Post-Game Talk: GM 2: Flames def. Canucks - 3-0

Status
Not open for further replies.

Star Ocean

Registered User
Dec 30, 2018
3,583
2,003
Glad I havent watched either game yet this year what a joke. 2 games 2 goals no wins no points for Pettersson whos CLEARLY in a sophmore slump. Looks like from what i hear he gained too much weight and cant move him self around like he did last year. Boeser looks like good we didnt do a long term deal with him and we wasted a 1st on Miller who cant get ANYTHING done. What a joke, will we be even worst then Ottawa and Detroit this year? Probably

And now Ben Hutton is outscoring Pettersson and played half the games. WOW
It's been 2 games. Not sure if this was a serious post

I mean, a star player has never been shutout in 2 games before. Never!

I recall crosby scoring 1 assist in 4 games last playoffs.
 

mossey3535

Registered User
Feb 7, 2011
13,218
9,645


The issue I have is that his analysis goes straight to the results without looking at how the actual game flow of the PP has looked so far in the actual regular season. Who gives a f*** what this looked like in the preseason against AHL squads?

It also willfully ignores the performance of the PP in the last four years. Edler has been a boat anchor and underproducer for at least that time and arguably longer.

Finally, it confirms that Green determines the personnel makeup of each unit. Considering that the 5-on-3 worked very well because the flow went through Boeser, and that PP2 is so much more fluid and competent than PP1 with "worse" forwards but Myers/Hughes.

No wonder he's never talked in this kind of depth since it's the first real evidence that this teams special teams failures are on Green.
 

mossey3535

Registered User
Feb 7, 2011
13,218
9,645
Miller is skating with Pettersson and Boeser at pactice today. Glad to seem them trying something to get Pettersson going. This is where they talked about playing Miller when they aquired him. If nothing else this will help that line start with possession. Elias was pretty bad at the dot last season and is 31% so far this year.

I'm glad they're making a change but I'd prefer they give Leivo back to EP. That line worked last season since Leivo can win board battles which balances out Boeser's sometimes passivity. I also think Miller has always looked good with Horvat and that pairing is what has made the 2nd line our best line so far.

Yeah Leivo hasn't been good on the PP but that's not his fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bertuzzzi44

M2Beezy

Objective and Neutral Hockey Commentator
May 25, 2014
45,287
30,123
It's been 2 games. Not sure if this was a serious post

I mean, a star player has never been shutout in 2 games before. Never!

I recall crosby scoring 1 assist in 4 games last playoffs.
Crosby also has THREE cups so is NOT the same thing Ocean Boy :shakehead
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slapshot_11

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,047
14,079
I get the fact that we're only 'two games in'. But so far a couple of trends from the recent dismal seasons have already raised their 'ugly heads. The Canucks coughed up a third period lead and lost another one-goal game in Edmonton. They led the entire league in one-goal losses a year ago.

And last season they were shut out more than any other team in the NHL. And they got a head-start on that dismal record with a 3-0 bagel in Calgary.

And finally, the PP is officially 0-10, which for a team with the 25th ranked offense last year, is a recipe for a long year if it continues.

But for the time being, join the happy faces on Sportsnet 650...'Don't worry, be happy'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: geebaan

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,772
9,427
I don’t think that not qualifying him was the correct decision at all.

I imagine that’s what he’s referring too.

I agree that once the Canucks refused to qualify him that he was never coming back here and that a team like LA ticks more of the boxes for him than here.

i see that as a judgment call though, not obvious mismanagement as mathonwy is implying. the canucks did re-sign gudbranson to try and salvage value and got pearson. did you agree with that decision?

i think the $2.8m deal was what screwed it up. i like him and still think he might make good but thought he was never going to make it with us. that contract meant we couldn't move the guy and then it meant we had to walk from the guy. if we had re-signed him at $3.5-4m he'd be untradable again unless he was playing at a level where we would not want to trade him. catch 22 all caused by that contract.
 

1440

Registered User
Feb 20, 2013
475
969
Respectfully, I think you’re slicing the data in the wrong way. If you want to highlight the story of the game, look by period. In all situations, the Canucks got taken to the woodshed in the second period and made up ground in the game when it was no longer close. (Put another way, the Flames controlled the high leverage minutes.)

The Game Flow chart tells the tale. Overtaking the Flames in xG through the third matters a lot less when you’re already down two actual goals and Calgary has controlled the game to that point.

It’s a bit like saying, “the Canucks were unlucky to not have lost 2-1”.

