News Article: Is this the start of the downward slope for the Sedins?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
25,363
14,840
Vancouver
sure it is but here is a set of numbers (Hank's adjusted point totals)

81
82
84
119
101
90
85
55

Seems to be a decline pretty plain and simple there isn't it?

some people just have a hard time admitting the truth and that all players age even their hometown favorites.

I see three outlier seasons (two for the better, one for the worse), not a simple decline.
 

Pure West

Registered User
Oct 3, 2005
2,005
318
Vancouver
I don't think its unreasonable to expect their production to not be the at or near point per game that it was from 05-06 through 12-13. Calling it a start of a gradual decline will depend on where you start counting from I suppose. If you start counting from the Art Ross years it sure seems like a gradual decline....seeing 100+ points to 80, to just under 80, and now 50. However, if you're looking at it like the usual production was 75-80 from their ages 25-32 aside from a couple of seasons where their supporting cast was excellent....then last year just seems like a ridiculous aberration and not a gradual decline.

They probably are in decline, as they will be 34 when the season starts and have a very iffy supporting cast, but expecting them to decline from last season seems very unrealistic. I think you're looking at 65-70 points from them this season.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
54,096
86,498
Vancouver, BC
They're obviously in decline. As all players of their age are.

Equally obviously, last season's struggles were an outlier.

I fully expect 70-75 points from Henrik and 65-70 points from Daniel this year.
 

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
burrows looks like burrows but hes not getting results, daniel doesnt look like daniel sedin. when daniel got results, he still doesn't look like daniel sedin.

they both had a terrible year in terms of boxcar stats. i would put money on burrows being more likely to recover (to full) than daniel. theres obviously a reality where daniel does and burrows doesnt, and a reality where they both recover, but i think the most likely conclusion is that daniel isn't going to get back to where he was three years ago relative to henrik

accusing someone of racism is a pretty ****** way to say "i dont understand why a and not b"

i think either is pretty unlikely sadly

So what are you willing to put money on then?
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,871
4,982
Vancouver
Visit site
You keep saying this and I keep responding that it doesn't matter what they did in the first 41 games. If you want to arbitrarily change your time period, let's break that down even further. In the first 15 games, for example, Henrik was slightly above a PPG. Then Henrik proceeded to score 17 points over his next 26 games, for a 0.65PPG average. Daniel scored a PPG in October, and then scored 20 points in 26 games in November/December (0.77PPG)

You can try to hide that fact all you want but that doesn't change anything, they simply weren't very good last year. They had a great October (to the levels that most people think they can still play over a full season...I'm not one of those people) and they weren't close to what we need them to be over the rest of the season.

If they scored 35 points over the 1st 41 games, that means Henrik scored 15 points and Daniel 12 in the second half of the season. So we had half a season where they were 60-80 point pace players, and have a season where they were 20-30 point pace players. Put the two halves together and we got a 50 point seasons out of them.

We'll have to wait and see how they do, but scoring like decent top line players one half of the season then average 3rd liners the next half is abnormal. That's not a downward slope that's a straight up plunge, as if they aged 10 years after the new year. That points heavily to injuries and coaching being the culprits of their poor output last season.
 

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
If they scored 35 points over the 1st 41 games, that means Henrik scored 15 points and Daniel 12 in the second half of the season. So we had half a season where they were 60-80 point pace players, and have a season where they were 20-30 point pace players. Put the two halves together and we got a 50 point seasons out of them.

We'll have to wait and see how they do, but scoring like decent top line players one half of the season then average 3rd liners the next half is abnormal. That's not a downward slope that's a straight up plunge, as if they aged 10 years after the new year. That points heavily to injuries and coaching being the culprits of their poor output last season.

He argued they were bad when they were getting 100 points. You're not going to convince him they're good now.
 
Last edited:

Fat Tony

Fire Benning
Nov 28, 2011
3,012
0
the "decline" just seems worse than it actually is because the league's stars are getting shut down

sorry if i wasn't clear the first time, hope you didn't lose any sleep over it

No. The Sedins' production had fallen off the map relative to the to scorers.
 

btdvox

Registered User
Jul 5, 2013
460
2
Vancouver
I think they are at least 70 pt players and should be 60 pt players in their career, the way they played.

If Teemu can do it, I think they can, simply on how they play the game.

I've said this once and I'll say it again, way too many people are taking last season seriously. Torts didn't even practice all year and he would rather stay in Point Roberts than coach, last season was on him and the fact that so many Canucks had some of their worst years is also on him. We're not talking about just the Sedins here, Edler, Burrows, Kesler, Sedins and the list goes on.
 

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
If that's the case, it's depressing to think that a good first half only helped them break into the top 100 in scoring.

It was their worst stretch of games in a very, very long time. We've been pretty spoiled by the twins consistency over the years.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
54,096
86,498
Vancouver, BC
It was their worst stretch of games in a very, very long time. We've been pretty spoiled by the twins consistency over the years.

You'd think that after 15 years of being constantly under-estimated by the fanbase here, people would have learned not to under-estimate them any longer. Apparently not.
 

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
You'd think that after 15 years of being constantly under-estimated by the fanbase here, people would have learned not to under-estimate them any longer. Apparently not.

I think a lot of them just keep grinding so one day they'll actually be right.
 

thehockeyfanatic

Registered User
Oct 1, 2010
86
0
We're never going to contend for a Stanley Cup again with the Sedins as our front line players plain and simple. What makes this situation even worse is none of our prospects are ready to step in and make a significant impact to make up for this. I'd argue that none of our prospects even have elite first line upside. We're going to be a mediocre team for the foreseeable future. The Canucks will not be good enough to contend (if everything falls into place) and not bad enough to have a high lottery pick (even if injuries and further regression occur).
 

groovygoodwine

Registered User
May 8, 2013
228
0
We're never going to contend for a Stanley Cup again with the Sedins as our front line players plain and simple. What makes this situation even worse is none of our prospects are ready to step in and make a significant impact to make up for this. I'd argue that none of our prospects even have elite first line upside. We're going to be a mediocre team for the foreseeable future. The Canucks will not be good enough to contend (if everything falls into place) and not bad enough to have a high lottery pick (even if injuries and further regression occur).

This is exactly where we are at ^^
 
Last edited:

thehockeyfanatic

Registered User
Oct 1, 2010
86
0
You'd think that after 15 years of being constantly under-estimated by the fanbase here, people would have learned not to under-estimate them any longer. Apparently not.

It has nothing to do with underestimating the Sedins. It's about looking at the numbers that show a steady decline in production that coincides with them exiting the typical prime years of production. It also has to do with people watching the Sedins and relating it to the career trajectories of other star players. To expect that they would maintain their peak of '11-'12 forever is naive much in the same way Bertuzzi and Naslund were only top 5 players in the league for a couple years.

I fully expect and believe that they can bounce back from last year's terrible year but they will never reach the level they did a few years ago again. So where does that leave this team who lost Kesler (arguably their best player last season), lost Luongo and Schneider for very little, and has no prospects that are likely to have a significant impact in this upcoming season? If this year's team were to win a playoff round that would impress me much more than the 2011 team that won three.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad