First round opponent

[Strawbone]

I don't want to see LA simply because they make hockey no fun to watch. If we do end up getting passed by the Oilers for the division lead, I wonder if that would be motivation for the team to prove that they are still a legit contender, or if that would be demoralizing after being in 1st place for so much of the year only to lose it at the very very end.

[AnthonyG]

54 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Perhaps, but if you look at almost every cup winner over the past decade or so they've had to do their time before breaking through. It goes back further than that too. The closest things to exceptions are Chicago's one season runway before winning in 2010 (they went to the conference final), and LA's two season runway prior to winning in 2012. 

 

By and large most teams do their time, I couldn't tell you the last time a team consistently missed the playoffs, stepped back into the playoffs, and won a cup. It's likely been a good while though.

 

More than likely the Canucks will have to do their time like most other cup winners have. 

True, but if you really dive into Vancouver's playoff absences, there was tons of adversity each season. The last few seasons has shaped this team more than you would think. 

 

2019-20 a taste of playoffs and Demko being thrust into the spotlight against a contending VGK team he took to game 7.

 

2020-21 COVID decimating a team mid season and causing us to push though and play grueling 19 games in 30 days while still overcoming COVID and losing a star player. Brock Boeser taking lead and carrying the team for a good chunk of the season while JT and Hughes struggled. We also started that season with 18 games in 30 days and 4 back to backs.... 

 

2021-22 Pettersson had a 44 game slump going pointless in like 24 games iirc? He broke through while Demko, Miller and Hughes all had outstanding seasons.

 

2022-23 Demko dealt with his first slump in his career for the first 25 games, we had a hard time outscoring the issues in net, especially after Demko's injury sidelined him and Martin came in and let everything in. We couldnt outscore the problem, no matter how many goals we put up.

 

2023-24 The team has come together after going through hell on their own and as a group, to finally put the real product on display and an 82 game season of consistency is no small task and one that should translate into playoff success. Every player has battled their demons and now they have all shown up and played at the top or near top of their level for almost a full 82 game season. 

 

Early struggles lead to late success. We went through ours over the last few years, I don't see why taking our game to the next level should hold us back any further from achieving the ultimate goal, only because we havent played much in the playoffs. We know what its like to play through hell, we've gone through many grinds of our own. I have full faith in this team. We've answered back and you know what, every other team has the exact same pressure to face. We have youth on our side, depth in scoring, strong down the middle, a brick wall behind us and QB on the back end that feeds those relentless forwards. The other teams may have more playoff experience, but also dealing with more injuries and tolls on their bodies and the inevitable and undefeated curse of age.

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, AnthonyG said:

True, but if you really dive into Vancouver's playoff absences, there was tons of adversity each season. The last few seasons has shaped this team more than you would think. 

 

2019-20 a taste of playoffs and Demko being thrust into the spotlight against a contending VGK team he took to game 7.

 

2020-21 COVID decimating a team mid season and causing us to push though and play grueling 19 games in 30 days while still overcoming COVID and losing a star player. Brock Boeser taking lead and carrying the team for a good chunk of the season while JT and Hughes struggled. We also started that season with 18 games in 30 days and 4 back to backs.... 

 

2021-22 Pettersson had a 44 game slump going pointless in like 24 games iirc? He broke through while Demko, Miller and Hughes all had outstanding seasons.

 

2022-23 Demko dealt with his first slump in his career for the first 25 games, we had a hard time outscoring the issues in net, especially after Demko's injury sidelined him and Martin came in and let everything in. We couldnt outscore the problem, no matter how many goals we put up.

 

2023-24 The team has come together after going through hell on their own and as a group, to finally put the real product on display and an 82 game season of consistency is no small task and one that should translate into playoff success. Every player has battled their demons and now they have all shown up and played at the top or near top of their level for almost a full 82 game season. 

