PGT - Vancouver at Pittsburgh

[Jester13]

29 minutes ago, Rip The Mesh said:

I'd call this, not only up to date but probably good news..

 

Love that Allvin is putting a bit of pressure on Petey to make a decision now and not wait until the offseason. We can't wait that long. We need to build this team, and we need to know what we have left to further the plan. 

 

Plus, with how great this road trip has gone, it's a great time to lock him in with the fun these guys are having together right now. 

[Gawdzukes]

8 hours ago, Tusk said:

to gain more depth for playoffs we should be stocking up in Abbotsford. More size, more speed, spend some non cap money.

there is a huge advantage to be able to call up guys in the playoffs when some of our guys get injured or suspended for protecting our team. It will happen.

I think we would lose more to trade someone away then we could gain at this point

They are a TEAM and are working for each other. Each one of them.

 

I don't think that's really true. You can have as many players on the black aces squad as you want:

 

The Black Aces are the extra players added to a roster for a team's playoff run after their own season is over in the minor-leagues or elsewhere. The Black Aces practice with the team and are expected to be ready to step into the lineup if any of the regular players in the lineup are unable to play.

 

The NHL's 23-man roster limit ends at the trade deadline, and there is no salary cap in the postseason, allowing teams to carry as many Black Aces as they wish. The Black Aces typically consist of most NHL-contracted players from the team's AHL affiliate after the AHL team is eliminated from the playoffs, and can also include players from juniors or college if their seasons are over.

 

However, this rarely happens and especially not if the players are not good enough to be included on the main team anyway. It would be far smarter to actually trade for quality players and put them on your actual NHL team. What your suggesting, signing AHL players to call up in the playoffs, doesn't happen because it's not a good strategy. Also, there is no fighting in the playoffs because teams are not stupid and don't want to lose the game on a dumb penalty.

 

Players pretty much never get suspended protecting their teams. If a player does get suspended, he is usually replaced by someone in the pressbox or Black Aces, not from the AHL. When this does happen it is usually a youth player with high pedigree, which would cost us huge assets to acquire, only to sit them in the pressbox.

 

Last year when Benn was suspended two games he was replaced by Luke Glendenning, who was already on their roster and had already played in games one and two and the entire playoff.

 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/37723357/dallas-stars-jamie-benn-suspended-2-games-cross-checking-vegas-mark-stone

 

He ended up scoring in the elimination game #6.

[Kragar]

2 hours ago, Grandmaster said:

I just hope those clowns miss the playoffs. They’ve enjoyed enough success, time to suck and have their fans feel how we felt for the last dozen or so years. 

 

Especially the shady, uber-tanking they did to get their stars.

 

I can appreciate Crosby for the quality player he is, but the fans deserve to suffer for a while.

 

Oh, and just to throw this in, Malkin is a tool.  Be nice to see Zadorov crush him next month.

[IBatch]

30 minutes ago, Malibu said:

I will still take Sam Reinhart and 4 first rounders for Petey of course. In fact, there is no player other than Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux that is worth a top ten UFA scorer and 4 firsts. This is the weirdness of RFA rules afaic, it is not worth resigning your star, let someone else take them. 

And back then, the rules were a lot different.   It's not true though.  TB and Vegas cases in point (recent ones).   The problem is, when guys like Nylander sign and ruin it for other teams.    Stamkos, Barkov, Stone, Point, Kucherov, Hedman,  Alex Petrangelo,  Mark Scheiffle,  there are so many UFA's that signed for something reasonable, and for their own clubs!     I also get the flip side, Parise, Suter, Doughty, EK, Panarin (well at least so far it's ok)  ... it's ok to have several UFA's in the mix including your top players if they sign for what works.   Peak Sedin era for example too. 

[Jaimito]

 

 

 

[WeneedLumme]

10 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Not to sound like a debbie downer but are people here a bit concerned that, in the last 4 games, the team only scored 1 non empty net goal in the 3rd period?

 

Edit: 5 if you include the loss to the Blues

If they were playing from behind in the third period and couldn't score, I would be concerned. But considering that they were always playing with the lead in the third period, so their major focus is obviously to prevent the other team from scoring, no, of course I am not concerned at all over that. Why would you be?

