Canucks Stats That Make Me Want To Jump In Front Of A Bus
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 7:00 AM PST
in Incessant Bitching
125 comments
-As Tweeted yesterday, the Islanders have 1 more point than the Canucks.
-The Canucks are only 1 point ahead of now 1 point behind the Oilers
-Vancouver is now 3 points out of a playoff spot and 7 points behind the Northwest Division-leading Avalanche.
-Kyle Wellwood and Sami Salo have zero goals and 2 points this season. Darcy Hordichuk has 1 goal and 2 points in less games. Matt Pettinger had 1 goal and 2 points in 7 games played. Rick Rypien has more points than they do (3). The last time Wellwood scored a goal was in game 4 of the St. Louis series. The last time he scored a regular season goal was on April 4 against the Oilers. In his last 72 regular season games played, he has scored 7 goals and 8 assists. He has 18 shots in 19 games this season.
The last time Sami Salo scored a goal was in game 2 of the Chicago series. The last time he scored in the regular season was March 1 against Columbus. That was about 36 regular season games ago. Where's the cannon, Sami? Oh right, "guys block more shots nowadays."
-Alexander Edler has hit the net 42 times in 23 games played this season. He has 0 goals. The last time he scored a goal was in game 2 of the Chicago series. The last time he scored a goal in the regular season was March 27 against Colorado. Last season the Canucks were 8-1-1 when Edler scored a goal. Somebody buy this guy one of them Sears kiddie nets with targets on it for Xmas. And make sure you give it to him a few weeks early.
-Brendan Morrison has scored 7 goals and 17 points in 23 games with the Capitals this season. He makes only $300,000 more than Wellwood does. Yeah yeah, he plays with higher-skilled players, but it's still sad. It almost makes me wish....
-There are 2 teams in the NHL that do not have an overtime/shootout loss this season: Pittsburgh and Vancouver. That is more of an intriguing stat than anything else, but if a few of those 11 losses were decided in OT or a shootout, things would not look so bad. Edit: I see The Province has just caught on to this concept.
It's time for Vancouver to shed the .500 hockey club image. It's not good enough. Teams that finished 8th in the Eastern and Western Conferences last season were 11 and 9 games above .500 hockey. Consecutive wins over Colorado and a hard fought 1-0 loss to Chicago is a good start. Let's hope they continue to progress. The guys that are slumping are going to have to snap out of it, and quick.
0 recs |
125 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
It’s been easy to blame injuries for the lack of consistency to start the season but those stats are sobering. Now with basically full health this team has to start stringing some wins together.
Kyle Wellwood was in and out of the doghouse all year last year but this year he hasn’t seemed to fall out of favour with the coaching staff despite a serious lack of output. I can’t imagine he will get too many more chances. His one saving grace is that the Canucks are not deep at strong face-off winning centres.
I can’t bad mouth Salo too much because he has been solid defensively. Edler on the other hand has been far too inconsistent at both ends of the rink, which is crappy because this was supposed to be his “big next step” year. Where would we be without Ehrhoff?
I have to think with the return of Daniel and the probability that Luongo will hit a groove that this team will start to play some good hockey but I really expected a lot more from this group given how well they played down the stretch last year.
Go Canucks Go!
by Twincest on Nov 24, 2009 7:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Blastoff has been such a pleasant surprise indeed. I can’t believe Salo hasn’t scored in THAT LONG. It blew my mind when I looked it up. You’re right, he has been good defensively. I just want to see more point presence in the form of goals. We have a D-corps that should make our PP even better than it is (even though it’s not terrible as it stands.)
I was going to heckle Burrows too, but didn’t. Let’s hope he finds his touch back on the top line.
It looks like Bernier is on pace for about 26 goals. Some nights you’d think he’d score 35+
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 9:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
AV noted recently that Wellwood was lucky there had been so many injuries, implying that when the injured guys return, Welly is the odd man out unless his offence picks up. He’d better hurry, it’s just a matter of weeks now. Here once again is my best guess at some lines, come then:
Burrows-Sedin-Sedin
Samuelsson-Demitra-Bernier
Raymond-Kesler-Grabner
Hansen-Johnson-Rypien
And, as I noted at the time and some commenters missed, both the Kesler and Demitra lines are #2 lines; flip ’em around if you like ( I just did, visual tyranny begone) but balance the ice time between ’em more.