 

Early struggles lead to late success. We went through ours over the last few years, I don't see why taking our game to the next level should hold us back any further from achieving the ultimate goal, only because we havent played much in the playoffs. We know what its like to play through hell, we've gone through many grinds of our own. I have full faith in this team. We've answered back and you know what, every other team has the exact same pressure to face. We have youth on our side, depth in scoring, strong down the middle, a brick wall behind us and QB on the back end that feeds those relentless forwards. The other teams may have more playoff experience, but also dealing with more injuries and tolls on their bodies and the inevitable and undefeated curse of age.

 

You've done a good job pointing out highlights in lost seasons, why we slid during said seasons, and how those experience contribute to the current team doing what it's done. 

 

But ultimately they still haven't made the playoffs since 19-20 and there was a large gap prior to that. Our core is largely inexperienced come playoff time, the bubble was it for almost all of our current core. I'm of the opinion that there is no substitute for actual playoff experience, and that most teams will beat their heads against the playoff wall before breaking through. 

 

This doesn't mean I don't think the Canucks are good, but statistically they're much more likely to lose out than go all the way, regardless of the growth they've shown up until this point. Stats aren't the end all be all, but there's a long history of teams having to do their time. It ain't me being a debbie downer, it's simply the track record most cup winners have prior to winning. 

 

If you think they'll go all the way this season, great, at that point we can simply agree to disagree. Which isn't to say I wouldn't love to be wrong. 

 

As I said earlier, this season has already been a success regardless of what happens come playoff time. 

[AnthonyG]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

You've done a good job pointing out highlights in lost seasons, why we slid during said seasons, and how those experience contribute to the current team doing what it's done. 

 

But ultimately they still haven't made the playoffs since 19-20 and there was a large gap prior to that. Our core is largely inexperienced come playoff time, the bubble was it for almost all of our current core. I'm of the opinion that there is no substitute for actual playoff experience, and that most teams will beat their heads against the playoff wall before breaking through. 

 

This doesn't mean I don't think the Canucks are good, but statistically they're much more likely to lose out than go all the way, regardless of the growth they've shown up until this point. Stats aren't the end all be all, but there's a long history of teams having to do their time. It ain't me being a debbie downer, it's simply the track record most cup winners have prior to winning. 

 

If you think they'll go all the way this season, great, at that point we can simply agree to disagree. Which isn't to say I wouldn't love to be wrong. 

 

As I said earlier, this season has already been a success regardless of what happens come playoff time. 

Do you feel that we could beat any team in a best of 7?

[RJCF96]

17 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Do you feel that we could beat any team in a best of 7?

Healthy Demko, and our star players playing like stars, we can beat any team in a best of 7. The same also applies for our opponents. If their stars outshine ours, we would be gone in the first round.

 

I like our odds because when our star players are on, we are absolute fire. Pettersson, Miller, Boeser are scoring threats. We have good supporting/depth forwards as well. Hughes is an elite Norris calibre defenseman. Demko is an elite Vezina calibre goalie.

 

Garland, Joshua and Hoglander all took huge steps in the positive direction this season.

 

It really depends on if our best players shows up for the playoffs. And if we manage to get pass the first round, we could go on a bit of a run.

 

[Coconuts]

35 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Do you feel that we could beat any team in a best of 7?

 

Aye, but I also reckon we could lose to any first round matchup in seven. When it comes to the Canucks, and the chances of other teams, I'm generally pretty pragmatic. 

 

I'm not arguing that the Canucks couldn't go on a cinderella run, I just believe it's a lot likelier they don't. Runs like that are rare, and generally they've been done by teams who've been punted out consistently beforehand. 

 

St. Louis had a helluva run in 2019, their run to simply make the playoffs is a well known anecdote. They missed the playoffs the season before but they'd made the playoffs 6/7 seasons prior to winning the cup and made a conference final run and then went out in the second round the two seasons prior to missing. They'd been in the mix.

 

Washington finally broke through in storybook fashion in 2018, finally overcoming Pittsburgh, but they'd lost in the second round the previous three years and made the playoffs almost every season of Ovi's career up until that point. 

