Jump to content

[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks Vs. Calgary Flames, Scotia Saddledome, September 24, @ 5PM PST, Preseason Game #1


Slegr

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, RWJC said:


so to paraphrase your point - a player doesn’t need to prove that they can play above their peers in order to qualify with certainty for an NHL job. They just need to be able to hang on playing with players who may be years ahead of them in development and skill and that is sufficient criteria to base them on. 
 

maybe tonight’s game wasn’t literally against the Flames. Perhaps it was a continuation of a camp scrimmage but instead of it being against other bubble candidates, the best options were placed together against a much more competitive and skilled team to see how our players would react? That is a possibility, no? Do you think the A has so much parity that teams never get blown out in that league? 
 

These guys got a chance to prove something of themselves to the coaching staff. They didn’t have to score hat tricks or kick the shit out of someone, they just had to show they could retain what they learned in camp, action it in a competitive game where the result doesn’t matter, only the effort and the willingness to follow through on systems coaching, whether it be pre-ordained or on the fly. 
 

The score means shit.

The individual performance and evidence of reliability is what counts. 
 

it’s like some fans here think they’re owed a victory sooooo badly because they need it as much as the team does. Quit projecting. 
What this team needs is to suss out its best roster for its best chance of success. Performance analysis can be fluffed up when you’re playing with someone far better than you who can cover up your flaws. Is that what you want to see? I don’t.

 

I want capable players who can support their linemate and dont eventually prove to be a liability simply because they werent critiqued adequately enough in preseason. 
If you want to blame Tocchet for anything, this is what it would be if he shared your perspective…a failure to perform due diligence at an appropriate time and opportunity. 
 

I don’t mean to sound harsh and like I said I value counter opinion, but this isn’t madness. It’s truly due diligence. Again, just one way of looking at it though. Doesn’t make my opinion any more valid than yours.

 

In your prior post you say that the Benifit for the young guys was they get to see what it takes to make it at this level. And I’d agree. But That’s assuming evaluation is only about how they play against opposition. But there’s 30 other different teams that it’s not possible to really see how they would do. And that’s  part that you don’t seem to understand and it’s how they play with current rooster players. Because player evaluation is as much about cohesiveness. But your not alone. There’s someone in the Canucks Org that doesn’t understand that part as well. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Breadnbutta said:

If i remember correctly in 2010/11 we only won one pre season game and then went on to win the pres trophy with a huge gap too. I think 2nd place was 12 points behind.

 

Pre season means nothing.. Allen Iverson Practice 

We said this last year, before shitting the bed throughout the first half of the season which included a historically bad PK. Feel like this is a common comment made over the last 10 years of our franchise looking terrible. At some point if you want a good start, it begins in preseason. But, the fact this wasn't the regulars getting cooked is the only real positive. But is that positive worth getting a bunch of our developing players absolutely obliterated? Not really.

  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So the Calgary Flames beat the Abbotsford Canucks 10-0. I’m surprised it was that close. 
 

Not sure it was a good idea to do

this. Lots of players can lose confidence in a game like this. Especially the goalies. 

The more I thought about it the better I thought the decision was to ice an AHL roster. 
 

It’s the start of camp. Tocchet just taught all these young guys who thought they could “make it” how far they have to go to make it. If this doesn’t light a fire under the asses of those competing for the few spots, and teach them how hard the NHL is, nothing will. 
 

Whether it was by design or not, I see that as the silver lining here. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

See who wants a job.

Clearly about 3-4 do, the rest don't.

Yeah, I'd think Juulsen isn't on that list after getting faked out while sliding by Huberdeau, and giving it away in the front of the net to Coronato.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KingRaj91 said:

I don't expect vets like Petey and Huggy to be dressed in the next few games considering they're away games. But I do agree that we should be dressing our potential lineup - its basically a brand new team and these guys need to figure out how to play together.

 

I think we have a great team but I'm worried about that RD spot besides Huggy. Not sure how we fill that spot.

I think this was a one of game for the young guys to see how hard it is to play against NHL players  and take that back with them to their teams and show how much work they have yet to improve (especially when they prob tried hard for just 1 game, let alone  a season and they failed)

From here on I think we see more vets with bubble guys

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dumb Nuck said:

We'll see, what disturbed me most was how soft we played, a trait that has haunted us over a decade, in that sense we didn't meet pressure with pressure. I'm hoping for the best, we shall see.

Some players still played the right way.

 

Who stood out to you? If they pass our own eyeball test I'm betting the coaches are seeing largely the same thing there. Those are the guys looking at nhl jobs. Thats a good thing! You don't know what you really got until you put it to the test, you know? That's my takeaway from that God awful performance anyway.  Oh well. Onto the next. : )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference was the quality of competition. We fell behind early and some players got flustered. That is the level of play that the young guys have to get to if they want to play in the NHL. They're not children. If something like this sets back their development then they weren't mentally strong enough to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Canuckle said:

Some players still played the right way.

 

Who stood out to you? If they pass our own eyeball test I'm betting the coaches are seeing largely the same thing there. Those are the guys looking at nhl jobs. Thats a good thing! You don't know what you really got until you put it to the test, you know? That's my takeaway from that God awful performance anyway.  Oh well. Onto the next. : )

I honestly think Tocchet screwed up tonight, we shall see how it plays out and I’d be elated if I was wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chon derry said:

In your prior post you say that the Benifit for the young guys was they get to see what it takes to make it at this level. And I’d agree. But That’s assuming evaluation is only about how they play against opposition. But there’s 30 other different teams that it’s not possible to really see how they would do. And that’s  part that you don’t seem to understand and it’s how they play with current rooster players. Because player evaluation is as much about cohesiveness. But your not alone. There’s someone in the Canucks Org that doesn’t understand that part as well. 


I’m arguing the points of why we saw what we saw tonight, not hypotheticals or a self-righteous notion that I know any better than a professional coach in the best league in the world who also happens to have had a very successful, respected career in said league. Not to mention a coaching and mgmt team backing him that has ample success, and a few cups too, themselves. 
 

“But you’re not alone. There’s someone in the Canucks Org that doesn’t understand that part as well. ”

 

Do you have short term amnesia? We just had a camp where some of these bubble players played alongside NHL counterparts in practices and scrimmages to determine the very thing you’re arguing for. Hoglander played with EP and Kuz. Podz with JTM and BB6.  you do realize that chemistry and cohesiveness may have already been partly assessed to a sufficient enough standard to warrant the roster we saw tonight as part of a progression of eligibility. Right? Yeah? No?
 

Regardless, go ahead, you do you.

 

I expect you to be hired as an NHL coach in the very very near future instead of wasting your talents and expertise on a public forum like this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gwarrior said:

Hey, Calgary, with your roster against ours, ya could have used some lube!!!! I look forward to our guys returning the favor.

Sadly we dropped our pants and bent over for them.

 

 

 

Edited by Dumb Nuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...