Canucks do not have a dominating fw a la Ovechkin and others, but when healthy they do have depth, so let’s use it.
BTW, Sean, one thing I noted lately, at least in the Avs game, was that the Canucks did NOT go into a shell when they got the lead; they kept coming. That was very hopeful indeed. The Chi loss was just a tight game where someone got lucky; couldda gone either way.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 10:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey cas’, I absolutely agree with your line estimations and the co-#2 lines. Perfect, except for a genuine sniper and maybe a CoHo, ’Shiro and Schroeder. Next year maybe.
by Bobby Canuck on Nov 24, 2009 1:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bottom, line they have to go on a long stretch of winning, similar to the past 3 years (especially the breathtaking stretches of last year and two years before that) to get into the playoffs.
by Bobby Canuck on Nov 24, 2009 9:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
If these guys are going to make a good December, the first two lines are going to have to lead them. The Sedin and Kesler lines (and whoever makes up the other three wingers) will need to score in bunches and just hope the third and fourth lines can play decent defensive hockey. It’s too frustrating waiting for Pudge and crew to find relevancy. They can’t be relied on anymore.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Nov 24, 2009 9:26 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well it could be worse. Imagine poor Ottawa losing Pascal Leclaire to a broken jaw for a month and he wasn’t even playing! Takes a puck off the jaw on the bench! Yeesh!
Yeah, we can’t rely too heavily on the 3rd line, Mike. We just need a little bit more though. The top 6 will deliver. Can’t wait till Dank finds his legs!
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 9:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Dank and his steel toe skate. Where Steely Dan goes, we go.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Nov 24, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
My Poor Islanders
Always seem to be the team that people say “I can’t believe they are doing better then us”
In fairness I still think last years team wasn’t half bad, but when your Goaltenders are Joey MacDonald and Yann Danis and your D isn’t a brick wall your pretty screwed. It makes Mark Streit managing to finish the year with a + that much more impressive.
by WebBard on Nov 24, 2009 11:44 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I always seem to
“the building blocks are in place for the Islanders”.
But they never seem to assemble anything like a playoff team :-(
Which is really too bad.
by Temujin on Nov 24, 2009 12:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Milbury
Is like that kid in all of us, when we see a project someone spent 6 hours building up, we want nothing more then to smash it down in a few seconds.
by WebBard on Nov 24, 2009 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We have a commenter here who’s a lot like that, too.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here we go…
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
by Smoboy41 on Nov 24, 2009 12:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, I ain’t naming names. If anyone leaps to mind, you do that on your own :)
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 12:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A team that has 9 wins and 15 losses has more points than a team with 12 wins and 11 losses. NHL the only professional sports league that rewards you for losing. I want sudden death back. I think if you lose in OT you should get nothing but if you lose in a shootout then you get your charity point.
by marcness52 on Nov 24, 2009 4:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that makes sense, actually. no point for OT loss, but a point for shootout.
i mean no harm. i come in peace. unlike shane o'brien or kevin bieksa........
watch out for the Rypper too, he can whip anyone.......
GO CANUCKS GO!
by missy on Nov 24, 2009 4:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
3 points for a regulation win. Easy. Encourages teams to go for the win in regulation. But the NHL likes having every team within 5 points of each other with two weeks to go they think it makes people want to watch.
by Section 312 on Nov 24, 2009 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is then we go back to teams playing for the Shootout instead of trying to win in OT. Thats the reason for the OTL Point and the 4 on 4.
"So basically, the Stats make no sense whatsoever."
by WebBard on Nov 24, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So it’s one of:
a) 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss, regardless of OT or shootout; or
b) 5/0 for a win, 4/1 in a shootout and 3/2 in OT; encourages teams to play hard and “win it now” instead of, esp late in the 3rd period of a tie game, playing shell vs shell in order to split 3 pts instead of just 2.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 4:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
@casual…huh, never heard of that idea before. That’s worth looking at.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just noodling on it. Hey, even the Leafs could have a 100 point season!