 

 

[Bure10Kuzmenko96]

1 hour ago, Malibu said:

I will still take Sam Reinhart and 4 first rounders for Petey of course. In fact, there is no player other than Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux that is worth a top ten UFA scorer and 4 firsts. This is the weirdness of RFA rules afaic, it is not worth resigning your star, let someone else take them. 

Sam Reinhart is definitely not in the same category as Petey and sometimes 1sts don't necessarily work our. I don't get your hate on for Petey. He's one of our best players. 

[Gawdzukes]

3 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

I'd like to take this moment to tell everyone that some fans on the Penguins' board legitimately think that we "got away with murder" all game and that the refs heavily favored us, and when that will stop, we won't be as good as we currently are. Apparently, there's a reason our star players have so much room, and it's because we play a dirty game... 

 

Idk about all of you, but being a top team dominating play and averaging 1 powerplay a game doesn't really reek of preferential treatment. I thought Pittsburgh played an incredibly dirty game as soon as they were down 3-0, and were constantly setting picks, holding, interfering, hooking etc... They learned that the refs weren't calling shit and the game started getting chippy. I told the people I was with that if it continued, things were going to get violent, and the very next shift Crosby attempted to injure Hughes with a late hit, they targetted Pettersson, and then they finally got whistled for the wild crosscheck on Garland.

 

THE REFS NEED TO STOP MAKING THE GAME ABOUT THEM AND CALL PENALTIES FAIRLY AND OBJECTIVELY.

 

 

 

Just like all the silly fans here that automatically think we've been cheated every single time we lose. The game was refed very fairly. Tocchet even said so himself. It's funny how so many folks here can point out all the times there should have been a penalty against the other team but miss all the stuff we get away with.

 

The way games are refereed is not going to change. The games are exciting the way they are. People need to accept that they will lose games and it's not always someone else's fault. It's called sportsmanship.

 

What I saw was a team that played hard to get back into it after going down 3-1. The refs put away the whistles and let them play hockey, except for the two obvious and rather poor penalties we took (that were absolutely deserved). Completely normal unless you're looking for every little advantage to be called your way. Then you're just a homer.

 

It really is telling. Back and forth game, in which our coach commended the refs on a good job for letting them play. Penalties were 4-2 in their favor with us getting called twice in the third for two obvious penalties. They didn't even score on either PP, we win 4-3, and people are still bitching about the refereeing.  It's a wee bit embarrassing.

[NHL Tyranny]

2 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said:

 

useless stat

[KFAN]

10 hours ago, -AJ- said:

 

Obviously, we were playing at that pace, but I've seen many good starts fall off and away from the playoffs. I will always remain the skeptic first. Generally speaking, I won't believe we'll get it done until we've proven it beyond substantial doubt.

 

The feeling of let down after getting up my hopes is to great a risk to take. I spent too many naive years of my youth expecting much from our team and end up disappointed to believe without substantial evidence. Call it cynicism if you want, but it is what it is. Many Canuck fans feel the same way. A product of a lot of disappointment over the years.

I agree, and as much as some really believe this could be a cup year, I think we're at least 1 year, but probably 2 away from contending. Management and coaching have done a great job of bolstering the team compared to the past number of years, and I really do believe they'll toughen us up enough to finally win the Stanley.

[Rip The Mesh]

 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

26 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Just like all the silly fans here that automatically think we've been cheated every single time we lose. The game was refed very fairly. Tocchet even said so himself. It's funny how so many folks here can point out all the times there should have been a penalty against the other team but miss all the stuff we get away with.

 

The way games are refereed is not going to change. The games are exciting the way they are. People need to accept that they will lose games and it's not always someone else's fault. It's called sportsmanship.

 

What I saw was a team that played hard to get back into it after going down 3-1. The refs put away the whistles and let them play hockey, except for the two obvious and rather poor penalties we took (that were absolutely deserved). Completely normal unless you're looking for every little advantage to be called your way. Then you're just a homer.

 

It really is telling. Back and forth game, in which our coach commended the refs on a good job for letting them play. Penalties were 4-2 in their favor with us getting called twice in the third for two obvious penalties. They didn't even score on either PP, we win 4-3, and people are still bitching about the refereeing.  It's a wee bit embarrassing.

Alright, let's say you're right. How can you REASONABLY explain that the Canucks have dominated possession 4 games in a row, and have had 4 powerplays in that span, meanwhile being shorthanded more often? It's tight-checking hockey, sure. Have the refs blown tons of calls? Yes. Have they blown much more calls that should have gone our way and not the opposite? Yes. 

 

At the end of the day, this is what it will be like during the playoffs, so it's really refreshing to see that the Canucks are getting results despite the reffing. It's objectively been favored towards our opposition though. Unless you're willing to argue that the past 4 teams have defended to near perfection discipline-wise and we've been completely undisciplined. I'm guessing that's not the case though?

[Mike Vanderhoek]

1 hour ago, Rip The Mesh said:

I'd call this, not only up to date but probably good news..

 

 

Having a resolution as a fan would be great, but it has already been stated multiple times that the player prefers to leave negotiations until after the season. I don't see any need to push or apply pressure to the situation.

 

I don't believe there is all that much uncertainty to be honest. I mean Pettersson will command an AAV above Miller's on either one of a shorter term or longer term deal. He is a pending RFA and the 25/26 & 26/27 season's the team will be eating the over $4 million dollars in each year of OEL's buyout. Plan accordingly.

 

Fans and media tend to look at all of an organization's assets as highly important re: high value placed on a 1st round pick or high end prospects, etc, NHL players care about their current club and improving their chances of success. 

 

He may very well be invested in this team and city, heck could even be willing to discount a deal here. Nothing we or any " insider " knows its just conjecture. But as much as several additions have helped this club, the majority of those additions have been on expiring or shorter term deals. Zadorov for example is playing a smaller role in Vancouver than he did in Calgary and on an expiring contract may bolt after the season.

 

Point is, the club should be investing in another Hronek type deal. Another key addition whom is in the age range of this core, will fit in longer term and build on the club's burgeoning success thus far. That type of addition at cost of say futures or those assets not on the active roster would be more showing to Pettersson and his teammates. Hronek was not a player on really anyone's radar and was obtainable so this management group has shown they can dig and target the type of players they want rather than scour the rental market. You bring in another one or two key pieces that fit into the team's plans then who knows, could get a lower AAV out of Pettersson out of it.

[NHL Tyranny]

21 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Just like all the silly fans here that automatically think we've been cheated every single time we lose. The game was refed very fairly. Tocchet even said so himself. It's funny how so many folks here can point out all the times there should have been a penalty against the other team but miss all the stuff we get away with.

 

The way games are refereed is not going to change. The games are exciting the way they are. People need to accept that they will lose games and it's not always someone else's fault. It's called sportsmanship.

 

What I saw was a team that played hard to get back into it after going down 3-1. The refs put away the whistles and let them play hockey, except for the two obvious and rather poor penalties we took (that were absolutely deserved). Completely normal unless you're looking for every little advantage to be called your way. Then you're just a homer.

 

It really is telling. Back and forth game, in which our coach commended the refs on a good job for letting them play. Penalties were 4-2 in their favor with us getting called twice in the third for two obvious penalties. They didn't even score on either PP, we win 4-3, and people are still bitching about the refereeing.  It's a wee bit embarrassing.

Coach knows better than to dwell over officiating. He will likely always say nothing or be complimentary (or at least I hope so)--or suffer the wrath of Bettman and his posse. I don't see too much complaining, just a debate about whether game management is used to favour home team come-backs. I believe it is but not consistently and I don't believe the Pens deserved twice as many PPs, irrespective of the end result.

[Tusk]

26 minutes ago, Bure10Kuzmenko96 said:

Sam Reinhart is definitely not in the same category as Petey and sometimes 1sts don't necessarily work our. I don't get your hate on for Petey. He's one of our best players. 

Its not hate, its concern for next season. We all love him, its the contract everyone is concerned about for next year.

But we are doing nothing this year for sure! Except win the CUP

[Dr. Crossbar]

3 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

I'd like to take this moment to tell everyone that some fans on the Penguins' board legitimately think that we "got away with murder" all game and that the refs heavily favored us, and when that will stop, we won't be as good as we currently are. Apparently, there's a reason our star players have so much room, and it's because we play a dirty game... 

 

Idk about all of you, but being a top team dominating play and averaging 1 powerplay a game doesn't really reek of preferential treatment. I thought Pittsburgh played an incredibly dirty game as soon as they were down 3-0, and were constantly setting picks, holding, interfering, hooking etc... They learned that the refs weren't calling shit and the game started getting chippy. I told the people I was with that if it continued, things were going to get violent, and the very next shift Crosby attempted to injure Hughes with a late hit, they targetted Pettersson, and then they finally got whistled for the wild crosscheck on Garland.