 

Vegas was a playoff regular from the get going and went deep repeatedly prior to winning. 

 

Tampa had been a playoff regular forever, Pittsburgh too. Chicago had a shorter runway as I mentioned, but were a consistent playoff regular from 2008-2009 onward as they won their cups. LA had a two season runway, Boston had been a playoff regular prior to beating us.

 

It's tough to step in and win a cup after a lengthy absence, it typically hasn't happened. Which isn't to say it can't, of course. The last team to almost do it was probably the 2002-2003 Ducks, who lost in the cup final after missing the playoffs for three seasons. Habs almost did it, but still had a one season runway prior to meeting the Bolts in the final. 

 

Some folks have argued this season is our best window to try and go deep for cap reasons, whereas I believe this team has a fantastic chance to be a contender over the next few years. The summer before last, when the whole sign/trade Miller thing was going on, I was arguing that we were probably at least four years out from contention, we're getting closer. I'm not interested in the team going "all-in" because I'd rather try and maintain a more lengthy competitive window, it's part of why I wasn't interested in emptying the coffers for Guentzel. 

 

I think the Canucks are a team who will be in the mix, and their making the playoffs this season is a fantastic first step towards that. They'll get some playoff experience and know what to expect going forward. I wouldn't be surprised if they regress a bit next season, but I reckon they should still be a playoff team. 

 

A lot has been said about the OEL cap hit, the raises we're going to have to give out, and so on, but every GM has to navigate the cap realities they're dealt. Hell, Minnesota was in playoff mix up until recently with nearly 15M in dead cap. I think the Canucks will be in the mix, and by being in the mix they'll give themselves a chance to break through. 

 

There's a lot to be optimistic about going forward, which is a nice chance of pace from the past several years. 

Edited April 11 by Coconuts

[AnthonyG]

9 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Aye, but I also reckon we could lose to any first round matchup in seven. When it comes to the Canucks, and the chances of other teams, I'm generally pretty pragmatic. 

 

I'm not arguing that the Canucks couldn't go on a cinderella run, I just believe it's a lot likelier they don't. Runs like that are rare, and generally they've been done by teams who've been punted out consistently beforehand. 

 

St. Louis had a helluva run in 2019, their run to simply make the playoffs is a well known anecdote. They missed the playoffs the season before but they'd made the playoffs 6/7 seasons prior to winning the cup and made a conference final run and then went out in the second round the two seasons prior to missing. They'd been in the mix.

 

Washington finally broke through in storybook fashion in 2018, finally overcoming Pittsburgh, but they'd lost in the second round the previous three years and made the playoffs almost every season of Ovi's career up until that point. 

 

Vegas was a playoff regular from the get going and went deep repeatedly prior to winning. 

 

Tampa had been a playoff regular forever, Pittsburgh too. Chicago had a shorter runway as I mentioned, but were a consistent playoff regular from 2008-2009 onward as they won their cups. LA had a two season runway, Boston had been a playoff regular prior to beating us.

 

It's tough to step in and win a cup after a lengthy absence, it typically hasn't happened. Which isn't to say it can't, of course. The last team to almost do it was probably the 2002-2003 Ducks, who lost in the cup final after missing the playoffs for three seasons. Habs almost did it, but still had a one season runway prior to meeting the Bolts in the final. 

 

Some folks have argued this season is our best window to try and go deep for cap reasons, whereas I believe this team has a fantastic chance to be a contender over the next few years. I'm not interested in the team going "all-in" because I'd rather try and maintain a more lengthy competitive window, it's part of why I wasn't interested in emptying the coffers for Guentzel. 

 

I think the Canucks are a team who will be in the mix, and their making the playoffs this season is a fantastic first step towards that. They'll get some playoff experience and know what to expect going forward. I wouldn't be surprised if they regress a bit next season, but I reckon they should still be a playoff team. 

 

A lot has been said about the OEL cap hit, the raises we're going to have to give out, and so on, but every GM has to navigate the cap realities they're dealt. Hell, Minnesota was in playoff mix up until recently with nearly 15M in dead cap. I think the Canucks will be in the mix, and by being in the mix they'll give themselves a chance to break through. 

 

There's a lot to be optimistic about going forward, which is a nice chance of pace from the past several years. 

The big thing is, having that ability to be able to beat any team in a best of 7. Thats what defines a true contender and though nothing is a guarantee, this is what is different about this team vs the bubble team and the Desjardin debut. This team CAN win a Stanley cup. Will they? That remains to to be seen, but our odds are real this time around.

[Coconuts]

4 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

The big thing is, having that ability to be able to beat any team in a best of 7. Thats what defines a true contender and though nothing is a guarantee, this is what is different about this team vs the bubble team and the Desjardin debut. This team CAN win a Stanley cup. Will they? That remains to to be seen, but our odds are real this time around.

 

This team is better than either of those teams, certainly. They're an actual competitor who've legitimately made the playoffs, whereas we probably would have missed out on the bubble experience entirely had Covid not canceled that season, Markstrom had gone down and we were trending down. 

 

The Desjardins team was the Sedin's last gasp, it went downhill from there. 

 

I don't think they'll do it this season, but as you've said, they've got a legit chance. 

Edited April 11 by Coconuts

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

17 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Nashville really picked it up once they put Barrie in the press box where he belongs.  If they get a couple of injuries and dress that pylon, it's an easy win.  Neither of the other options has a guy who is that much of a liability and is at risk of playing.

 

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

 

Aye, but I also reckon we could lose to any first round matchup in seven. When it comes to the Canucks, and the chances of other teams, I'm generally pretty pragmatic. 

 

I'm not arguing that the Canucks couldn't go on a cinderella run, I just believe it's a lot likelier they don't. Runs like that are rare, and generally they've been done by teams who've been punted out consistently beforehand. 

 

St. Louis had a helluva run in 2019, their run to simply make the playoffs is a well known anecdote. They missed the playoffs the season before but they'd made the playoffs 6/7 seasons prior to winning the cup and made a conference final run and then went out in the second round the two seasons prior to missing. They'd been in the mix.

 

Washington finally broke through in storybook fashion in 2018, finally overcoming Pittsburgh, but they'd lost in the second round the previous three years and made the playoffs almost every season of Ovi's career up until that point. 

 

Vegas was a playoff regular from the get going and went deep repeatedly prior to winning. 

 

Tampa had been a playoff regular forever, Pittsburgh too. Chicago had a shorter runway as I mentioned, but were a consistent playoff regular from 2008-2009 onward as they won their cups. LA had a two season runway, Boston had been a playoff regular prior to beating us.

 

It's tough to step in and win a cup after a lengthy absence, it typically hasn't happened. Which isn't to say it can't, of course. The last team to almost do it was probably the 2002-2003 Ducks, who lost in the cup final after missing the playoffs for three seasons. Habs almost did it, but still had a one season runway prior to meeting the Bolts in the final. 

 

Some folks have argued this season is our best window to try and go deep for cap reasons, whereas I believe this team has a fantastic chance to be a contender over the next few years. The summer before last, when the whole sign/trade Miller thing was going on, I was arguing that we were probably at least four years out from contention, we're getting closer. I'm not interested in the team going "all-in" because I'd rather try and maintain a more lengthy competitive window, it's part of why I wasn't interested in emptying the coffers for Guentzel. 

 

I think the Canucks are a team who will be in the mix, and their making the playoffs this season is a fantastic first step towards that. They'll get some playoff experience and know what to expect going forward. I wouldn't be surprised if they regress a bit next season, but I reckon they should still be a playoff team. 

 

A lot has been said about the OEL cap hit, the raises we're going to have to give out, and so on, but every GM has to navigate the cap realities they're dealt. Hell, Minnesota was in playoff mix up until recently with nearly 15M in dead cap. I think the Canucks will be in the mix, and by being in the mix they'll give themselves a chance to break through. 

 

There's a lot to be optimistic about going forward, which is a nice chance of pace from the past several years. 

 

It's worth noting that after most Cinderella runs, those teams fade back into mediocrity.  The teams that show patience stick around

[The Lock]

It's going to be difficult no matter who we play, but I voted Nashville. Out of the 3 I'd want Vegas the least because, if their players "magically" come back from injury 1st round again they're going to be extremely tough plus they'll have the experience.

 

That being said, I think it's important to be excited for the playoffs no matter what. Yes, we're messing up a bit as of late; however, it's a clean stale come playoff time and we've seen what this team can do with momentum behind it.

[The Lock]

3 hours ago, AnthonyG said:

The big thing is, having that ability to be able to beat any team in a best of 7. Thats what defines a true contender and though nothing is a guarantee, this is what is different about this team vs the bubble team and the Desjardin debut. This team CAN win a Stanley cup. Will they? That remains to to be seen, but our odds are real this time around.

 

And that's what I think we should be excited about. Maybe we get a cup. Maybe we're out 1st round. All possibilities are up in the air really and we've seen that when this team has momentum, it's a hard force to stop.

[IBatch]

18 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

Maybe, but the playoffs are a different animal and most of LA's current roster is playoff seasoned given this would be their third straight playoff appearance. Doughty and Kopitar have extensive playoff resumes as difference makers as well. 

 

I don't look forward to playing any of these teams, but it'll be fun to see how we do. I'm personally not expecting us to go beyond the second round, but playoff experience in itself will be extremely valuable going forward. But as you've said, gotta beat whoever you get, fans can go around in circles and hockey players themselves can have their preferences, but ultimately it doesn't matter. 

 

Given how the last decade has gone just getting to the dance in itself has been a step forward, the season has already been a success regardless of how things go come playoff time imo. Most teams have to do their time making the playoffs consistently and getting booted out before breaking through, getting in at all is the first step to becoming a playoff regular. 

Just watched Burke, recent appearance.   One thing he brought up is every single team has a preferable opponent.   And match ups are crucial to a teams success in the postseason.   They won't say it and make it public, but for sure do have their own ideal scenes as far as who they hope to play each round.   Since the TDL the scouts have nothing to do, so they will be scouting each possible team, analyzing their special teams (power plays) goalie tendencies etc.    Expect each team we might play, that our team will have the skinny on them, and the same goes for those teams on us.    As fans we don't have any control really.     So agree there isn't much point on fussing about it. 

 

Home ice does matter.   They've accomplished that for the first round, would be nice to see them also add to that and hopefully have other rounds where that matters too. 

[IBatch]

15 hours ago, stawns said:

 

It's worth noting that after most Cinderella runs, those teams fade back into mediocrity.  The teams that show patience stick around

St. Louis for sure gave hope to the entire mediocrity band.   Parity.   The difference now between a great team and a good team is razor thin.   Same with a good team and a mediocre one.   And as far as regular seasons go,  we've seen a lot of cups won outside of the top band as well.   LA times two.    Some teams are built better for the post season.    MTL is probably the only "Cinderalla" run i've seen since the cap came in... and that wasn't with fans and an odd year.   Maybe NSH, but they paid their dues as well, wouldn't call that team mediocre, just in the band of hopefuls.     Which this team certainly is right now as well. 

 

In case you're interested,  Canucks were ranked second as far as longest windows by THN.   A four year window.   Starting now.   So yes patience for sure.    Winning this year would be shocking if it was framed in the pre-season, they've proven some mettle now, winning the division would put an exclamation mark on the season.   As of right now, i'd rank only 93, 2011, 2012 as better regular seasons.  

 

   Usually it takes a few cracks at it.   Only Dallas ahead of us (their window is "open", makes sense given the age of their best players, and no state tax).    Our team isn't perfect, but has it all where it matters the most.    It also wouldn't be considered a Cinderella run if we went to the final or won a cup this year either.

 

Edit:  As for that window ... makes sense, once all these guys get paid ... it won't be easy.    Hopefully they can navigate that.   It's also why I was hoping we'd trade a first this year to give this team a chance.    Back in November when it was awfully apparent that Tochett definitely got through to the group last Spring.    Years 1-4.   At some point we should expect Miller to decline, and EP to ascend.   We wouldn't have a chance without either of those guys.    Same with Demko and QHs.     Brock breaking out is also timely, these guys finally came to play this season.    Tochett and his staff deserve a lot of credit for that. 

 

The way I see it, the mediocrity will come by keeping this team together organically.    It's peak is right now and sustainable for a few years, then we will need to re-tool.    Window gets wider is if Millers like Pavelski,  and if we can draft some studs to balance the cap, make some savy trades etc.   Four years of peak is pretty darn good these days.   

Edited April 12 by IBatch

[IBatch]

16 hours ago, stawns said:

 

It's worth noting that after most Cinderella runs, those teams fade back into mediocrity.  The teams that show patience stick around

Also think that next year is the year they likely will need to go all-in.   Can't sit on the sidelines waiting for an opportunity.    Have to create that.    The last time we had 7 legit NHL d-men, we were winning presidents trophies.    What a difference it makes.    When on, there isn't a team in the league we can't beat in a 7 game series, and that's against them when they are on.     The longer the playoffs go, the better for us as well.   Our D is going to ground and pound them into submission.    QHs and EP, keep them safe I like our chances a lot.  

Edited April 12 by IBatch

[LaBamba]

It’s funny how in hindsight that PDO stat was trying to tell us something. It seems like our luck has run out since the all star break and we are playing closer to the level that was expected by this team. To be really honest. In my eyes we are an underdog in every scenario. We are one of the lowest scoring teams in the league after the all star break, our PP is a mess and we don’t have the depth to cover any major injuries. We took a big step forward this year, but we are definitely not a top tier western conference team. 

[AnthonyG]

13 hours ago, LaBamba said:

It’s funny how in hindsight that PDO stat was trying to tell us something. It seems like our luck has run out since the all star break and we are playing closer to the level that was expected by this team. To be really honest. In my eyes we are an underdog in every scenario. We are one of the lowest scoring teams in the league after the all star break, our PP is a mess and we don’t have the depth to cover any major injuries. We took a big step forward this year, but we are definitely not a top tier western conference team. 

Sure you're absolutely right we are one of the lowest scoring teams since the All-star break.

 

5v5

8th in High danger chances for with 304

we have the 2nd fewest High danger chances against with  221, better than any other playoff team

5th fewest goals against

2nd best expected goals against

1st in fewest scoring chances against with 518, 36 fewer than Carolina and after that its a fucking massive separating between us and any other playoff team.

 

All situations

8th HDCF

5th HDCA

15th in goals against

3rd xGA

1st in fewest scoring chances against

 

Offence may be struggling, but defense is elite. Goaltending and PK havent been stellar but we are indeed getting our #1 PKer and starting goalie back... We are really doing our best to make sure our goalies job is as easy as possible.

Edited April 13 by AnthonyG

[kilgore]

LA scares the crap out of me as a fan.  A 1-3-1 team like that only works if all 5 skaters on the ice buy in.  And this LA team is solidly all in.  And a lot of experience doing it.  They are kryptonite to an aggressive Tocchet style team. Especially with the first goal.  I think LA abandons the 1-3-1 game at the start of every game.  They play lights out Boudreau-there-it-is hockey to gain that crucial first goal.  I think it takes other teams by surprise, certainly the Canucks were not ready for their starts. Teams prepare to beat that stifling style system and then are surprised by the all out forechecking onslaught from LA to start the game.

 

Then you'll see LA switch back to what they are comfortable with once they get that lead.  It works because that kind of initial push is unsustainable for all 60 minutes, but they only have to sustain it until they get, or recapture, a lead. Then they don't have to work so hard, and catch their breath, hang back, and just wait for the other team to make mistakes while they clog up the middle ice.

