Only 3 wins in last 11 games - Are you worried?

BB6

Registered User
Feb 14, 2012
2,397
64
Canada
Been worried since we lost to Boston in the finals, can any of you look in the mirror and say this team is better than the one that couldn't get it done then?
Of the people that say yes, I'll wager 90% of you blame Luongo for not winning the cup.

If nothing big happens then we're forever going to be a team that is almost good enough and in a couple years our window is gone.
 

Crows*

Guest
I think we need some perspective. After 22 games in 2010-2011 the Canucks were 12-7-3.

Not much different.
 

mrmyheadhurts

Registered Boozer
Mar 22, 2007
16,089
1
Vancouver
I don't worry until we hit the 10 games before the playoffs mark. Until that point, it's all about figuring out what we're going to do when the playoffs start. This team will make the playoffs and this stupid, shortened season will be meaningless once they start.
 

Grumbler

Registered User
Oct 25, 2012
2,955
713
Very worried...we NEED TO WIN THE NEXT 26 GAMES. Anything less than that we need to reform the team.
 

ItsAllPartOfThePlan

Registered User
Feb 5, 2006
16,105
6
Calgary
I see the Canucks as a team slowly sliding into mediocrity. A couple of years ago when a game went into overtime it was almost a gimme for Vancouver. Or if they got down a couple of goals in regulation it didn't matter because we knew they could easily come back.

I think Gillis has been really over rated as a GM and is watching while the team slips. How about if we still had Grabner and Hodgson ? Or he had pulled the trigger on that supposed deal with Toronto at the start of the season. The Canucks are now 16th in goals for. 16th !

And do we have a single player in Chicago who could really help ? ( Jensen maybe ). The cupboard is bare.

We have been too patient with Gillis. He's doing a crappy job. This team is going nowhere.

Yeah..disagree with every single point here.
 

Barney Gumble

Registered User
Jan 2, 2007
22,711
1
After 22 games in 2010-2011, we were only 1/4 into the season.

A lot different.

Exactly. The "margin for error" is extremely slim. It looks like no team other than the division winner in the NW will make the playoffs; even a modest losing streak from now on (at least modest by a full 82 game schedule standards) could put that in jeopardy for us. The "good news" - perhaps that'll shake things up with respect to our coaching staff if the worst happens. Too much complacency - *especially* are so-called PP coach. As others have mentioned, good/solid coaching in terms of overall design but unable or unwilling to adapt/make changes when the opposition takes countermeasures that prove to be effective.
 

Crows*

Guest
After 22 games in 2010-2011, we were only 1/4 into the season.

A lot different.

Well by the 48 game mark if that season the canucks were virtually unbearable. So if that is the case Again, I like those chances.
 

Crows*

Guest
Well by the 48 game mark if that season the canucks were virtually unbearable. So if that is the case Again, I like those chances.

Ok let me post that again. No edit feature available and on my phone. Not unbearable... Unbeatable..
 

Barney Gumble

Registered User
Jan 2, 2007
22,711
1
Well by the 48 game mark if that season the canucks were virtually unbearable. So if that is the case Again, I like those chances.
They also had built up a substantial lead (unless I'm mistaken) for the NW division title then. Ain't such a large gap now.
 

Crows*

Guest
They also had built up a substantial lead (unless I'm mistaken) for the NW division title then. Ain't such a large gap now.

The gap wasn't that big at the 22 game mark.

All I'm saying is if they can figure out their game by the same 48 game mark like that year... It bodes well
 

ItsAllPartOfThePlan

Registered User
Feb 5, 2006
16,105
6
Calgary
Who in Chicago would be able to come up and help this team?

Jensen for a forward or Ebbett if you are desperate. That would be in a limited role, but any playoff team would do the same thing. No team is going to put a rookie for top 6 mins unless you are Edmonton or florida. On defense, Andersson or Connauton could fill in for brief stretches. We also have Joslin signed.

But regardless, I was more referring to the 'cupboard is bare' point he made.
 

galiano

Registered User
Mar 12, 2003
3,625
0
why do you ask ?
Visit site
Jensen for a forward or Ebbett if you are desperate. That would be in a limited role, but any playoff team would do the same thing. No team is going to put a rookie for top 6 mins unless you are Edmonton or florida. On defense, Andersson or Connauton could fill in for brief stretches. We also have Joslin signed.

But regardless, I was more referring to the 'cupboard is bare' point he made.


The future cubboard has some worthwhile players, particularly on D but the present cupboard is bare.

Other than Jensen, a long shot at the moment, the rest of your call up list is pathetic. Andersson is making progress but is no where NHL ready, Connauton has been a train wreck in Chicago. His offence has disappeared and his defence is terrible - by far the worst +/- on the team at - 11. He would be a disaster on the Canucks. Joslin for a couple of games ok. And the forwards in the cupboard ? Ebbett ? Billy Sweat ? brutal. Bare cupboard Mr Gillis.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Jensen for a forward or Ebbett if you are desperate. That would be in a limited role, but any playoff team would do the same thing. No team is going to put a rookie for top 6 mins unless you are Edmonton or florida. On defense, Andersson or Connauton could fill in for brief stretches. We also have Joslin signed.

