Post-Game Talk: (MOD WARNING POST #180) Oilers 2, Canucks 0: gg no re

[VanJack]

Granlund is like fools gold. Looks shiny and nice, but pretty much worthless.

So I assume you'd expose this 20-goal scorer on an affordable entry-level contract in the Expansion Draft; and protect a guy like Sutter, who's a Corsi nightmare earning $4.4m a season....Pretty sure Vegas would love that kind of 'fool's gold' from the Canuck executive suite.

 

[rune74]

You know there is a pretty easy stat that says exactly what you are trying to say. Granlund is 5th on the team in p/60 behind just the Sedins and Bo-Bae. You want to complain about players not producing for their ice-time, there are far bigger complaints in Sutter and Eriksson. Gaunce, Chaput and Megna bring up the rear by a wide margin.

There is some weird love in for glance here....I don't share that.

 

[PG Canuck]

All this arguing over this roster will be pointless when a good portion of these players are not on it once we are back to contending because they simply just aren't good enough on a contender.

 

[TruGr1t]

So I assume you'd expose this 20-goal scorer on an affordable entry-level contract in the Expansion Draft; and protect a guy like Sutter, who's a Corsi nightmare earning $4.4m a season....Pretty sure Vegas would love that kind of 'fool's gold' from the Canuck executive suite.

I'd like to see you find a single poster that is in favour of exposing Granlund over Sutter. Most everyone's wet dream is that Sutter is exposed, but that'll never happen. The only debate I recall was Granlund over Hansen.

 

[mossey3535]

Granlund - I'm sure there will be some who find fault but that was very good effort. For all those who say he can't play in traffic maybe they should give their heads a shake and get off "I always right agendas" and start actually watching the games. It's ridiculous. He goes to the net hard and battles hard in every situation. Real quick to find openings and slide off players to get chances. Thought he made good attempts on all his chances and forced the goalie into very good saves. His touch with the puck is top drawer. Maybe not saying a lot but he is our best forward at the moment

You're not always right either. The number of times you have credited Granlund with battling hard and being physical when he is consistently not is mind boggling. Off the puck he is often a floater and shys away from contact. His performance on the PK alone this game should have been a huge negative grade.

Again, I'm not trying to say Granlund is a bad player. You have to give him every bit of credit for his increased production. But it's assessments like this that drive me crazy. Does he get into scoring positions? Yes. Can he net drive? Yes, but only when he isn't challenged physically. He uses smarts to get into position but for every time he does that he is bodied off by the defender at a 2:1 ratio. This game he thrived with Horvat and Baertschi who opened up the ice for him - good for him, I praise him for that.

But then you present your assessment that he has top-notch touch with the puck. Well, I would have said he has a good shot but that wasn't the case in this game when all 7 of his shots were in prime scoring positions and he was logo hunting. He made a non-skilled attempt in his one cross-crease in close. Your assessment didn't fit this game, but would be something I said in other games like the one where he was with the Sedins and had 2 goals. And he definitely didn't really distribute or do much to contribute to line possession in this game.

You've got just as much of an agenda as any of the rest of us on here. I respect your commentary but don't try to take some moral/objective high road on us.

 

[mossey3535]

So I assume you'd expose this 20-goal scorer on an affordable entry-level contract in the Expansion Draft; and protect a guy like Sutter, who's a Corsi nightmare earning $4.4m a season....Pretty sure Vegas would love that kind of 'fool's gold' from the Canuck executive suite.

I'd expose Sutter but there is zero chance of that. I wouldn't protect Gaunce because I don't think anyone will take him due to an extremely low event season, although if Vegas did I would be sad to lose him because I don't think he's had a real chance to show what he has.

Of course at this point you protect Granlund. Personally I just want people to understand that this player has an uphill battle to even come close to this level of goal production next season, particularly if we have a new coaching staff.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You know there is a pretty easy stat that says exactly what you are trying to say. Granlund is 5th on the team in p/60 behind just the Sedins and Bo-Bae. You want to complain about players not producing for their ice-time, there are far bigger complaints in Sutter and Eriksson. Gaunce, Chaput and Megna bring up the rear by a wide margin.

And he's also 5th on the team in ice-time per game (in the recent month he's been closer to 1/2 on the team). Ranking as low as he does league-wide, this also helps explain why our offense is so lousy. We need better players than Granlund.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I'd like to see you find a single poster that is in favour of exposing Granlund over Sutter. Most everyone's wet dream is that Sutter is exposed, but that'll never happen. The only debate I recall was Granlund over Hansen.

This.

I think I've been very clear that I would expose Sutter and protect Gaunce. I would also look to acquire a decent player from another team who can't be protected by that team, and replace Granlund with that newly acquired player on our protection list.

 

[me2]

You know there is a pretty easy stat that says exactly what you are trying to say. Granlund is 5th on the team in p/60 behind just the Sedins and Bo-Bae. You want to complain about players not producing for their ice-time, there are far bigger complaints in Sutter and Eriksson. Gaunce, Chaput and Megna bring up the rear by a wide margin.

