[PGT] Hurricanes at Canucks, Dec.9th

[Tocchet.A.Hockey.God]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Contenders are favourites.   You also missed Dallas.   A lot of "experts" picked Dallas and CAR final before this season.   They are the better team last year in the playoffs, Bobrovsky stood on his head and MT did his thing ... without Svecknikov.    Dallas also matched or edged Vegas, just didn't get it done (that was the best series last year ... and well they have a great blend of youth and vets).    Not sure why you think our window is now other the cap.   Naslund and the Sedins were just getting started at Brocks age....Agree our cap window is pretty legit right now and next year. 

Yes for sure Dallas is.

 

When I say our window is Now I mean this year and next 3-4 years. Miller is already 30. the rest of the core is mid late 20s and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek's due next season Hughes in 4 years. If we keep making the Playoffs in the next 3-5 years we are going to be drafting in the mid 20 range so not much top talent probably guys that will take 3-5 years to start contributing to the team in any meaningful way and that is if they don't bust and we might get 1 decent 1st liner out of it. That means UFA's to fill the depth and we all know you pay for UFA's. Just look at who we lose next season if not re-signed Cole, Blueger, Lafferty, and Zadorov. Lafferty and Zadorov have earned increases Blueger I could see a an increase for as well and Cole is right on par. But first we have to pay Petey and Hronek so we are going to lose 1 or 2 for sure.

Edited December 11, 2023 by CanuckFanForever

[Tocchet.A.Hockey.God]

6 hours ago, spook007 said:

There really isn't that much difference between AV's NHL coaching history prior to coming to Canucks, than that of Tocchets:

 

Alain Vigneault

 

MTL	1997–98	82	37	32	13	—	87	4th in Northeast	4	6	.400	Lost in Conference Semifinals (BUF)
MTL	1998–99	82	32	39	11	—	75	5th in Northeast	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
MTL	1999–00	82	35	34	9	4	83	4th in Northeast	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
MTL	2000–01	20	5	13	2	0	(12)	(fired)	—	—	—	—
MTL total		266	109	118	35	4			4	6	.400	1 playoff appearance

 

Rick Tocchet

 

TBL	2008–09	66	19	33	14	(52)	5th in Southeast	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
TBL	2009–10	82	34	36	12	80	4th in Southeast	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
ARI	2017–18	82	29	41	12	70	8th in Pacific	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
ARI	2018–19	82	39	35	8	86	4th in Pacific	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
ARI	2019–20	70*	33	29	8	74	5th in Pacific	4	5	.444	Lost in First Round (COL)
ARI	2020–21	56	24	26	6	54	5th in West	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
VAN	2022–23	36	20	12	4	(44)	6th in Pacific	—	—	—	Missed playoffs
Total		474	198	212	64			4	5	.444	1 playoff appearance

If you liked AV as a coach in Vancouver, why not Tocchet? 

They both came into a team with potential, while being rebuilt... 

 

There are as you say so many similarities between the two, and the fact that this teams window is now, should not detract us from believing Tocchet has it him to win with this team... If anything Tocchet has more NHL experience than AV had.

 

The fact our window is now, doesn't mean we can continue to be dominant , and maybe also continue to grow. 

 

In JR/PA we believe, and if they think Tocchet can lead this team, so should we......

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by CanuckFanForever

[coolboarder]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Hmmm, I guess. Although, we did go 3-2 on the first road trip for which we were totally fresh. That was a bonus. We went 2-1 on the second. It was a gravy trip. 2 days off after beating Edmonton on a Monday followed by Ottawa, Toronto, and Montreal, Thurs, Sat, Sunday with another two day rest after. That trip doesn't get much easier. Doesn't really seem overly tough or extreme to me at all. Actually it's probably pretty nice to have those games and a winning record in the books.

 

The homestand will be extremely beneficial to us in March as we're fighting it out for playoffs and positioning and other teams fans will be complaining about their schedule down the stretch when it matters the most. I think people need to consider that it is pretty great for our schedule and stop sweeping it under the rug to prove a point. It should theoretically be an extremely huge benefit for us.