But regardless, I was more referring to the 'cupboard is bare' point he made.

So you were referring to a specific point? But you said every point ;)

Jensen could probably help us, but I wouldn't expect much more impact than what we've gotten from Schroeder or Kassian.

Ebbett can't help us. We've seen that movie and it's terrible.

Connauton seems to have regressed. Maybe he could help, maybe not.

Andersson is nowhere near ready, and Joslin is worse than Cam Barker IMO.

Our present day cupboard is extremely bare right now.
 

Karl Hungus

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
2,470
0
Some concern is creeping into my mind but there's still lots of time to iron out the kinks. So far I see the season in these terms.

We had a slow start that I attribute to what our players were doing during the lockout. Once we got up to speed things went well, even in the absence of Kelser. When Kesler came back there was the typical letdown you see from players that have been playing above their usual role while a key player is out. Kesler breaks his foot and never gets up to speed after being a disruption to the chemistry the team had developed in his absense (not his fault, just the way it goes). Then Bieksa gets hurt and without Kesler or Bieksa the team struggles to play their usual game.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Some concern is creeping into my mind but there's still lots of time to iron out the kinks. So far I see the season in these terms.

We had a slow start that I attribute to what our players were doing during the lockout. Once we got up to speed things went well, even in the absence of Kelser. When Kesler came back there was the typical letdown you see from players that have been playing above their usual role while a key player is out. Kesler breaks his foot and never gets up to speed after being a disruption to the chemistry the team had developed in his absense (not his fault, just the way it goes). Then Bieksa gets hurt and without Kesler or Bieksa the team struggles to play their usual game.

Either that or we just took advantage of beating teams in our weak division, and once we started playing teams from other divisions who are better we started losing and Kesler's return just coincided with that timing of the schedule?
 

brownbello

Registered User
May 6, 2009
265
1
Powell River
I'm not bashing our coaching, but want to consider something. I'm not expert but I believe the coaching indicators would be special teams and I think the slide we are seeing (which is not really a slide but other teams getting better) is on our special teams.

What I'm curious about is how many ideas can the same coaching staff have? I haven't coached much but everybody has there style and I'm not sure if they're able to adjust. It just seems like our special teams have been figured out and we've gotten stale.
 

deadinthewater

Registered User
Jan 14, 2012
10,069
520
Been worried since the off season and I've made that very clear. This team isn't as good as people want to believe. No, it's not the same team that went to the Cup finals. The loss of what Raffi Torres brought in terms of physicality has never been replaced. The loss of what Ehrhoff brought in terms of mobility and a transition game has never been replaced. The Sedins are older and now need those extra offensive zone starts just to hang around a point per game. Kesler is a walking injury. And we no longer have any prospects in the cupboard who can step up now that Schroeder is a full time member of the lineup (being misused I might add). Until Gillis stops ignoring our need for another high end talent up front we will continue to slowly regress to mediocrity.

This is just pure comical. They're our best players, hands down, and somehow through your twisted logic you work them into what's wrong with the team right now? Unbelievable. Wait, coming from you, not so much.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
This is just pure comical. They're our best players, hands down, and somehow through your twisted logic you work them into what's wrong with the team right now? Unbelievable. Wait, coming from you, not so much.

Where did I say they are what's wrong with the team?
 

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
FWIW, 20 games into 10-11 the Canucks were in 8th place, 2 points out of 13th, and only had a +4 goal differential. They were also 1-4-2 against non-NW division Western Conference teams.

Obviously the shortened season means they'll have way less ground to make up for any issues to start the season, but it really is a little early to be sounding alarm bells.

That's not to say that there aren't many concerning signs with the team, but I've seen enough recent years of the Canucks having poorer starts than this to know to withhold judgement for a bit. It's not like they give out a prize for being the first to correctly predict that the team will fail.
 

Wheatley

We Rabite You
Sep 24, 2010
2,230
0
Remember in 2009 I think it was, the Canucks had a 7 game losing streak, or something along those lines.

Everyone was calling for AV to be fired, saying we'd never make it past the second round with him as our coach, let alone make the Stanley Cup finals.

Those were good times.
 
Last edited:

Cocoa Crisp

Registered User
Mar 8, 2006
2,820
0
NYC
This team will make the playoffs. I'm certain of it. If we're in the bottom 4 so be it.

What I haven't liked the past few years is the mentality that if the team plays 'the right way', has the 'right habits' - I'm paraphrasing Hank here - that we'll be able to translate that to success in the postseason. So we end up finding a groove where we play 0.667 hockey for most of the year and come to the conclusion that it's because of their excellent habits and my, how wonderful everything is.

BS.

The playoffs are about momentum, getting hot at the right time and exhibiting a desperation that comes as a result of constant pressure and discomfort. That's the team that usually hoists the Cup at the end of the year.

Hopefully the shortened season will keep them from settling back into comfortable old habits, despite how well that translates into President's Trophies and Division Titles.
 

mavstar

No expectations
Aug 12, 2011
463
0
Vancouver
The Kings proved that playoff seeding doesn't matter. As long as we're in the playoff picture, I'm not worried.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->