The flames goals were scored at the end of the first and start of the second when play was relatively even (the Canucks held a slight Xgoals advantage). They then took over for the last 15 minutes of the second. It is disingenuous to say that they had controlled the game to that point. The Canucks were the better team for most of the game and were unlucky to be behind after the first.

Secondly, though score effects exist they are not an excuse to say that vast chunks of the game do not matter when one team trails another. Unless one team leads by 4 or more goals, they are not likely to let off the gas so to speak. If a team has the habit of trying to sit back on one or two goal leads and get outshot 4-1 in the process, it is not a recipe for success in the long run. Canucks fans know this all too well from years past.
 

Grantham

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
1,372
1,398
I think the thing that makes me the most angry about this game, is the offensive zone starts. Sutter, Beagle,Schaller with greater than 80% offensive stars, while our top two lines have less than 30%.

So Bo’s and Petey’s lines have to start from the wrong end of the ice about 75% of the time, defend, and then try to work their way up the ice with the remaining energy they have left to create offence. While one of the highest paid bottom 6 in the league get cushy deployment and can’t be trusted to defend, and certainly never score.

Stupid use of our resources
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,367
83,458
Vancouver, BC
Why might that have been? I just can’t see what it is about the player or his play they don’t like ?

I know he has been frustrated by his deployment.

No idea, wasn't really given a follow up by the source. Just take my word for it.

ST LOUIS WON CUP WITH BIG D.

And with the arrival of Hughes, I’m pretty sure the dinosaur 1980s mentality can’t process the thought of multiple small defenders on the same blueline.
 

Hockeyphysio

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
603
519
I think it’s pretty concerning they’re playing Edler 25+ Minutes and playing the 3rd pairing as though it’s Guillaume Brisebois and Brogan Rafferty not proven veteran NHL defenseman.

I don’t mind a top heavy usage but this seems extreme and not conducive to long term success.

Its interesting watching a teams in MLB and NBA very tightly manage the load their players take on, where as the Canucks (and most of the NHL) don't even try. Stecher and Benn should be a very effective 3rd paring else why did you sign Benn in the first place?
 

RobsonStreet

Registered User
Jun 4, 2004
718
288
The flames goals were scored at the end of the first and start of the second when play was relatively even (the Canucks held a slight Xgoals advantage). They then took over for the last 15 minutes of the second. It is disingenuous to say that they had controlled the game to that point. The Canucks were the better team for most of the game and were unlucky to be behind after the first.

Secondly, though score effects exist they are not an excuse to say that vast chunks of the game do not matter when one team trails another. Unless one team leads by 4 or more goals, they are not likely to let off the gas so to speak. If a team has the habit of trying to sit back on one or two goal leads and get outshot 4-1 in the process, it is not a recipe for success in the long run. Canucks fans know this all too well from years past.

I argued the Flames were the better team through 40 minutes, you used the phrase “last 15 minutes of the second”. I don’t think I’m the one constructing a narrative.

Score effects absolutely exist up/down 1, 2 and 3 goals. This is true league wide and has been known in analytics circles since... 2006 if I had to guess. If you don’t believe me, compare 5v5 adjusted last night to 5v5 raw in xG or shot share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ekimbo

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
i see that as a judgment call though, not obvious mismanagement as mathonwy is implying. the canucks did re-sign gudbranson to try and salvage value and got pearson. did you agree with that decision?

i think the $2.8m deal was what screwed it up. i like him and still think he might make good but thought he was never going to make it with us. that contract meant we couldn't move the guy and then it meant we had to walk from the guy. if we had re-signed him at $3.5-4m he'd be untradable again unless he was playing at a level where we would not want to trade him. catch 22 all caused by that contract.
They could’ve moved Gudbranson for picks before the extension. I’d have preferred that and it’s not really comparable to Hutton.

I agree they extended him too early the first time for too much though.
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,088
13,876
Missouri
I argued the Flames were the better team through 40 minutes, you used the phrase “last 15 minutes of the second”. I don’t think I’m the one constructing a narrative.

Score effects absolutely exist up/down 1, 2 and 3 goals. This is true league wide and has been known in analytics circles since... 2006 if I had to guess. If you don’t believe me, compare 5v5 adjusted last night to 5v5 raw in xG or shot share.