 

THE REFS NEED TO STOP MAKING THE GAME ABOUT THEM AND CALL PENALTIES FAIRLY AND OBJECTIVELY.

 

 

 

It's really interesting looking in at other teams' forums. You quickly realize that people are saying the same things as other fans across the board. None of it is unique. People react and respond to situations in the same ways often with the exact same language. 

 

Now that we're a better team it's fucking with people's perceptions of the Canucks, so of course people need to say "we got away with murder" rather than accepting we beat the Pens fair and square despite the refs and dirty tactics. We're now finally matching pressure with pressure and pushing back physically and aggressively as a team. 

 

The Pens are a team on the decline, imo, and are resorting to dirtier play in order to get an advantage because they can't dominate. 

 

Interesting that we're a team on the rise yet seemingly "got away with murder" ... it can't possibly be that we're a better team.

 

We've been saying for years in here that in order to win anything, the Canucks have to win despite the refs and in the face of bad calls. The only way to do that is to do what we've been doing and keep doing it. 

[Rip The Mesh]

18 minutes ago, NHL Tyranny said:

useless stat

Even more of a useless post. Need something to do? Scrape the snow off my drive way..

[NHL Tyranny]

Just now, Rip The Mesh said:

Even more of a useless post. Need something to do? Scrape the snow off my drive way..

want to borrow my snowblower?

[HorvatToBaertschi]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

It's really interesting looking in at other teams' forums. You quickly realize that people are saying the same things as other fans across the board. None of it is unique. People react and respond to situations in the same ways often with the exact same language. 

 

Now that we're a better team it's fucking with people's perceptions of the Canucks, so of course people need to say "we got away with murder" rather than accepting we beat the Pens fair and square despite the refs and dirty tactics. We're now finally matching pressure with pressure and pushing back physically and aggressively as a team. 

 

The Pens are a team on the decline, imo, and are resorting to dirtier play in order to get an advantage because they can't dominate. 

 

Interesting that we're a team on the rise yet seemingly "got away with murder" ... it can't possibly be that we're a better team.

 

We've been saying for years in here that in order to win anything, the Canucks have to win despite the refs and in the face of bad calls. The only way to do that is to do what we've been doing and keep doing it. 

Yeah it's quite fun to see how other fanbases are dealing with their own stuff. I like it a lot to see how other teams gauge our players' values. 

 

I 100% agree that we have to do our best to avoid focusing on the refs, and they've done a great job at pushing through despite the horrific officiating this season. It's just absolutely insane to me to defend the refs. They are clearly managing games and getting way too involved (by either calling or not calling plays). It's not just against the Canucks, it's always within a game, the team that's winning is always going to face adversity, because Bettman believes that throwaway regular season games all need to go to overtime for people to start paying attention. He then instills blackouts on half the games and most casuals are forced to watch the NBA games that aren't blacked out.

 

Anyways, all that to say that the refs are objectively favouring our opposition. Not because we're the Canucks and they have a vendetta, but because we have the lead more often than not. 

[Rip The Mesh]

 

[Ghostsof1915]

32 minutes ago, NHL Tyranny said:

useless stat

Cyclone Taylor skated backwards and scored a goal. A week before he told a reporter he'd do it.

 

That's a useless stat.

[Gawdzukes]

3 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Alright, let's say you're right. How can you REASONABLY explain that the Canucks have dominated possession 4 games in a row, and have had 4 powerplays in that span, meanwhile being shorthanded more often? It's tight-checking hockey, sure. Have the refs blown tons of calls? Yes. Have they blown much more calls that should have gone our way and not the opposite? Yes. 

 

At the end of the day, this is what it will be like during the playoffs, so it's really refreshing to see that the Canucks are getting results despite the reffing. It's objectively been favored towards our opposition though. 

 

Well, I don't know. Maybe because of what I said where the defensive/leading team gets most of the calls against and the team that is losing gets the majority of the calls for if they are playing aggressive. That's just a normal outcome of one team pushing and one team defending. Maybe we simply take more penalties? I mean that doesn't seem to outlandish to me. To each their own though ... it's about perspective.

 

I guess the league advises the refs to cheat against the Canucks then right? I just wonder why you would even bother watching if it's all just fake and the refs are paid to cheat. It seems like a waste of time, like wrestling.

 

Anyways I don't want to start any arguments. I just honestly couldn't believe people were still bitching about refereeing, especially after we won, and Tocchet said the refereeing was great. I never once screamed at the TV that a penalty should have been called. I didn't notice any moments where I expected a penalty called against the Penguins that wasn't. I'm rewatching the game right now to see all this cheating going on. Can't say I'm seeing anything yet but I'm only half way through.

[Dr. Crossbar]

2 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Yeah it's quite fun to see how other fanbases are dealing with their own stuff. I like it a lot to see how other teams gauge our players' values. 

 

I 100% agree that we have to do our best to avoid focusing on the refs, and they've done a great job at pushing through despite the horrific officiating this season. It's just absolutely insane to me to defend the refs. They are clearly managing games and getting way too involved (by either calling or not calling plays). It's not just against the Canucks, it's always within a game, the team that's winning is always going to face adversity, because Bettman believes that throwaway regular season games all need to go to overtime for people to start paying attention. He then instills blackouts on half the games and most casuals are forced to watch the NBA games that aren't blacked out.

 

Anyways, all that to say that the refs are objectively favouring our opposition. Not because we're the Canucks and they have a vendetta, but because we have the lead more often than not. 

 

Well, the connective tissue between all of our points made and frustration is that it isn't ending anytime soon.

 

We all know what "should be" but ...

 

We just need to be a great team to make it harder on them. 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

19 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Well, I don't know. Maybe because of what I said where the defensive/leading team gets most of the calls against and the team that is losing gets the majority of the calls for if they are playing aggressive. That's just a normal outcome of one team pushing and one team defending. Maybe we simply take more penalties? I mean that doesn't seem to outlandish to me. To each their own though ... it's about perspective.

 

I guess the league advises the refs to cheat against the Canucks then right? I just wonder why you would even bother watching if it's all just fake and the refs are paid to cheat. It seems like a waste of time, like wrestling.

 

Anyways I don't want to start any arguments. I just honestly couldn't believe people were still bitching about refereeing, especially after we won, and Tocchet said the refereeing was great. I never once screamed at the TV that a penalty should have been called. I didn't notice any moments where I expected a penalty called against the Penguins that wasn't. I'm rewatching the game right now to see all this cheating going on. Can't say I'm seeing anything yet but I'm only half way through.

Literally proving that you didn't read my post. " It's not just against the Canucks, it's always within a game".

 

There's a reason why teams find a way to push when we get a lead. It's because they start getting away with a lot of holds, hooks, picks that turn the puck over in the offensive zone and they can breakout with much more ease. 

 

Also, please explain the blatant too many men in OT that lead to a 3on1 that didn't get called? How about the blatant dive/embellishment right before the Hronek call? Teams are getting liberties against us because we always have the lead. We were able to suppress it against NYR but they still somehow got more powerplays than us, despite getting absolutely doggied all game... curious, no? Same thing happened in october when we played them.. we were up 3-1, they scored 2 powerplay goals to tie it up in the last 10 minutes of the game, and won the game off a blatant non-call. 

 

This happens to a lot of teams, but the Canucks deal with it the most, being the team that's had the most leads in the NHL right now. Bettman wants overtimes because he thinks it sells the game. He doesn't understand that people are sick of the gimmicks after 60 minutes. 

 

Rangers fans ADMITTED that they got fucking dominated for 60 minutes, and that it looked like their players were skating in quicksand and that we were on steroids... How do they have 2 powerplays and us 0? Make it make sense, let's hear some arguments. They played a perfect defensive game? Their fans will easily disagree

 

Edited January 12 by HorvatToBaertschi

[NHL Tyranny]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Cyclone Taylor skated backwards and scored a goal. A week before he told a reporter he'd do it.

 

That's a useless stat.

I just don't see it as much of an hockey indicator. What does it show that point streaks, Goals, or GWGs don't. Seems a bit arbitrary. It doesn't really mean clutch goals and the consecutive thing for GWG is more luck than anything. Say Vcr scores 6 goals in the 1st, then lets off the gas and the opponent rally's back (with the help of homer refs) to score 5 but still lose. Is the 6th goal really more important than any of the others? Perhaps in retrospect but it doesn't mean it was an important goal at the time. I would prefer to look at tying goals or winning go ahead goals to signify clutch goals, just plain goals to signify scoring prowess, and point streaks to signify heaters.