The downside is that sports standing would look like this for every team:
Vanc 23-13-12-25
23*5+13*4+12*3 = 203 pts. Not sure it’d be intuitive enough to make the races understandable, but I do think the fans would like the way it pushed the teams to play for the win instead of the loser point.
Maybe we could follow baseball’s lead, kinda, and report that a team is, say, 2 full games back of another, which’d mean 10 points.
Anyway, like I say, just noodling on the idea. Option a) is a lot simpler :)
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and fwiw, I had it backwards: should be 4/1 for an OT win and 3/2 for the shootout. Oops.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I still liked the original concept from a few years back when someone suggested 5 minutes of 4 on 4 and then 5 minutes of 3 on 3. Who the hell isn’t going to score 3 on 3?
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The loser in that scenario gets ZERO points.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point, but it doesnp;t address the end of regulation and that fact that teams’d still be still motivated to play it safe till OT in order to make it a 3 pt game.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops, I was too slow! Point taken.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who the hell isn’t going to score 3 on 3?
Want me to name names? :)
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think it makes much sense to use a 5 min. 4 on 4 OT and then a shootout when neither are used in the playoffs. It just seems wrong if a team that has fewer wins makes the playoffs over another team just because they got “better” losses. A loss is a loss.
by marcness52 on Nov 24, 2009 6:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So Far
There has only been one team affected by the Shootout/OTL system since the lockout.
Last years Panthers would have finished tied with the Habs and would have won the first tie breaker. But a shootout loss to the Habs meant that instead of having an even face to face record with the Habs, the Habs had 1 more win and won the tie breakers before it went to the secondary tiebreakers.
I tried to make that make as much sense as I could while I typed it, sorry if it came out confusing.
"So basically, the Stats make no sense whatsoever."
by WebBard on Nov 24, 2009 8:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand what you’re saying. That’s tragic. Well, the Panthers should have won that game then. Their fate was in their own hands.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 8:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
@WeBard: Exactly. That wouldn’t work either.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
“I can’t believe they are doing better then us”
Ott
NYI
Phx
Colo
I miss anyone else?
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 11:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
@WebBard: Do you know how many times I had to defend Roloson to people over the past few years? What an insane performance by him last night. Squashing the Leafs’ dreams, one save at a time.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 12:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hell, they had to defend Roloson to me over at the Islanders boards, I was ready to kill Snow for signing a nearly 40 year old goalie.
by WebBard on Nov 24, 2009 12:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Weird to me that the Oilers let Roloson walk
because of his age and him wanting a 2 year deal, then signed Khabibulin to a 4 year deal. I think they are two years apart in age.
Just checked the stats from that game last night. 61 shots! Holy crap, Roloson saw tons of rubber.
by Temujin on Nov 24, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Word is that Bolduc is skating with the team today. Watch Woody sit and Bolduc play. I like that Bolduc kid.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 12:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He has a “projectable frame!”
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hosea24 is saying that Rypien is not at practice today. Damn, so much for my first idea?
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What do you mean by “projectable frame”?
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 12:25 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Damned if I know, which is why I mentioned it. It’s part of the scouting report on Bolduc.
Anyone here have the vaguest idea what they’re talking about? Is it kinda like saying that a puppy has big paws that he’s gonna “grow into?”
Scouting Report
Assets * Has a projectable frame, two-way instincts and a little scoring upside. Plays an aggressive game that is infectious.
Flaws * Lacks the requisite offensive skills to play a top-six forward role in the NHL. Needs more bulk to thrive as a role player.
Career Potential * Versatile role player.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Has a projectable frame,
Needs more bulk to thrive as a role player.
He needs to get stronger to be an effective role player in the NHL. So they are saying he has the size, and frame to add muscle to make that happen.
by Section 312 on Nov 24, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s kinda what I thought, like a puppy w/big bones. But I wasn’t sure, so thanks for the explanation.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
More of a guess than an explanation to be honest. I mean from what I understand some guys have a “frame” that allows them to add a lot of muscle without slowing them down and some guys don’t. I guess Bolduc has one of those frames. He was Bakersfield Condor for a while so if I get a chance I will see if anyone I know who played there played with him.
by Section 312 on Nov 24, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Smoboy! Check your email! Dammit!
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 12:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
OK
Mail read, sir! Reply sent, sir! Await further instructions, sir!