 

The key is to out match that pace and outwork them to start a game. Get the lead, and force them to open up and play a style they are not used to keeping up.  We can do it. Take advantage of breakthrough skaters like Hughes and Hoglander.  But its not the kind of games I want to watch, and I think its the game that suits the Canucks the least.

[AnthonyG]

1 hour ago, kilgore said:

LA scares the crap out of me as a fan.  A 1-3-1 team like that only works if all 5 skaters on the ice buy in.  And this LA team is solidly all in.  And a lot of experience doing it.  They are kryptonite to an aggressive Tocchet style team. Especially with the first goal.  I think LA abandons the 1-3-1 game at the start of every game.  They play lights out Boudreau-there-it-is hockey to gain that crucial first goal.  I think it takes other teams by surprise, certainly the Canucks were not ready for their starts. Teams prepare to beat that stifling style system and then are surprised by the all out forechecking onslaught from LA to start the game.

 

Then you'll see LA switch back to what they are comfortable with once they get that lead.  It works because that kind of initial push is unsustainable for all 60 minutes, but they only have to sustain it until they get, or recapture, a lead. Then they don't have to work so hard, and catch their breath, hang back, and just wait for the other team to make mistakes while they clog up the middle ice.

 

The key is to out match that pace and outwork them to start a game. Get the lead, and force them to open up and play a style they are not used to keeping up.  We can do it. Take advantage of breakthrough skaters like Hughes and Hoglander.  But its not the kind of games I want to watch, and I think its the game that suits the Canucks the least.

Their 1-3-1 has been a system that Vancouver has exposed time and time again. We havent exactly scored on our opportunities, but having double the scoring chances AND more than double the high danger chances with a 60% CORSI and being as deep if not deeper down the middle with Vezina quality goaltending…. I just dont see how LAK wins a best of 7 with the analytics I’ve provided in the head to head. We have also been the stingiest team since the all-star break in giving up the fewest scoring chances by a landslide. 

Edited April 12 by AnthonyG

[filthy animal]

2 hours ago, kilgore said:

LA scares the crap out of me as a fan.  A 1-3-1 team like that only works if all 5 skaters on the ice buy in.  And this LA team is solidly all in.  And a lot of experience doing it.  They are kryptonite to an aggressive Tocchet style team. Especially with the first goal.  I think LA abandons the 1-3-1 game at the start of every game.  They play lights out Boudreau-there-it-is hockey to gain that crucial first goal.  I think it takes other teams by surprise, certainly the Canucks were not ready for their starts. Teams prepare to beat that stifling style system and then are surprised by the all out forechecking onslaught from LA to start the game.

 

Then you'll see LA switch back to what they are comfortable with once they get that lead.  It works because that kind of initial push is unsustainable for all 60 minutes, but they only have to sustain it until they get, or recapture, a lead. Then they don't have to work so hard, and catch their breath, hang back, and just wait for the other team to make mistakes while they clog up the middle ice.

 

The key is to out match that pace and outwork them to start a game. Get the lead, and force them to open up and play a style they are not used to keeping up.  We can do it. Take advantage of breakthrough skaters like Hughes and Hoglander.  But its not the kind of games I want to watch, and I think its the game that suits the Canucks the least.

Even in an entertainment standpoint, nothing warms your beer faster in a bar than bad hockey. That and Chris Gear takes!

Edited April 12 by filthy animal

[bishopshodan]

Doesn't matter. 

We're gonna go through them all, like a hot knife through butter. 

[kilgore]

6 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

Doesn't matter. 

We're gonna go through them all, like a hot knife through butter. 

 

[24K]

Our chances of facing Vegas is very low so I'll leave them out.

 

It is between the Preds and Kings. Both is gonna be tough but I rather the Preds cause I will not be able to stand watching the Kings 1-3-1 hockey. 

[Psycho_Path]

I want Vegas just so we can beat them out in the 1st round

[Donald Trump]

We want Florida! We want Florida!