He's 13th in ES on ice goals/60.

21st/23rd in ES on ice goals against/60. (Only Dorsett and gudbranson are lower).

 

[arttk]

Trying. But it's tough when the goalposts keep moving. The original claim I responded was teams like Chicago and Washington wouldn't employ a player as bad as Granlund (wrong). Then it was yeah but they score at the same rate as him (wrong).

Now it's yeah but raw points!! Of which he still beats most of the players previously mentioned out, if not all of them.



What? You scale back a players minutes and their production reduces? Colour me shocked.

I haven't moved the goal post at all. I've stated consistently that Granlund is of zero use to them.
Granlund is basically scoring at the same point production pace as those guys mentioned but you guys would consistently point towards the goal pace rather than point pace because that's the obvious agenda you are trying to push. Last I check we don't call Crosby a 30-40 goals scorer, we call him a 100 point player for a reason, points are apparently very important in this league.

Yeah he also plays 17:50ish a night(21 last night) and all those guys play from 9min to 12 min a night. Look at the players with similar minutes and they are producing at a 50+ point pace.

And I have repeated this over and over again, Granlund at 13-14 min a night is a 20ish point player. He doesn't offer defense, physicality or anything that would interest any team where the objective is to get through the playoffs and win the cup. Put Granlund on the 3rd or 4th line on any contender and it will make their team worse. It's as simple as that.

 

[arttk]

You know there is a pretty easy stat that says exactly what you are trying to say. Granlund is 5th on the team in p/60 behind just the Sedins and Bo-Bae. You want to complain about players not producing for their ice-time, there are far bigger complaints in Sutter and Eriksson. Gaunce, Chaput and Megna bring up the rear by a wide margin.

Saying he is 5th means nothing aside from the fact Benning had put tougher a pitiful roster.
Its like saying Edler and Hutton are top 10 point getters on this team. Who the **** cares if they are scoring 17 points? All this just highlights why this team will get a chance to finish 29th overall.

Nobody praises Chaput and Megna, we hate the fact they are on the team. Hell we hate the fact Sutter, Chaput, Megna, Granlund, Eriksson, Skille, Dorsett are on the team. But some of you just love to hone in on Granlund and tell us how wonderful he is when he is part of the problem and just one of many in the **** basket Benning put together. He might not be as bad as the rest but he is still part of that **** basket.

 

[arttk]

So I assume you'd expose this 20-goal scorer on an affordable entry-level contract in the Expansion Draft; and protect a guy like Sutter, who's a Corsi nightmare earning $4.4m a season....Pretty sure Vegas would love that kind of 'fool's gold' from the Canuck executive suite.

We have a collection of crap that should be exposed. You think Vegas is going to look at our list and think oh goody, what a wonderful selection.
They probably loathes whatever the crap we expose because they have to take someone and they might get a better player just by taking players off waivers.

 

[VanJack]

I'd like to see you find a single poster that is in favour of exposing Granlund over Sutter. Most everyone's wet dream is that Sutter is exposed, but that'll never happen. The only debate I recall was Granlund over Hansen.

Go back and look at post #394: To quote: "Granlund is like fool's gold....all shiny and nice, but basically worthless." .....sounds like Expansion Draft fodder in the minds of at least one poster.

 

[arttk]

Go back and look at post #394: To quote: "Granlund is like fool's gold....all shiny and nice, but basically worthless." .....sounds like Expansion Draft fodder in the minds of at least one poster.

Well we have a lot of worthless piece.

 

[TruGr1t]

Go back and look at post #394: To quote: "Granlund is like fool's gold....all shiny and nice, but basically worthless." .....sounds like Expansion Draft fodder in the minds of at least one poster.

How's what you quoted have anything, at all, to do with the expansion draft or Sutter? Outside, I guess, of some precarious logical leap you made yourself.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Go back and look at post #394: To quote: "Granlund is like fool's gold....all shiny and nice, but basically worthless." .....sounds like Expansion Draft fodder in the minds of at least one poster.

Stop making things up.

Do I think Granlund should be protected? Not really. But would I protect Sutter over him? Hell no. And I've stated this many times before. Pay attention.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I haven't moved the goal post at all. I've stated consistently that Granlund is of zero use to them.
Granlund is basically scoring at the same point production pace as those guys mentioned but you guys would consistently point towards the goal pace rather than point pace because that's the obvious agenda you are trying to push. Last I check we don't call Crosby a 30-40 goals scorer, we call him a 100 point player for a reason, points are apparently very important in this league.

Yeah he also plays 17:50ish a night(21 last night) and all those guys play from 9min to 12 min a night. Look at the players with similar minutes and they are producing at a 50+ point pace.

And I have repeated this over and over again, Granlund at 13-14 min a night is a 20ish point player. He doesn't offer defense, physicality or anything that would interest any team where the objective is to get through the playoffs and win the cup. Put Granlund on the 3rd or 4th line on any contender and it will make their team worse. It's as simple as that.