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
by Smoboy41 on Nov 24, 2009 5:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, now assume the position! haha
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That pic caption should read:
SCORE MORE OR YOU WILL BE SHOT!
by yoata on Nov 24, 2009 5:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
believe me, I was going to photoshop a pic of Woody with a gun to his head. That’s coming I’m sure!
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only one getting more and more angry the more I think about Wellwood? I am going to pop a blood vessel soon. He has played like 250 minutes this year and has what 2 points? Two fucking points!!!! How is this sack of donkey feces still on this team. I am willing to bet we could have gotten more than 2 points from Shirokov in that many minutes. Or Bolduc or Desbiens or Oberg or Corey fucking Schnieder playing as a forward for fucks sake. OK starting to feel a little better now that I have gotten that out. Now if only Wellwood would do us all a favour and fuck off.
by Section 312 on Nov 24, 2009 5:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Shirokov is a defensive liability though. He may have gotten more points but what would his +/- be? Wellwood does need to pick it up though. At least he’s not a minus but yeah he needs to start producing. I’ve been completely unimpressed with his offensive play. It looks like he forgot how to play in the offensive zone. Even last game he couldn’t even stickhandle out of his own end on one play and forked it over at our blueline. Once we get completely healthy or at least healthy enough he’d better be scratched or put on waivers.
by marcness52 on Nov 24, 2009 6:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that’s why shirok has been in MB all this time even as we played guys like Bieksa at forward; cuz the team wants shirok to learn the n.a. game and how to play defense in it, and they won’t bring him back till he’s ready.
He burnt a lotta bridges to come here, and in watching him play he wasn’t afraid to use the body either, so I think it’s more a matter of just learning and drilling in some new techniques till he’s ready. At least I hope so.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can remember a playoff game when Trevor Linden was around 35 and he forked it over at our blueline. That happens. My point was that there are probably 4 or 5 guys on the farm who could have an even rating and more points than Wellwood.
by Section 312 on Nov 25, 2009 8:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m more puzzled than angry. He worked hard in the offseason so why the sudden dropoff? Maybe he’s just lost his will to work and to compete … or maybe he is hurting more than he lets on … or maybe a lotta things. But it’s all moot as far as deciding stay or go w/the guy; either he turns it around in a hurry or he’s gone. He was a low-risk, high-reward signing for not much money, so if we let him go soon it’s pretty much no skin off our noses going forward.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If he’s treated as an asset, then his value is shit right now. If he can score a few his value goes up. Who the hell is going to take this guy at $1.2 on waivers?
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 24, 2009 6:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody, unless they think there’s some correctable problem – e.g. an injury – that accounts for his dropoff. Failing that, he either turns it around real soon or his major league days are probably over.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 24, 2009 6:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Where were
all these excuses when Hodgson was getting the shaft?
by yoata on Nov 24, 2009 7:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is an interesting point though Sean that yoata makes because one of casual’s main points about Hodgson was that hurt or not he wasn’t good enough for the NHL. Well certainly the same can be said about Wellwood right now so who cares if he is hurt? casual shouldn’t. Turns it around in a hurry? Why should this guy get any more time on this team? 18 games isn’t enough of a sample size to see that he is crap? He would clear waivers faster than Ken Jennings used to clear a category on Jeopardy!
Don’t ask me where the Ken Jennings thing came from that’s like a 4 year old reference.
by Section 312 on Nov 25, 2009 8:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so who cares if he is hurt? casual shouldn’t.
or maybe he is hurting more than he lets on … or maybe a lotta things. But it’s all moot as far as deciding stay or go w/the guy; either he turns it around in a hurry or he’s gone.
Seems consistent to me.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 10:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Section: I hear you, but I am sick and fucking tired of the Hodgson talk. It’s been argued out to hell already. The kid is in Brampton, end of story. Let the dead horse remain unkicked! :)
But yeah, if it Wellwood maybe being injured being used as a comparison to Hodgson…then…m’eh. It’s not an excuse. As long as Woody stinks somebody is going to say “oh Christ we should have kept Hodgson”. It’s hindsight 20/20 bullshit.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 12:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I second that, Sean. The whole Hodgson thing has become an obsessive cult and needs to be dropped.