 

I went to go look at other teams and started with Arizona, they played 3 games in 4 nights Oct 16-19th, then the played another 3 in 4 nights on Nov 1-4. They went 2-3-1 while we went 2-4, losing to the lowly Sharks in the last one. We did look tired against the Flames but part of that was how emotional and hard fought the win was against the Isles. That part is just hockey though. Back to backs are supposed to be hard.

 

I get the NHL schedule for Vancouver is hard. The biggest thing working against Vancouver is geography. We're probably the worst situated team in the league in that we're the furthest away from all the other teams. Obviously all the teams in the Eastern belt (Conference) have easier travel because they're so close to each other (TB and FLA a little further). 

 

 

I'll agree it kind of sucks but it's not the NHL's fault Vancouver is located in Vancouver either. I don't know maybe they could make an effort to make it easier but I don't really see it as that radically different from other teams when I look at the schedule. Outside of Edmonton, Calgary, Seattle, and SJ, every other team is further than any East Coast team has to travel to play within their own conference. Personally I don't think the NHL is purposely giving us bad schedules in as much as it's very hard to come up with a better one. I don't know if there is a real good solution to the problem other than moving the team to Quebec. Our back to backs is one of the best in the league though.

 

Personally I don't see it as such a big deal myself. Sure it's hard. The NHL is hard. I guess for those that are upset by it at least we have played fairly well and overall we are doing really well I would say. So, I'm pretty happy with the season so far, and our schedule looks like a piece of cake from here on out. December is super easy with games basically on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, all month long with one back to back (Minn, Chi) on the third Sunday. Jan and Feb have one back to back each and March is an absolutely teed up cake walk with no back to backs and a 9 game homestand. April has one back to back but it's nice too with two 2-day rest periods leading up to the last week of the season.

 

At least we're through the tough part and have done amazingly well. I'd say we're in a great position moving forward.

 

Your idea of subbing players in from the pressbox is interesting to say the least. Not sure if I like it or not lol, but it is definitely a cool idea. Maybe the first game of a back to back or something. Not sure the NHL would go for that though. Anyways, interesting topic. I now know our schedule inside and out. 

This will be my last post on this subject for a long while until next year's schedule and compare in the future.  I do agree that the NHL doesn't really purposely put us in a bad scheduling and in fact, they could have done better.   This applies to many teams on the Pacific Northwest, including Albertan teams as well.

 

First step, change their schedule matrix to more divisional games to 5 games with one or two teams on 4 games on rotation basis and reduce conference games from 3 to 2 games.  That is first step because conference games in the Eastern conference is no difference to them and doesn't affect them that much compared to Pacific and Central.  In fact, I would like to see conference format eliminated.   If the NHL doesn't really change the format, then I would suggest fewer cross-continental trips but still have it easier.   I envisioned the type of schedule with border crossing.

 

Three cross-continental trips with no stupid out of way trip for example, looking at February schedule, Carolina, Boston, Detroit, Washington and Chicago, like going from southeast, then New England then Great Lakes then back to Mid-Atlantic corridor.  This type of travel add more miles than say, Carolina, Washington, Philadephia which will shave off a few hundreds of miles.   It is making sense of the travel.  For teams in the east, doesn't really make much difference to them but for teams out from the West, it compounds even more.   January trip is fine, it's long but manageable.   

 

What it is ultimate better if they start the trip from either, Washington and work their way up to Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Boston, Montreal and finally Ottawa for their 8 games then fly home without going through the customs.  2nd trip would start from either one of central division team, maybe Chicago, then go Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh and Buffalo then going by a short bus trip or a short 40 minutes flight to Toronto then fly home from Toronto.  3rd trip would start from maybe Nashville, Carolina, two games in Florida then end up in Dallas on their way home.  That is reducing their travelling distance.  With this calculations, I have been able to work the way up to less than 39,000 miles and that is the standard Eastern conference team's travelling distance throughout the year with all 41 road games schedule and that was without Seattle in my equation when I have had a free time long time ago.