Yep. And again of course they do. While stats can show those score effects it’s another thing one can easily see...it doesn’t really need numbers to elucidate what’s going on. Teams absolutely change the way they are playing depending on the score. The team in the lead will often be much more conservative on pinching and aggressively push the play, reduce the forechecking pressure etc. It’s not some crazy thing and it definitely happens when a team is only up by one or two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ekimbo

RobsonStreet

Registered User
Jun 4, 2004
718
288
Yep. And again of course they do. While stats can show those score effects it’s another thing one can easily see...it doesn’t really need numbers to elucidate what’s going on. Teams absolutely change the way they are playing depending on the score. The team in the lead will often be much more conservative on pinching and aggressively push the play, reduce the forechecking pressure etc. It’s not some crazy thing and it definitely happens when a team is only up by one or two.

To build on this, it’s not just pressing versus sitting on leads. IIRC, score influences rates at which power plays are called and for which team. Incidentally, Vancouver made up ground in shots and expected goals by virtue of having ~3 extra minutes on the power play last night.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tantalum

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,510
Chris Tanev was excellent through preseason and in the first game, and that pairing was working well. The fact that Tanev had a lousy one-off game (primarily handling the puck in the offensive zone) doesn’t mean you rush to break that pairing up.
No doubt MS but Green/Baumgartner have to figure out that pairs deployment and Tanev has to be more assertive in the offensive zone or he's gonna restrict Hughes creativity. Hughes would benefit greatly by playing with good shooters

Between last year and last game i have seen more poor outings by Tanev than the 5 yrs previous. The bad ice combined with the Flames suffocating style made it tough for anyone to be crisp last game. I suspect he'll be fine but i still wouldn't mind seeing

Edler Stecher
Hughes Myers - Ozone starts
Benn Tanev - Dzone starts

especially as the seasons wears on we cant be using that btm pairing as little as we are
 

Zippgunn

Registered User
May 15, 2011
3,929
1,628
Lhuntshi
$$$ I can't think $$$ of any reason $$$ why those coaches $$$ would join us either $$$.

Just dish out the money. Coaches get paid less than your average stars. Also, if you believe Aqualini wouldn't fork up the money you'd be wrong. Aqualini just spent 20 million dollars just to have rights to a team slot in a Call of Duty professional league. That's not including the infrastructure you'd need to run a team. That's just the right to play in the league. Want to know the average viewership for this professional league? Sub 100 thousand.

It would have to be a LOT of money for any coach who is actually any good at his craft to come here and basically commit career suicide. If they are that good then they will probably get offers from other teams and if you don't think Vancouver is at the very bottom of most potentially available coaches' lists then I just don't know what to say to you. Only the desperate newbie coaches will say yes.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,797
4,012
Leivo is a solid 5-on-5 possession player.

But WTF is he on the First unit PP?? When the team already has possession you need to create, move, and open up lanes! It’s why Baertschi was effective on the PP. Not sure why Green doesn’t understand that good 5-on-5 play doesn’t necessarily translate to good PP play. Get Leivo off the damn PP and put in someone that isn’t stationary and can actually move and create!

This is something that tends to get overlooked: Green seems to think that you need to be good at ES first in order to be on the PP, when in fact they are 2 different situations and don't necessarily require the same things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mossey3535

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
26,010
15,871
I'd much rather have Goldobin and Baertschi with Horvat rather than Ferland and Pearson.
Respectfully disagree..why should a guy (Goldy) that cant produce, cannot retrieve the puck..is useless without the puck..be gifted top 6 minutes..?

Personally,I think guys on the roster right now are still trying to find chemistry with each other ...

Ferland,Pearson and Horvat is a bulldog line..I'm kind of stoked to see that one.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,797
4,012
I had heard prior to the season from a source that Stetcher had fallen out of favour with the organization, his ice time seems to reflect that.
This wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't be very smart of them.
 

Intangibos

High-End Intangibos
Apr 5, 2010
7,806
3,370
Burnaby
I'd much rather have Goldobin and Baertschi with Horvat rather than Ferland and Pearson.

The sad part is we don't even need to choose. We could just have Goldobin and Baertschi with Horvat, and then dump two of Schaller/Eriksson/Sutter/Beagle/Leivo/Motte.

Miller Pettersson Goldobin
Baertschi Horvat Boeser
Ferland Gaudette Pearson
Leivo Sutter Virtanen

This lineup looks significantly better than what we have now and it's not even like a "wouldn't it be nice if we still had these players" roster, it's actual pieces we have right now and are choosing not to use.
 

Megaterio Llamas

el rey del mambo
Oct 29, 2011
11,219
5,929
North Shore
They'll get their chance along the way, don't worry guys. Anyone expecting much actual on ice improvement might be in for a let down however. Though the satisfaction of personal preference served is always better than nothing I guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->