would still question why Jannik "4th liner" Hansen is outscoring him.

What do you mean by "prime icetime"? He's been helping Bonino play tough minutes. They haven't been prime scoring minutes... they've been tough, defensive minutes. At least they were when Kesler played them.

I mean, good ice time with our 2C, 1:45 of PP time a game.

I don't want to play the Kesler game.

www.war-on-ice.com

They also define what a scoring chance is too.

The internet is hard. I looked up the glossary of terms, couldn't find scoring chance.

Good looking website though, glad they're rating areas of the ice for shot quality. Pretty cool stuff if you're smart enough, not sure I am.

Higgins is fine as the 6th forward.

Who wants to be fine?

He'd be much better as a 7 or 8.



-------

People need to remember, the Twins are our very best players, they couldn't win the big one at their peak, with the best team in 30 years in the league record wise, and we're going to push for older vets for one more kick at the can?

Doesn't make sense.

In 3 or 4 years I want to forget these guys even existed. I want a new group of players. I don't want a barren cupboard because we were putting lipstick on the pick for their 33-37 year old seasons.

We're way too many pieces away from winning it IMO.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

You expecting two rookies again? I think the young guys that are playing keep getting better and I hope Benning will make roster improvements. This team desperately needs more help down the middle.

Yeah, young teams tend to get better. In 2007-08 Duncan Keith was maybe a top 4 solid defenseman, in 2009-10 he was Norris material. 2007-08 Jonathan Toews was a good rookie who had room for improvement in some areas, in 2009-10 he won a Cup, Conn Smythe, was a Selke nominee, and was well on his way to becoming the next Messier.

Vey I think will get better, Horvat will get better, Kassian I hope will get better, Virtanen might make the team. As long as we keep hitting our picks, we'll get better as years go by.

 

[Scurr]

If he had 9 goals people would still question why Jannik "4th liner" Hansen is outscoring him.

Only people that get fooled by shooting percentage.

 

[arsmaster*]

Only people that get fooled by shooting percentage.

Sorry. I don't wait around for things to normalize, I expect players getting good opportunities to do something impactful on the score sheet.

Too much is based on the fancies now. I liked it when a player was not producing and you could comment on it without a wall of links to some fancy page, but that's just ignorant old me I guess.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

How are we supposed to take a step forward next year? Assuming we are going to integrate more youth next year I would assume we would be worse.

A lot of that would ride on the progression of some of our younger players. Bo Horvat being one (a logical step for him next season would be to progress to the team's 3rd Line C) ; I would argue that Frankie Corrado could/should be a regular(bottom-pairing at least) by the start of next season as well.

The other young player we need to see some sort of progression from is Zack Kassian. And if that's not going to happen, someone from below needs to push him; it should be Nicklas Jensen, as he has had ample time to be seasoned in the AHL with spot duty in the NHL. But if Jensen has yet to put together the consistency needed to push Kassian, that push may have to come from someone else.

 

[Scurr]

Sorry. I don't wait around for things to normalize, I expect players getting good opportunities to do something impactful on the score sheet.

Too much is based on the fancies now. I liked it when a player was not producing and you could comment on it without a wall of links to some fancy page, but that's just ignorant old me I guess.

There is plenty of grey area to argue but arguing that Higgins does nothing with the prime ice-time he gets is ignorant.

 

[MS]

Sorry. I don't wait around for things to normalize, I expect players getting good opportunities to do something impactful on the score sheet.

Too much is based on the fancies now. I liked it when a player was not producing and you could comment on it without a wall of links to some fancy page, but that's just ignorant old me I guess.

No kidding. I like fancy stats, and they're helpful in context, but so many people now treat them as absolutes ... when they're almost all just variables of +/- for shots, with all the same issues as regular +/-.

Higgins has 1 goal and 3 points in his last 21 games playing mostly top-6 minutes. Most of those games he's completely invisible (unlike, say, Burrows during his slump last year when he was completely snakebit but still generating loads of chances). It isn't good enough, and digging deep for some favourable stats doesn't change that.

That said, yes, the fact that he's a fundamentally sound player who continues to play solid defense when struggling badly makes him more useful than other players in similar slumps.

 

[Scurr]

No kidding. I like fancy stats, and they're helpful in context, but so many people now treat them as absolutes ... when they're almost all just variables of +/- for shots, with all the same issues as regular +/-.

Untrue. The biggest issue with +/- is the volatility of shooting percentage over the short-term. Luck can negatively or positively effect the number too much to make it really meaningful. Shots work better because they take that single biggest issue out. There are still issues with shots but none as big as shooting percentage.

Higgins has 1 goal and 3 points in his last 21 games playing mostly top-6 minutes. Most of those games he's completely invisible (unlike, say, Burrows during his slump last year when he was completely snakebit but still generating loads of chances). It isn't good enough, and digging deep for some favourable stats doesn't change that.

If you count the shots he's getting you'll get a better indication of how he's really playing.

That said, yes, the fact that he's a fundamentally sound player who continues to play solid defense when struggling badly makes him more useful than other players in similar slumps.

Good enough for me.

 

[absolute garbage]

The Canucks went 3-0 against non-playoff teams and outscored them 9-1.

And 0-2 against playoff teams and got outscored 2-9.

Decent trip but not that confidence inspiring. Miller was really good though.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Untrue. The biggest issue with +/- is the volatility of shooting percentage over the short-term. Luck can negatively or positively effect the number too much to make it really meaningful. Shots work better because they take that single biggest issue out. There are still issues with shots but none as big as shooting percentage.

The difference in shot quality is not all luck. Over the long-term, yes, it probably evens out to some extent but in a small sample the differences can be vast.