 

January road schedule is way better for this length of the road trip.  Watch for them to have a bit better leg on their 7th game due to one factor, 5 night stay in NY city area without hopping on a plane and a short flights around Great Lakes cities. this trip is almost similar idea unlike in the past where the Canucks would go from NY area then Pittsburgh-Flyers despite being in same state but actually 300 miles away and from Philadelphia to NYC is actually less than 100 miles or even Boston-Buffalo trip is actually worse 450 miles away despite Boston to NY (200 miles) or Montreal (300 miles) is way better in the past and Buffalo is actually closer to Pittsburgh than Philadelphia.  This little things do add up over the years as a part of the NHL schedule which is insane to me.  This is the reason why I would implement a break after the NYC, maybe 2-3 days off then go Boston, Montreal and Ottawa then go home.  I don't see anything wrong by giving them a 2-3 days break between games on the road with a retreat somewhere with some practice time.   Sure it might be long, 3 weeks but beneficial on a long run.

 

What even it make it worse, the NHL gave the Eastern conference trip with Seattle to Vancouver or vice versa.   They do not even mix Edmonton-Vancouver-Calgary-Seattle like that while Western teams would mix things up, like Canucks February schedule.   Only one team went through like that was that was Detroit.  Rest of them would travel in a circular way, not out of way.   I have done a trip breakdown, Eastern team trip was like this, Seattle to Vancouver b2b, 5 times, Vancouver to Seattle b2b, 8 times and One team was mixed with no b2b between Vancouver and Seattle was Detroit and finally only Carolina doesn't make a Seattle to Vancouver this season, it was broken up in two parts.  T/his is the proof of giving Eastern teams an easier time.  I would love for the Eastern teams to go through LA, Arizona, SJ Vancouver then Edmonton then next trip would be like Anaheim, LV, Seattle then end up in Calgary.    I asked myself a question, why couldn't they do that for the Western teams with favorable home schedule as well?   This is 1000 miles difference! on the same time zone!!!!  Canucks do that every year, out of the way and giving Eastern teams an easier time with their travelling schedule.  Makes no sense!!!  Had the NHL done that, Eastern conference trip would raise about 2,000 miles every year and that is now 2,000 miles difference with the way their scheduling works nowadays.

[spook007]

3 hours ago, CanuckFanForever said:

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

yes exactly this...

Hence the window is larger... JR/PA are (maybe) a few pieces away from having a contender builts far quicker than the 2011 team. 
The team is responding to Tocchet, just like the team was under AV. 
If Tocchet falls flat on his face, which nothing suggests atm, then it can be discussed, who should be in charge...

I clearly remember a fair few 'Fire AV' posts in the old CDC... guess you do too?

 

How would that have looked later on?

 

Again, as I said earlier, if JR/PA who has more knowledge about, what it takes to win the SC thinks Tocchet has, what it takes, maybe let him run with it...

 

Another poster asked, who you would have wanted to lead this team instead? Bearing in mind JR/PA sacked Bruce for not playing structured enough... 

[CanucksJay]

4 hours ago, CanuckFanForever said:

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

I like this current core more than the 2011 core and agree with you regarding our window for this core that we have many of the pieces to start our ascent. However I would prefer we model a different team. A much more unpopular one. 

The Canucks were dominant in 2010 and were making the playoffs winning the first round every year since 2007 except for one year (2008) when they missed the playoffs. Leading up to 2011, they had made the playoffs in 3 of the 4 seasons and won a round in each playoff appearance. It got to the point in 2010 and 2009 that winning a round wasn't good enough and a 2nd round loss was seen more as a disappointment and under achievement rather than success. 

The Canucks were upset a couple of times against a young Blackhawks team and faced a few disappointments before Burrows finally "slayed the dragon" 

 

I feel like a 2nd round defeat for this team would be seen by some as a positive/ successful season

This team has missed the playoffs every year except for the one bubble year which has a huge asterisk where we beat the wild in a "play in" to get in. 

If anything, my hope would be that this team is more like the young Blackhawks team that knocked out the favourites (Vancouver) and went on to win the cup without much previous playoff experience. 

A lot of comparables like a Duncan Keith (Hughes), Toews (Miller), Kane (Petey), Hossa (Boeser). 

We need guys like Kuz and Hogs to emerge as the next Sharp and Versteeg and not sure whether we even have a guy like Bolland (who shut down the Sedins). Suter and Bleuger are not at Bolland level but overall team depth might still be good enough to cover not having a dominant  3c like Bolland. 

Defense they had Seabrook (Hronek), Hjalmerssen, Byfuglien, Campbell after Keith. 