… Damn, a red light … just like in Brampton where Gillisgan sent Hodgson!
… Ouch, a paper cut … just like the release papers for Hodgson!
… Oh no, unemployment is rising again … especially for Hodgson!
… The price of gas went up again; this wouldn’t have happened if we’d kept Hodgson!
Retch.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hodgson (for the last time, the last time).
While I don’t necessarily agree with the yoata potshots (amusing though they may be), I DO think there is a point, and something I don’t understand.
Why are people unwilling to accept the fact that they hold the organization to a different standard when it comes to certain players? It is okay to be a fan of the Canucks and say “they handled Hodgson poorly”. That doesn’t mean you are bailing on the team, and it doesn’t mean you can’t praise other decisions.
The problem I have is when some people refuse to seemingly admit that the organization may have not been just or equal in their treatment of Hodgson compared to their treatment of some other underperforming players (I haven’t been keeping track of names, but I know I’ve seen that on this board in spots). If we could agree that the organization screwed up when it came to Hodgson and didn’t give him a fair shot, I feel that the issue would be resolved.
And if you feel the organization GAVE him a fair and equal shot, I suppose we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
by Jevant on Nov 25, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is okay to be a fan of the Canucks and say "they handled Hodgson poorly".
Correct. It is also okay to be a fan of the Canucks and say "they handled Hodgson properly, given the circumstances."
And let’s leave it at that :)
Some people quarrel because they do not know how to argue
— G.K. Chesterton
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
aw, I love you too, man.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently, the team has changed Wellwood’s workout routine in an attempt to jumpstart his performance on the ice. Here he is doing his Wellwood best:
Plucky little guy.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My on my. My man crush on Woodrow has been renewed.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I should (or YOU should) make a Hodgson post about it in the FanPost section, I’ll staple the damned post to the top of the section so it stays there, and then whenever somebody wants to complain about the damned Cody thing, they can post it in there. I’m tired of it showing up all over the fucking place in these posts here. We agree to disagree. Let’s move on. Jesus!
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 2:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But having said that, if a bunch of you want to partake in those arguments over and over again and can agree to it, then knock yourselves out. I’m starting to sense otherwise though
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 3:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I like the idea of a “crying towel” fanpost. First wimper, free; subsequent wimpers into the towel, please.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I post
about Hodgson when it’s relevant, nobody has to agree or even reply, the fact that some absolutely have to says a lot, but whatever, I don’t see why I can’t mention him, he’s Canuck property and has relevance as much as any prospect.
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 6:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well as long as a bottom 6 player stinks and we gripe about it you’ll always think we should have kept Hodgson, right? This could go on all year. It’s getting old. Just my opinion. Like I said…it’s done. He’s in Brampton. Now we have someone like Grabner to talk about because he actually is going to become an issue in the near future.
Hodgson’s going to wear a sewer colored Battalion jersey this year.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 6:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At least one of any team’s bottom 6 will normally disappoint, par for the course.
When’s Grabs due back, anyway?
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 6:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
hear he may be trade bait if they can’t contend, Windsor maybe.
Grabner, good point, imagine him on Hodgy’s wing on the 3rd line!
; p
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 6:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Heard that too.
If Hodgson and Grabner were good defensively, that would be an excellent 3rd line. Next year, my friend. Next year.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 7:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I still prefer Raymond-Kesler-Grabner.
Something happens when you get all-around speed, both on a line and on a team, and the sum is greater than its parts. One or two fast guys, the other team can “manage,” but when your guys are all that fast, the other team starts to break down.
As for trading Hodgson … the team is moving towards speed (hello Ehrhoff and Grabner this year) and Hodgson is just average in that regard.
The G-man seems to be picking his vets on a case by case basis, but his young studs are all mighty zippy. Bernier’d be the slowest, and he’s not slow, just not really fast, either, and he’s kinda our designated “power forward,” of which every good team needs one. Raymond, Grabner, Kesler, Edler, Hansen, Burrows … really good wheels. Next up, Schroeder.
Might be coincidence, might be a trend. Has Gillis concluded that in the “new NHL,” speed will trump size?
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Yoata may have meant trading Grabner…not sure.
Players can be as zippy as they want, but they had better play a good 2-way game.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 8:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think most GM’s are concluding speed over size. The slow doofs are being weeded out. Now, speed AND size in a player is most valued I’d think.
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 8:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For sure on both your pts.
Per 2-way play: That’s what Jedi Master Keane is for.
Per speed AND size … Is the combo underpriced, fairly-priced, or overpriced in today’s salary-cap world? Let’s play Moneypuck.
G is grabbing guys that other teams are downgrading based on size, like Schroeder. Might be coincidence … or does G think smaller, faster guys deliver more bang for the buck and it’s better to afford two or three of them instead of one combo guy?
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 8:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he meant trading Hodgson … but I think he meant Brampton trading him, not the Cancuks trading him.
But the Canucks trading him remains a possibility if … big if … the team is consciously moving towards the old Edm Oiler model (which itself was based on the Wpg Jets Model, or so says Glen Sather) of speed everywhere.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 8:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"the G-man"
didn’t pick a single one of those guys you just mentioned.
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 8:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This
is exactly the kid of bs Gillisgan hype post that requires the sort of factual tempering I provide.
Here the koolaid guzzler, not only falsely attributes all the “young studs” on the team to Gillisgan out of obvious pure delusion since they are all Nonis/Burke picks, but also somehow manages to conclude that Gillisgan acuires his young players due to speed first.
Well let’s fact check that one too shall we:
Gillisgan’s actual youthful acquisitions:
Wellfed
Burnier
SOB
Hodgson
hmmm…
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Check that..I need to make a Yoata vs Casual Fan Post.
Gillis’ resume will improve in time, Y. haha
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 10:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
For
the Nucks sake, I hope he doesn’t get that chance…
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 10:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Might as well get used to him, IMO
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 10:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I haven’t replied to yoata in a long time, nor do I intend to. If the medium is the message, then for him the sneer is the statement, and I prefer more thoughtful discussion.
Anyone who classifies Samuelsson as a “young stud” instead of a “vet” and cannot see the difference between indicative and subjunctive (e.g. “a big if”) is more into ego than argument and that’s a waste of time. He can have the crying towel fanpost all to himself and anyone else who wants to commiserate.
BTW, thx for creating it, Sean; it was a great idea. We can channel future rants about “he who must not be named” over there now and save the rest of the board for better hockey talk. Smooth.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 26, 2009 11:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Copout
as usual.
And I didn’t mention Sammy in that post spinnerboy.
by yoata on Nov 26, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And I didn’t mention Sammy in that post spinnerboy.
they’ll have to get rid of the Sedins too, and Samuelsson
by yoata on Nov 25, 2009 8:41 PM PST
Doof. Back to crickets now.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 26, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doof.
That was a different post in reply to one in which you did not mention “young stud”.
Typical moronic response though, suprised you even acknowledged considering you couldn’t have been proven more wrong, but that gets ignored of course, must be like 2nd nature to you by now the amount of your completely baseless bs must get thrown back in your face.
Drink up buttercup!
by yoata on Nov 26, 2009 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The indentation disagrees. Facts are stubborn things.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 26, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You
truly are that stupid?
Facts? LOL, like all the ones you ignore when they prove you full of shit for the umpteenth time.
by yoata on Nov 26, 2009 7:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And yet the stubborn indentation is still there for all to see.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 26, 2009 7:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Schroeder
…needs to be added to that list as well.
But yes, Gillis does get some credit for some things he hasn’t done.
by Jevant on Nov 26, 2009 6:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How about the general overall increased scouting of American college hockey players?
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 26, 2009 7:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When Schroeder
looks like he might actually be capable of being part of the team I’ll include him, to me Hodgson was there.
And I’m not sure speed was the main factor with Schroeder either, he was clearly teh best talent available, only reason he wasn’t selected before was his size.
by yoata on Nov 26, 2009 8:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
“Gillisgan” has been at the helm for less than two years. Burke/Nonis were around for alot longer and now some of their draftees are showing that they were good choices. Who’s to say that in a few years guys like Oberg and Rodin won’t be all stars?
by Bobby Canuck on Nov 26, 2009 3:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who's to say they will
Or that some of Nonis’ others might.
Point is they aren’t close.
Nonis was GM for how long?
by yoata on Nov 26, 2009 3:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How about just W-L?
