Pre-Game Talk: GM 46: Vancouver Canucks vs. Chicago Blackhawks - Apr 22 - 7:00PM PST - SPAC

Status
Not open for further replies.

thepuckmonster

Professional Winner.
Oct 25, 2011
31,251
684
Vancouver
We're definitely not even close to being better than them.

This is how I see it:

Van Centre depth > Chicago Centre depth
Van Winger depth < Chicago winger depth
Van Defense depth (as of right now) < Chicago defense depth (fairly equal when healthy IMO)
Van goaltending > Chicago goaltending
Van coaching < Chicago coaching
 

Virtanen2Horvat

BoHorvat53
Nov 29, 2011
8,288
2
Vancouver
This will be a good game. I think our team can take them if they play physically. Playoffs roster should be good.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Kassian
Higgins-Roy-Hansen
Pinizzotto-Lapierre-Weise

- Roy could wing with Kesler and then we can call Schroeder up
- Roster can remain as above
- Kassian and Burrows can switch spots since both lines will have chemistry still.

Also remember Higgins/Tanev/Bieksa will be back.

Also if we win this game Minny has no hopes of taking the division and they have to win every game if we lose all our remaining games.
 
Last edited:

CanadianPirate

Registered User
Apr 17, 2007
1,241
38
This is how I see it:

Van Centre depth > Chicago Centre depth
Van Winger depth < Chicago winger depth
Van Defense depth (as of right now) < Chicago defense depth (fairly equal when healthy IMO)
Van goaltending > Chicago goaltending
Van coaching < Chicago coaching

Yeah on paper the Canucks match up very well with the Blackhawks. The issue is the game has to actually be played on the ice:cry:. I think the main problem right now is:

How the canucks are playing<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<How the blackhawks are playing

:laugh::laugh::laugh::cry:
 

VanCanucks53

Registered User
Jul 6, 2007
4,416
314
Calgary
Yeah on paper the Canucks match up very well with the Blackhawks. The issue is the game has to actually be played on the ice:cry:. I think the main problem right now is:

How the canucks are playing<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<How the blackhawks are playing

:laugh::laugh::laugh::cry:

I think that's what it comes down to. On paper this Canucks team is good as any(when healthy) but when you see them play...yikes, it's a different story. And paper really means nothing at the end of the day. They haven't been playing like an elite team. More of a middle of the pack type of team this year.
 

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
Chicago is nowhere close to "one of the best teams the NHL has ever seen". No freakin' way.

In terms of lineup, no, but in terms of results they are. They're currently on a 136 point pace which would break the NHL record and they have an .830 points % which would be 2nd highest in NHL history (behind the 1929-1930 Bruins who put up an .875 record in a 44 game season).

Granted their record is inflated by the shootout, so their adjusted pace is more akin to a 122 or so point pace (.744 record) under the old system. Still, that's about as good as it gets in the modern era outside of the late '70s Canadiens and the 95-96 Red Wings.

Obviously the shortened season makes things a little different (San Jose had an .800+ record after 48 games in 08-09 and ended up losing in the 1st round) but the Blackhawks year so far has been about as impressive as any in recent memory.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,198
8,536
Granduland
In terms of lineup, no, but in terms of results they are. They're currently on a 136 point pace which would break the NHL record and they have an .830 points % which would be 2nd highest in NHL history (behind the 1929-1930 Bruins who put up an .875 record in a 44 game season).

Granted their record is inflated by the shootout, so their adjusted pace is more akin to a 122 or so point pace (.744 record) under the old system. Still, that's about as good as it gets in the modern era outside of the late '70s Canadiens and the 95-96 Red Wings.

You have to remember that this is a shortened season, no doubt in my mind they wouldn't hit their projection if they had to actually play a full season
 

M A K A V E L I*

Guest
In terms of lineup, no, but in terms of results they are. They're currently on a 136 point pace which would break the NHL record and they have an .830 points % which would be 2nd highest in NHL history (behind the 1929-1930 Bruins who put up an .875 record in a 44 game season).

Granted their record is inflated by the shootout, so their adjusted pace is more akin to a 122 or so point pace (.744 record) under the old system. Still, that's about as good as it gets in the modern era outside of the late '70s Canadiens and the 95-96 Red Wings.