Looking at that roster, it was stacked but we have to remember that some of those names weren't household names at that point. 

 

We have a huge advantage in net with Demko compared to Crawford but i do wonder if our D is good enough. 

 

All this to say, I'd rather we be like the 2009 2010 Blackhawks than the canucks in which they missed the playoffs every year before winning 2 rounds in 2009 followed by winning the cup in 2010.

That would be like us knocking out the Avs or Vegas in the second round this year and then winning the cup next year. 

To do this, we probably need a few upgrades but it's not out of reach. 

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by CanucksJay

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

I like this current core more than the 2011 core and agree with you regarding our window for this core that we have many of the pieces to start our ascent. However I would prefer we model a different team. A much more unpopular one. 

The Canucks were dominant in 2010 and were making the playoffs winning the first round every year since 2007 except for one year (2008) when they missed the playoffs. Leading up to 2011, they had made the playoffs in 3 of the 4 seasons and won a round in each playoff appearance. It got to the point in 2010 and 2009 that winning a round wasn't good enough and a 2nd round loss was seen more as a disappointment and under achievement rather than success. 

The Canucks were upset a couple of times against a young Blackhawks team and faced a few disappointments before Burrows finally "slayed the dragon" 

 

I feel like a 2nd round defeat for this team would be seen by some as a positive/ successful season

This team has missed the playoffs every year except for the one bubble year which has a huge asterisk where we beat the wild in a "play in" to get in. 

If anything, my hope would be that this team is more like the young Blackhawks team that knocked out the favourites (Vancouver) and went on to win the cup without much previous playoff experience. 

A lot of comparables like a Duncan Keith (Hughes), Toews (Miller), Kane (Petey), Hossa (Boeser). 

We need guys like Kuz and Hogs to emerge as the next Sharp and Versteeg and not sure whether we even have a guy like Bolland (who shut down the Sedins). Suter and Bleuger are not at Bolland level but overall team depth might still be good enough to cover not having a dominant  3c like Bolland. 

Defense they had Seabrook (Hronek), Hjalmerssen, Byfuglien, Campbell after Keith. 

Looking at that roster, it was stacked but we have to remember that some of those names weren't household names at that point. 

 

We have a huge advantage in net with Demko compared to Crawford but i do wonder if our D is good enough. 

 

All this to say, I'd rather we be like the 2009 2010 Blackhawks than the canucks in which they missed the playoffs every year before winning 2 rounds in 2009 followed by winning the cup in 2010.

That would be like us knocking out the Avs or Vegas in the second round this year and then winning the cup next year. 

To do this, we probably need a few upgrades but it's not out of reach. 

 

Campbell was their best D early on (definitely remember him basically having his way with us one series, controlled the play in all three zones very well), Byfuglien was used as a forward against us as well, remember him making it awfully hard on  Luongo.

 

As for the comps.   Brock is emerging to be their Sharp.    Not their Hossa.  And i'd say EP is working his way much closer to a Hossa then a Kane (and if I had to choose one, i'd choose a Hossa anyways).      Also that team won a series (Turco, entirely on Luongo's back, with the help of an almost retired Linden..).   The Canucks had a lot to learn on the way.   And there team also changed quite a bit too.    Our team like you said, did get filled out with UFAs and trades. 

 

We've already passed the CHI first cup age with this group.    Other than guys like Hossa and maybe Keith.   Then Byfuglien went to WNP and switched to playing D full-time.    Get what you're saying.   But Hossa was a great player in OTT, before he went to CHI,  Brock is having a good year, but i don't see Hossa - I see Sharp, and if you ask CHI, they consider him part of their core,  same way Carter was in LA.    Toews and Miller are good comps, other than the age difference.   Actually was a very different team than the other two winners.    Campbell was the man.   A small PMD, not that Keith was much bigger.    I'd say yes though QHs and Hronek are equal to those two guys right now as they were back then. 

 

Get what you're saying.   We are in that middle stage now, where our window is open.  How long that window is, truly depends on the players and their cap hits.   As soon as Toews and Kane signed their UFA deals, their window closed to a crack. 

 

Edit:  This team could do exactly what you're suggesting, sure hope so.   As in coming in hot.  

Edited December 11, 2023 by IBatch

[CanucksJay]

55 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Campbell was their best D early on (definitely remember him basically having his way with us one series, controlled the play in all three zones very well), Byfuglien was used as a forward against us as well, remember him making it awfully hard on  Luongo.

 

As for the comps.   Brock is emerging to be their Sharp.    Not their Hossa.  And i'd say EP is working his way much closer to a Hossa then a Kane (and if I had to choose one, i'd choose a Hossa anyways).      Also that team won a series (Turco, entirely on Luongo's back, with the help of an almost retired Linden..).   The Canucks had a lot to learn on the way.   And there team also changed quite a bit too.    Our team like you said, did get filled out with UFAs and trades. 

 

We've already passed the CHI first cup age with this group.    Other than guys like Hossa and maybe Keith.   Then Byfuglien went to WNP and switched to playing D full-time.    Get what you're saying.   But Hossa was a great player in OTT, before he went to CHI,  Brock is having a good year, but i don't see Hossa - I see Sharp, and if you ask CHI, they consider him part of their core,  same way Carter was in LA.    Toews and Miller are good comps, other than the age difference.   Actually was a very different team than the other two winners.    Campbell was the man.   A small PMD, not that Keith was much bigger.    I'd say yes though QHs and Hronek are equal to those two guys right now as they were back then. 

 

Get what you're saying.   We are in that middle stage now, where our window is open.  How long that window is, truly depends on the players and their cap hits.   As soon as Toews and Kane signed their UFA deals, their window closed to a crack. 

 

Edit:  This team could do exactly what you're suggesting, sure hope so.   As in coming in hot.  

 

Hmm when you put it that way, comparing the rosters, we seem to fall short quite a bit both in terms of talent and we're older... 

Holy that Hawks team was stacked

 

 

[bh90]

I went to the game and this was one of most disciplined games I've seen the canucks play. It looked like they came in with a game plan and did not deviate from it all game.

 

They did not give up their positions on the ice and what the TV camera probably didn't see is the discipline the canucks had not pinching so they hold into their game plan. Carolina played very well too though.

 

Zadarov and Myers were absoloutely rock solid. You can see in person how advantageous their size is. They towered over everyone and just ate up all lanes. I noticed how Carolina was changing their game plan on zone entry when that pair was on the ice because they couldn't just skate because they couldn't get around them so they were trying extra passes.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

 

Hmm when you put it that way, comparing the rosters, we seem to fall short quite a bit both in terms of talent and we're older... 

Holy that Hawks team was stacked

 

 

On the bright side, we still beat that stacked team.   We've got 3-4 years before we are in the same age group, as the Sedin team was in 2010 and 2011 too.    This one has its own vibe.   It's the best roster we've had since Brock's rookie year.  

[CanucksJay]

39 minutes ago, bh90 said:

I went to the game and this was one of most disciplined games I've seen the canucks play. It looked like they came in with a game plan and did not deviate from it all game.

 

They did not give up their positions on the ice and what the TV camera probably didn't see is the discipline the canucks had not pinching so they hold into their game plan. Carolina played very well too though.

 

Zadarov and Myers were absoloutely rock solid. You can see in person how advantageous their size is. They towered over everyone and just ate up all lanes. I noticed how Carolina was changing their game plan on zone entry when that pair was on the ice because they couldn't just skate because they couldn't get around them so they were trying extra passes.

Its funny that it took a few losses for the team to buy in again on systems. 

They forgot that their attention to detail to start the season is what put them on the map and produced the top 3 scorers in the league along with a league high GF/GA differential 

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Its funny that it took a few losses for the team to buy in again on systems. 

They forgot that their attention to detail to start the season is what put them on the map and produced the top 3 scorers in the league along with a league high GF/GA differential 

Excellent point. The buy in to playing the right way is learned. And with such an elite core (all playing the right way and holding the team accountable) this group will continue to be great for many more years. 

[Rip The Mesh]

Well, no practice today (not much yesterday) A little surprised but a grueling schedule soon and for a very long time. Perfect time for Alvin (with Ruth's OK,

to think of or to actually make a move. Team is good, but there is a weak spot or two. Might not be popular but It wouldn't surprise me if the traded Kuzmenko.

Abbotsford has forwards but are not that rich in defense depth.

So; Whether it be on the farm or the parent club, I believe a move is coming. 

 

[stawns]

10 hours ago, CanuckFanForever said:

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

 

[Johngould21]

10 hours ago, CanuckFanForever said:

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

This statement gets a big "HUH" from me. You might want to fact check your statement.

[northern lights]

10 hours ago, CanuckFanForever said:

The Canucks core that went to the Final in 2011 wasn't established. Yes we had the twins but Kessel and Burrows were still trying to crack the lineup. Many players on that team took 3-4 years to acquire and then the management pushed all in 2010 at the UFA to fill out the team. Malholtra Torres Hamhuis and Ballard where brought in that summer. Higgens and Lapierre at the deadline. 

 When Alain was brought in he was inexperienced but grew with the team.

Our core is already here Hughes and Petey are far ahead of where the Twins where. The depth is already built and we have to Pay Petey and Hronek their due buy July 1st. With this team the time is now. With Alain's team the time was to build it up and then compete. 

Both had played in 400 nhl games prior to the 2010-11 season. Kessler had 3 seasons of 20 or more and Burrows has 60 goals in the 2 seasons before the cup final.  A far cry from just cracking the lineup. 

[Rip The Mesh]

Not that surprising.

 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Rip The Mesh said:

Not that surprising.

 

Good

[Ballisticsports]

Team no longer interested in being highest bidder and longest term on bottom line players

Bear would have been a good add for cheap, but like the way this management wants to build within their means

[Rusty Shackleford]

13 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Hmmm, I guess. Although, we did go 3-2 on the first road trip for which we were totally fresh. That was a bonus. We went 2-1 on the second. It was a gravy trip. 2 days off after beating Edmonton on a Monday followed by Ottawa, Toronto, and Montreal, Thurs, Sat, Sunday with another two day rest after. That trip doesn't get much easier. Doesn't really seem overly tough or extreme to me at all. Actually it's probably pretty nice to have those games and a winning record in the books.

 

The homestand will be extremely beneficial to us in March as we're fighting it out for playoffs and positioning and other teams fans will be complaining about their schedule down the stretch when it matters the most. I think people need to consider that it is pretty great for our schedule and stop sweeping it under the rug to prove a point. It should theoretically be an extremely huge benefit for us.

 

I went to go look at other teams and started with Arizona, they played 3 games in 4 nights Oct 16-19th, then the played another 3 in 4 nights on Nov 1-4. They went 2-3-1 while we went 2-4, losing to the lowly Sharks in the last one. We did look tired against the Flames but part of that was how emotional and hard fought the win was against the Isles. That part is just hockey though. Back to backs are supposed to be hard. Ottawa has 5 back to backs in March, including 3 sets of 3 games in 4 nights. That's a tough schedule right there.

 

I get the NHL schedule for Vancouver is hard. The biggest thing working against Vancouver is geography. We're probably the worst situated team in the league in that we're the furthest away from all the other teams. Obviously all the teams in the Eastern belt (Conference) have easier travel because they're so close to each other (TB and FLA a little further). 

 

 

I'll agree it kind of sucks but it's not the NHL's fault Vancouver is located in Vancouver either. I don't know maybe they could make an effort to make it easier but I don't really see it as that radically different from other teams when I look at the schedule. Outside of Edmonton, Calgary, Seattle, and SJ, every other team is further than any East Coast team has to travel to play within their own conference. Personally I don't think the NHL is purposely giving us bad schedules in as much as it's very hard to come up with a better one. I don't know if there is a real good solution to the problem other than moving the team to Quebec. Our back to backs is one of the best in the league though.

 

Personally I don't see it as such a big deal myself. Sure it's hard. The NHL is hard. I guess for those that are upset by it at least we have played fairly well and overall we are doing really well I would say. So, I'm pretty happy with the season so far, and our schedule looks like a piece of cake from here on out. December is super easy with games basically on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, all month long with one back to back (Minn, Chi) on the third Sunday. Jan and Feb have one back to back each and March is an absolutely teed up cake walk with no back to backs and a 9 game homestand. April has one back to back but it's nice too with two 2-day rest periods leading up to the last week of the season.

 

At least we're through the tough part and have done amazingly well. I'd say we're in a great position moving forward.

 

Your idea of subbing players in from the pressbox is interesting to say the least. Not sure if I like it or not lol, but it is definitely a cool idea. Maybe the first game of a back to back or something. Not sure the NHL would go for that though. Anyways, interesting topic. I now know our schedule inside and out. 

 

I agree that our schedule has been getting better since the days Gillis brought it up to the league and that the killer is travel.  That clip of Shane O'Brien talking about us getting Sundin half way through the season he mentioned that the travel absolutely took a toll on Mats. (Great video and made me love Mats and OB more)

 

What I'd like to see is sleep doctors back full time.  I remember back when we had them; when the boys were on the road, they would sleep in town after the game and then fly out the next day.  This ensures that they get REM sleep as well as proper recovery during sleep.  I don't believe they've been doing that at all since Benning and I've always wondered why we don't anymore.  It coincided with the best team/records/playoff run we've ever had and the science backs it.

[Hairy Kneel]

Rare footage of the Department of Player Safety and Supplemental Dicipline

 

[Hairy Kneel]

40 minutes ago, Ballisticsports said:

Team no longer interested in being highest bidder and longest term on bottom line players

Bear would have been a good add for cheap, but like the way this management wants to build within their means

My guess is Wash signs him for 3 years 2.75M

[Rip The Mesh]

39 minutes ago, Ballisticsports said:

Team no longer interested in being highest bidder and longest term on bottom line players

Bear would have been a good add for cheap, but like the way this management wants to build within their means

Yup! Glad they didn't get into a bidding war. Rutherford and Alvin, along with the scouts they now have in place, will address our defense.

It will not be like the days, "not so long ago" Where Benning would freak - out and go, "Oh", I gotta have OEL, no matter what it does to the cap

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, Rip The Mesh said:

Yup! Glad they didn't get into a bidding war. Rutherford and Alvin, along with the scouts they now have in place, will address our defense.

It will not be like the days, "not so long ago" Where Benning would freak - out and go, "Oh", I gotta have OEL, no matter what it does to the cap

It seems these days, a fully realized approach is at hand where Alvin is fully aware of the needs for the defense and is actively and methodically constructing it.

No more shots in the dark. 

[Gawdzukes]

9 hours ago, coolboarder said:

This will be my last post on this subject for a long while until next year's schedule and compare in the future.  I do agree that the NHL doesn't really purposely put us in a bad scheduling and in fact, they could have done better.   This applies to many teams on the Pacific Northwest, including Albertan teams as well.

 

First step, change their schedule matrix to more divisional games to 5 games with one or two teams on 4 games on rotation basis and reduce conference games from 3 to 2 games.  That is first step because conference games in the Eastern conference is no difference to them and doesn't affect them that much compared to Pacific and Central.  In

fact, I would like to see conference format eliminated.   If the NHL doesn't really change the format, then I would suggest fewer cross-continental trips but still have it easier.   I envisioned the type of schedule with border crossing.

 

Three cross-continental trips with no stupid out of way trip for example, looking at February schedule, Carolina, Boston, Detroit, Washington and Chicago, like going from southeast, then New England then Great Lakes then back to Mid-Atlantic corridor.  This type of travel add more miles than say, Carolina, Washington, Philadephia which will shave off a few hundreds of miles.   It is making sense of the travel.  For teams in the east, doesn't really make much difference to them but for teams out from the West, it compounds even more.   January trip is fine, it's long but manageable.   

 

What it is ultimate better if they start the trip from either, Washington and work their way up to Philadelphia, Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Boston, Montreal and finally Ottawa for their 8 games then fly home without going through the customs.  2nd trip would start from either one of central division team, maybe Chicago, then go Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh and Buffalo then going by a short bus trip or a short 40 minutes flight to Toronto then fly home from Toronto.  3rd trip would start from maybe Nashville, Carolina, two games in Florida then end up in Dallas on their way home.  That is reducing their travelling distance.  With this calculations, I have been able to work the way up to less than 39,000 miles and that is the standard Eastern conference team's travelling distance throughout the year with all 41 road games schedule and that was without Seattle in my equation when I have had a free time long time ago.

 

January road schedule is way better for this length of the road trip.  Watch for them to have a bit better leg on their 7th game due to one factor, 5 night stay in NY city area without hopping on a plane and a short flights around Great Lakes cities. this trip is almost similar idea unlike in the past where the Canucks would go from NY area then Pittsburgh-Flyers despite being in same state but actually 300 miles away and from Philadelphia to NYC is actually less than 100 miles or even Boston-Buffalo trip is actually worse 450 miles away despite Boston to NY (200 miles) or Montreal (300 miles) is way better in the past and Buffalo is actually closer to Pittsburgh than Philadelphia.  This little things do add up over the years as a part of the NHL schedule which is insane to me.  This is the reason why I would implement a break after the NYC, maybe 2-3 days off then go Boston, Montreal and Ottawa then go home.  I don't see anything wrong by giving them a 2-3 days break between games on the road with a retreat somewhere with some practice time.   Sure it might be long, 3 weeks but beneficial on a long run.

 

What even it make it worse, the NHL gave the Eastern conference trip with Seattle to Vancouver or vice versa.   They do not even mix Edmonton-Vancouver-Calgary-Seattle like that while Western teams would mix things up, like Canucks February schedule.   Only one team went through like that was that was Detroit.  Rest of them would travel in a circular way, not out of way.   I have done a trip breakdown, Eastern team trip was like this, Seattle to Vancouver b2b, 5 times, Vancouver to Seattle b2b, 8 times and One team was mixed with no b2b between Vancouver and Seattle was Detroit and finally only Carolina doesn't make a Seattle to Vancouver this season, it was broken up in two parts.  T/his is the proof of giving Eastern teams an easier time.  I would love for the Eastern teams to go through LA, Arizona, SJ Vancouver then Edmonton then next trip would be like Anaheim, LV, Seattle then end up in Calgary.    I asked myself a question, why couldn't they do that for the Western teams with favorable home schedule as well?   This is 1000 miles difference! on the same time zone!!!!  Canucks do that every year, out of the way and giving Eastern teams an easier time with their travelling schedule.  Makes no sense!!!  Had the NHL done that, Eastern conference trip would raise about 2,000 miles every year and that is now 2,000 miles difference with the way their scheduling works nowadays.

 

Fair enough. Thanks for the input. Obviously you've put a lot of thought into it. Much appreciated. It's nice you have actually attempted a solution as compared to just complain about it as well. 

 

I think as far as having 2-3 days off in NYC the players would rather just play and get home asap, and not waste more time being away from families. I like the cross continental trips myself. I spend a lot of time in SK in the winters so most of the games start at 9pm for me. I love having a series of games all starting at 5 or 6. It's a bit of a treat, and fun to see the Eastern teams. In order to do as you suggest I imagine they would have to build the schedule around the Pacific teams. It does get rather complicated with blackout dates, etc. I also wonder if the players even care a tenth as much as you do.

 

I don't see the NHL changing the schedule in the way you suggest. The best part about the league is the parity and playing different teams every night. Personally the last thing I want is more boring divisional games. Blah! I like it exactly the way it is myself. At least you're not the one doing all the travelling though. 

 

I didn't really understand the last paragraph. I tried reading it several times. Maybe the wording got mixed up.

 

I find the scheduling very fair besides the inherent geography, which is impossible to fix. Everyone plays 2 games home and away vs the other conference. Everyone also plays 3 intra conference games outside their own division, and 26 divisional games, over the exact same time period. The whole Western Conference has a tougher flight plan but one or two extra flights for Van, Edm, Cal, Sea, SJ, LA, Col, Ana, Vgs, Ari, across the country isn't that big of a deal in my eyes. The NHL schedule isn't meant to be easy, it's a grind for everyone but they are making like 50 times the amount of money than normal folks make, just to play hockey.

 

At the end of the day you just have to win hockey games, wherever they are and whatever you had to do to get there.

[Gawdzukes]

3 hours ago, stawns said:

 

 

lol no doubt, I did a double take there. Good thing Kesler luckily happened to squeeze in 41 goals that season. All while managing to get into a paltry 82 games trying desperately to make the squad after consecutive seasons of 82,48,80,82, and 82 games in the previous 5 years. 

 

Trying too hard to make the point fit the narrative perhaps?