Saying he is 5th means nothing aside from the fact Benning had put tougher a pitiful roster.
Its like saying Edler and Hutton are top 10 point getters on this team. Who the **** cares if they are scoring 17 points? All this just highlights why this team will get a chance to finish 29th overall.

Nobody praises Chaput and Megna, we hate the fact they are on the team. Hell we hate the fact Sutter, Chaput, Megna, Granlund, Eriksson, Skille, Dorsett are on the team. But some of you just love to hone in on Granlund and tell us how wonderful he is when he is part of the problem and just one of many in the **** basket Benning put together. He might not be as bad as the rest but he is still part of that **** basket.

We have a collection of crap that should be exposed. You think Vegas is going to look at our list and think oh goody, what a wonderful selection.
They probably loathes whatever the crap we expose because they have to take someone and they might get a better player just by taking players off waivers.

Well we have a lot of worthless piece.

I see you are just gonna keep talking yourself in circles and making arguments that have already been disputed so I'll leave you to it. I have better things to do... well not really but this argument has lost it's momentum.

 

[arttk]

I see you are just gonna keep talking yourself in circles and making arguments that have already been disputed so I'll leave you to it. I have better things to do... well not really but this argument has lost it's momentum.

Disputed lol. Avoiding my points is disputed now?

Nobody has brought up any counter arguments on why Granlund would be a player on those top teams.
All you did is ignore point production, his inability to play D and point towards goals and at the same time ignore the fact he is shooting like 5-7% higher than previous years.

But sure, continue to live in the bubble and pretend my points are already disputed.

Hell none of you guys are even willing to address a simple point, when is a 35ish point winger on the 1st or 2nd line ever considered good?

 

[m9]

Disputed lol. Avoiding my points is disputed now?

Nobody has brought up any counter arguments on why Granlund would be a player on those top teams.
All you did is ignore point production, his inability to play D and point towards goals and at the same time ignore the fact he is shooting like 5-7% higher than previous years.

But sure, continue to live in the bubble and pretend my points are already disputed.

Hell none of you guys are even willing to address a simple point, when is a 35ish point winger on the 1st or 2nd line ever considered good?

I don't understand the 'point production' criticism. He's producing as a decent 3rd liner for his ES P/60.

If he can make another minor progression next year and produce like a low-end 2nd liner then he will be an asset. If he can't, then he's probably not.

 

[arttk]

I don't understand the 'point production' criticism. He's producing as a decent 3rd liner for his ES P/60.

If he can make another minor progression next year and produce like a low-end 2nd liner then he will be an asset. If he can't, then he's probably not.

Well that's the point, he is just a very meh piece, a placeholder player. Somehow for some that is a big win.

 

[m9]

Well that's the point, he is just a very meh piece, a placeholder player. Somehow for some that is a big win.

It's only a win if he continues to progress.

 

[TruGr1t]

Well that's the point, he is just a very meh piece, a placeholder player. Somehow for some that is a big win.

Because the amount of positive things you can say about this team, you can count on one hand. The Granlund story is fine, and everything, but what everyone should predominantly be focusing on is the fact our management team is totally useless. Despite the fact WD is also a bit of a crazy coach, that's just another narrative that distracts from the fact Benning/Linden should be fired immediately.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I don't understand the 'point production' criticism. He's producing as a decent 3rd liner for his ES P/60.

If he can make another minor progression next year and produce like a low-end 2nd liner then he will be an asset. If he can't, then he's probably not.

"decent" 3rd line production while being poor defensively is not a useful hockey player.

 

[PG Canuck]

You're not always right either. The number of times you have credited Granlund with battling hard and being physical when he is consistently not is mind boggling. Off the puck he is often a floater and shys away from contact. His performance on the PK alone this game should have been a huge negative grade.

Again, I'm not trying to say Granlund is a bad player. You have to give him every bit of credit for his increased production. But it's assessments like this that drive me crazy. Does he get into scoring positions? Yes. Can he net drive? Yes, but only when he isn't challenged physically. He uses smarts to get into position but for every time he does that he is bodied off by the defender at a 2:1 ratio. This game he thrived with Horvat and Baertschi who opened up the ice for him - good for him, I praise him for that.

But then you present your assessment that he has top-notch touch with the puck. Well, I would have said he has a good shot but that wasn't the case in this game when all 7 of his shots were in prime scoring positions and he was logo hunting. He made a non-skilled attempt in his one cross-crease in close. Your assessment didn't fit this game, but would be something I said in other games like the one where he was with the Sedins and had 2 goals. And he definitely didn't really distribute or do much to contribute to line possession in this game.

You've got just as much of an agenda as any of the rest of us on here. I respect your commentary but don't try to take some moral/objective high road on us.

I'm happy someone finally said this.

 

[Nucker101]

Credit to another poster for bringing this up, but Granlund's on-ice sh% is extremely low despite his own sh% being so high. So he should have quite a few more assists and a few less goals.