Obviously the shortened season makes things a little different (San Jose had an .800+ record after 48 games in 08-09 and ended up losing in the 1st round) but the Blackhawks year so far has been about as impressive as any in recent memory.

Their overall record doesn't really matter in the playoffs since you aren't playing every team. It's all about matchups. Teams like Anaheim, Vancouver, and LA have a decent shot at beating Chicago if they end up playing. Chicago certainly won't be going .830 or whatever in the playoffs.
 

Hammer79

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
7,452
1,313
Kelowna
Chicago will be all in this game. They haven't got PT locked up yet, and they are playing their rivals. If Canucks lock up the division, which it looks very much like they will do, they won't meet the Blackhawks until 3rd round so it's not a 2nd round preview.

As for the Center depth advantage, Canucks still haven't been that great in the faceoff dot. Kesler's return has bumped it up a bit.

The main objective here should be to not lose their heads trying to chase Keith around and get out healthy. D-men are dropping like flies, which is turning into the biggest question mark going into the first round.
 

BoHorvatFan

Registered User
Dec 13, 2009
9,091
0
Vancouver
LOL delusional people think we're better than the Hawks. We've been ''better'' than the Hawks one year since we first played them in 2009 and even that is debatable because even with their team ripped apart by the cap we still needed 4 games and overtime to put them away after taking a 3 game lead.

Chicago has better top end players at every position except goal. We don't have a Keith or Seabrook who can play 30 minutes in a game, we have a much worse coach and our special teams are a complete laughing stock.

We might be able to squeak out a lame shootout win but in a 7 gam series... yeah right. They can up their game much more than we can.
 

LiquidSnake

Registered User
Jun 10, 2011
31,513
2
Vancouver, BC
LOL delusional people think we're better than the Hawks. We've been ''better'' than the Hawks one year since we first played them in 2009 and even that is debatable because even with their team ripped apart by the cap we still needed 4 games and overtime to put them away after taking a 3 game lead.

Chicago has better top end players at every position except goal. We don't have a Keith or Seabrook who can play 30 minutes in a game, we have a much worse coach and our special teams are a complete laughing stock.

We might be able to squeak out a lame shootout win but in a 7 gam series... yeah right. They can up their game much more than we can.

Those on fire hawks squeaked out a lame SO W vs the Canucks this year.

If only we had an ugly injury prone softer than a pillow player like RNH :laugh:
 

coastal_nuck

Registered User
Jun 28, 2006
1,284
217
Don't see how ANYONE could think we're a better team than the Hawks. Regardless of how our roster looks on paper, the team who has played to the best of their ability the most consistently this season is Chicago - no doubt about it. We're going to be in tough this game.
 

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
6,831
5,372
Vancouver
Chicago has been great, and are a great team. This season is weird, to be sure, but everything has come together well for them. The biggest question mark was probably goaltending, and Crawford has been solid. They will be a hard out in the playoffs, but strangely I would feel fairly confident against them. As to this game, who on earth knows? Both teams tend to get up against each other, though this year the games have not been filled with any kind of passion. Here's hoping for no injuries, a victory, and someone legally devastating Keith.
 

Garth Butcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2013
513
0
Saskatchewan
better team = chicago
team with more heart = arguably chicago
team I hate the most = chicago
team I'm rooting for = canucks.

just get in there and leave it all on the ice. once the playoffs start the highest position in the standing ain't gonna help ya.
 

Frankiedarling

Registered User
Jan 27, 2012
829
5
Seattle, Washington
Comparing Chicago to Vancouver confuses me.

They're both good teams on paper. We've seen Vancouver play and execute their game, and we've seen Chicago do the same.

I'm just eternally confounded as to what suddenly switched to throw our game off and what keeps theirs going. The only thing I can really compare it to is what happened to the Caps after that playoff loss, up until now when they're just starting to roll back into form.

Anyways. Should be interesting. On paper we're a good match. The ice will tell the tale.
 

arsmaster*

Guest
Quenville is so overrated as a coach on this board it's incredible.

What does he do that is so great? Plays good players?

Anyone think he'll get a bench minor when he stands on the bench and shows up the refs? Probably not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad