The Playoff Picture Thread

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Canucks now three points ahead of Edmonton in the standings (they also handed another point to Calgary for good measure).

Arizona now has a better season goal-differential than Edmonton.
 

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
47,835
39,721
Canucks now three points ahead of Edmonton in the standings (they also handed another point to Calgary for good measure).

Arizona now has a better season goal-differential than Edmonton.
Our goal differential shows that we were pretenders.
 

Ritchie Valens

Registered User
Sep 24, 2007
28,201
38,970
0-5-0 on the homestand, that right there was the season for me. Even a .500 homestand would have had them tied with Dallas for WC2 and a ray of hope still shining through.

The positive thing is they are still only 5 points out of WC2.

The negative thing is, they are 5 points out of last in the entire league.
 

Mez

Registered User
Nov 16, 2017
10,994
14,082
Same thing is last year, only more disappointing....last year we sucked from the beginning. This year it looked good after Hitch...then injuries and suck.
 

Perfect_Drug

Registered User
Mar 24, 2006
15,389
11,592
Montreal
And we can’t score, and our goalies can’t stop the puck...
Root of the problem is too many Dmen playing too high up.


Our team was solid when Hitch took over.

We haven't won since Klefbom and Russel went down in the same game. We also almost lost that game in the third after being spotted a 5 goal lead.



We aren't a deep enough team to sustain that kind of loss. But we were capable of winning plenty of 2-1 3-2 games with those guys in the lineup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Missing smitty

Drivesaitl

Time to Drive
Oct 8, 2017
45,304
54,855
Duck hunting
Our only issue is that 3 of our top 4 Dmen are injured.

Outside of our top 4 scorers, who have accounted for 72 goals, there are only 27 goals from the entire rest of the lineup. This is mind-blowingly bad. A competitive club, like Calgary, in comparison has 67 goals from the rest of their lineup. That club is better than us in every department. Their top 4 score more than out top 4 and they have depth. They also have better D and a Defenceman that flirts with PPG production support.

We have half a dozen starting players that I would even bother to have.

Another issue is that our 4 top D are pretty ordinary as top 4 D tend to go.
 

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,405
Root of the problem is too many Dmen playing too high up.


Our team was solid when Hitch took over.

We haven't won since Klefbom and Russel went down in the same game. We also almost lost that game in the third after being spotted a 5 goal lead.



We aren't a deep enough team to sustain that kind of loss. But we were capable of winning plenty of 2-1 3-2 games with those guys in the lineup.
What do the dmen have to do with 9 forwards unable to generate any offense?

And all of a sudden the same guys that hated Russell and Klefbom before, are raving about them now as the lynchpins of the defense. Lol.

Lastly, our team wasn't solid. Koski played out of his mind and won us some games that could have gone either way. Goaltending is back to being what it was - mediocre most times.

With or without these now incredible dmen, how does it explain the putrid performances of Reider, Lucic, Puljo continued clued out game, Brodziak, etc, etc?

Did you think we were going to go through the season with no injuries?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DerpMorg

Perfect_Drug

Registered User
Mar 24, 2006
15,389
11,592
Montreal
What do the dmen have to do with 9 forwards unable to generate any offense?

And all of a sudden the same guys that hated Russell and Klefbom before, are raving about them now as the lynchpins of the defense. Lol.

Lastly, our team wasn't solid. Koski played out of his mind and won us some games that could have gone either way. Goaltending is back to being what it was - mediocre most times.

With or without these now incredible dmen, how does it explain the putrid performances of Reider, Lucic, Puljo continued clued out game, Brodziak, etc, etc?

Did you think we were going to go through the season with no injuries?

I think a shallow team like ours was successful winning cluttered and close games as long as we had NHL Calibre dmen.

We didn't need a ton of secondary offense as long as we kept things close.

Really not gonna change my mind on this till Klef and Russel are back and we're still garbage.
 

frag2

Registered User
Mar 8, 2006
19,184
7,326
Our chances of making the playoffs are about the same as Lucic scoring a goal within the rest of the season.
I hope when he scores, it's at home, streamers and confetti shower down even if its mid-game and someone collects the puck for him.
 

Perfect_Drug

Registered User
Mar 24, 2006
15,389
11,592
Montreal
What do the dmen have to do with 9 forwards unable to generate any offense?

And all of a sudden the same guys that hated Russell and Klefbom before, are raving about them now as the lynchpins of the defense. Lol.

Lastly, our team wasn't solid. Koski played out of his mind and won us some games that could have gone either way. Goaltending is back to being what it was - mediocre most times.

With or without these now incredible dmen, how does it explain the putrid performances of Reider, Lucic, Puljo continued clued out game, Brodziak, etc, etc?

Did you think we were going to go through the season with no injuries?
It has nothing to do with incredible Dmen.



3 legit NHL dmen in Sekera Klefbom and Russel is half of an NHL roster of Dmen.

Not a single team in this league can sustain that kind of loss and keep on winning. Not Tampa, not the Capitals, not the Predators.

No team can sustain 3 of their top 4 being injured.




We are a team capable of wining close tight low scoring games with an NHL defense. We do not have that right now.


We are not a team built on depth. We are a team that played our top 4 for 50mins per game and the bottom pairing was given 10mins of 'filler'.

We are now playing AHL dmen in huge minute roles. Not a single team in this league can win doing that.
 

Perfect_Drug

Registered User
Mar 24, 2006
15,389
11,592
Montreal
You can disagree with me all you want.

But if the Hawks had injuries to Keith Seabrook, and Hjalmersson, I think they'd be in the lottery those years instead of winning 3 cups.



Its a tight league.
 

BoldNewLettuce

Esquire
Dec 21, 2008
28,125
6,967
Canada
636173205022185586-jim-mora-playoffs-copy.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: DerpMorg

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,405
Dmen kept shots to the outside, and we didn't need to score. We were winning 2-1 games till Colorado.

The problem is our injured dmen.
That's a recipe to win one/lose one though as the odds even out, and puts immense pressure on your goalies. And as we're finding out, our goalies are not up to the task.

As I've stated repeatedly, injuries happen and are part of the game. Anyone who thinks their team will get through a season without some injury adversity is not being realistic. I think we've been very lucky that Nuge, McD and Drai haven't even missed a handful of total games so far this year. Some teams are luckier than others. Good teams can overcome it, bad teams use it as an excuse.

We never had Sekera last year either and nothing has been done about it by management, other than to expect big things from Benning and company. I'm more concerned about the play and structure of the remaining 20 healthy guys.
 
Last edited:

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,405
I think a shallow team like ours was successful winning cluttered and close games as long as we had NHL Calibre dmen.

We didn't need a ton of secondary offense as long as we kept things close.

Really not gonna change my mind on this till Klef and Russel are back and we're still garbage.


Don't be ridiculous. Every team needs solid secondary scoring. Without it, you are doomed to missing the playoffs. Relying on 2 or 3 players will only get you so far.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->