Like every other professional sports league (unless the NHL wanted to realize that ties are NOT the end of the world either).
by Jevant on Nov 25, 2009 9:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
The fans like the shootout, tho (it is fun) and it ensures the game finishes nicely within a tv time slot. So I think it’s here to stay for the reg. season.
I just hate seeing 3 points given out rather than 2 AND I dislike the way too many teams, late in a tie game, play for the OT to guarantee themselves a point. Ugh, who wants to watch two teams play for a tie?
So I’d prefer to see either:
a) 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss, regardless of OT or shootout; or
b) 5/0 for a win, 4/1 in OT and 3/2 in a shootout.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I find the shootouts pretty boring now. Same moves, poor skaters, and limited intensity (it’s for only an extra point).
Do fans still really love the shootout? I used to love them when they cropped up in international competition – because we never got to see them. Now, they’re way too overdone.
by Jevant on Nov 25, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Like that one the Nucks had where it was like 13 rounds and no one could score. That’s not only uninteresting but pretty shocking considering the skill level of these guys. Tells me they don’t really take it that seriously.
As for the scoring system. I think 3 for a win in regulation and the same way we break down points in OT is fine. It rewards teams that are winning in regulation more than teams that win a lot of OT and shootouts plus teams would go for the win late in the third period especially if they needed to make up ground in the playoff race because of that extra point. Plus then every game is worth the same number of points.
But as I mentioned earlier Bettman likes it this way. More teams in the playoff hunt or seemingly in the playoff hunt so more fans in more cities stay interested longer.
by Section 312 on Nov 25, 2009 10:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tells me they don’t really take it that seriously.
The voices in your head are telling you wrong.
Alternate reality explanation: sometimes the goalies just make a lot of saves.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would be interested to know what the percentage of guys scoring is on penalty shots versus shootouts. I bet that would be informative.
by Section 312 on Nov 25, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In the shootout Goalies collectively stop more than 67 percent of attempts.
On a penalty shot their save percentage last year as a group was 72.
Fairly close but I guess my theory that they score less in the shootout is actually wrong. Now I am really confused as to why it is so boring.
by Section 312 on Nov 25, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cuz it’s only for one point.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Has it happened yet where a team with fewer wins but lots of OT/SO losses beats out a team that has more wins? I suspect it all shakes down in the end, but if not, that would be grounds for changing the system right there, I think.
Seriously – does it make ANY sense that a team that wins more games, but is stupid enough to lose them in regulation rather than a shootout should finish behind a team that wins fewer, but is more strategic with their losses?
by Jevant on Nov 25, 2009 10:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Still leaves the prob that both teams in a tie game, esp in the 3rd period, are incented (that a word?) to play it safe in order to guarantee themselves a point. Trap vs trap; bring a fiddle and have a hootenanny in the neutral zone. What could be better?
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To bring it full circle...
…it’s that type of hockey that makes me want to jump in front of a bus.
by Jevant on Nov 25, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And the bus would win, but if you can hang on till OT, you’ll get at least a point!
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
by casual on Nov 25, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jevant: Yes that has happened. In the 2007-08 season and the year prior, and the year prior to that. In 2005-06 the Oilers went to the Finals and were seeded 8th. They had one less win than Van but 5 extra points from OT/shootout losses. Crock of shite!
by Sean Zandberg on Nov 25, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rewarding a team for losing is pretty ridiculous. Is there any other sport that does that?
by marcness52 on Nov 25, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Since the only commissioner I respect less than Bettman is Bud Selig, I’m guessing MLB might start that up in the near future.
But in sincerity, no, I don’t think I’ve heard of one.
by Jevant on Nov 26, 2009 7:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Nucks Misconduct
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Follow The Misconduct
 |
 |
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Kari Lehtonen traded to Dallas, Turco move to come?
- Puck Previews: 'Hawks, Stars battle; Franzen in for Sweden?
- Evgeni Nabokov puts his name in the Vezina race
- Puck Daddy chats with Brandon Yip about life as a rookie, his first NHL game, Colorado’s success this season and the upcoming Olympics
- Puck Headlines: Getzlaf ankle worry; Quick's Olympic mask
SBNation.com Recent Stories
SCOREBOARD
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
