Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said: If it was a cup contender we lost to, I'd stomach it a lot better. But it was Calgary. True, we were very rusty and did not play our regulars much in preseason like Calgary. Its the first game so usually upsets are bound to happen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekker Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 57 minutes ago, Conscience said: Bains called back up, at least he can make a play with the puck. Goodbye aman I bet he goes in at Sprongs spot and Coach T sends his message early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, Blue said: Its just not true that he was slow last night. And you are judging this all on one game , where he out produced Mcdrai combined , but then you're judging them over a whole season. He actually got points and drew a penalty. I agree. Petey looked fine out there, he was engaged and made some plays. McBaby did fuck all yesterday but he gets a free pass because he's McBaby. Too funny... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure10Kuzmenko96 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 11 hours ago, Ballisticsports said: Was at the game (Centre 17 rows up) The 1st period was fun, and 2&3rd they looked flat, like they had it in the bag RT said it was summer hockey, so much to playing to a system after the 1st Was hoping that they would tie it up for OT and they did (I also got a shirt parachuting from the roof) At least we didn't pull an Edmonton on season opener Last 2 season openers for Edmonton at least so that's good 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayDangles Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 38 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: Actually we were unlucky the Flames scored 5 with some pretry weak shots. Canucks didnt think Silovs would be giving up long shots and did not block them. Getting outshot by a 6 to 1 margin for 2 periods and giving up 5 goals is not "unlucky". Canucks got exactly what they deserved last night. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 4 minutes ago, Goose said: yeah, after watching the game the best way to describe it was loose, and they needed to match CGYs work rate. I noticed early on even Hughes was a primary defender on 2 glorious scoring chances against (CGY could have been up 2-0). All in all, attention to details and line up tweaks will definitely improve things. **** Certain guys like Desharnais surprised me. He is super quick/agile for a big guy. A few times he pursued opponents in the D zone, disrupting play. Canucks might have something there if they can round out his all around game. Wasnt a fan of Sprong in pre season w EP/Debrusk, and seems like Tocchett wasnt in this game either. Shades of Kuzmenko being a non-factor w/o the puck. Forces Debrusk to work twice as hard and its going to burn him out, guaranteed. With Suter and Dakota in, Tocchet could manage Sprongs minutes to be mostly used as a PP guy and short bursts when we need offense. Sprong should be given limited minutes since he is not good away from the puck but his shot is elite. Suter-Miller-Boeser Hoglander-Pettersson-Debrusk Joshua-Blueger-Garland Heinen/Sprong-Raty-Sherwood Aman/sprong I think Suter and Dakota will allow us to be more tighter defensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 4 minutes ago, JayDangles said: Getting outshot by a 6 to 1 margin for 2 periods and giving up 5 goals is not "unlucky". Canucks got exactly what they deserved last night. I think Silovs didnt have a good night either. Usually Canucks even if they get outshot, would be able to win games. Oilers always outshot Canucks last season and never won a game against Canucks in regular season, almost losing to us in Playoffs. I think they need to play better defensively and Silovs needs to be better. Otherwise long shots from the blueline should not go in as regularly as they did last night since expected goals for Flames was 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 3 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: With Suter and Dakota in, Tocchet could manage Sprongs minutes to be mostly used as a PP guy and short bursts when we need offense. Sprong should be given limited minutes since he is not good away from the puck but his shot is elite. Suter-Miller-Boeser Hoglander-Pettersson-Debrusk Joshua-Blueger-Garland Heinen/Sprong-Raty-Sherwood Aman/sprong I think Suter and Dakota will allow us to be more tighter defensively. His shot is why you play him with Petterson and Debrusk....he just has to learn to play a 200' game. He's going to be given the opportunity in Joshua's absence. If he is unable to find that part of his game, he will get the Kuzmenko treatment. I did not see him as the issue last night; he seemed to generate stuff when he was on teh ice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayDangles Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 2 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: I think Silovs didnt have a good night either. Usually Canucks even if they get outshot, would be able to win games. Oilers always outshot Canucks last season and never won a game against Canucks in regular season, almost losing to us in Playoffs. I think they need to play better defensively and Silovs needs to be better. Otherwise long shots from the blueline should not go in as regularly as they did last night since expected goals for Flames was 2 Yes that's true, but posting 3 shots on the entire 2nd period is pathetic. It's OK to give up a few extra perimeter shots, but when the shot are that lopsided it also tells you that the Canucks have zero possession and control. That means we spend way too much time defending and the results will always be the same. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 10 minutes ago, JayDangles said: Getting outshot by a 6 to 1 margin for 2 periods and giving up 5 goals is not "unlucky". Canucks got exactly what they deserved last night. Shots overall were 26-24 If Silovs was better this game might've gone the other way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 2 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: I think Silovs didnt have a good night either. Usually Canucks even if they get outshot, would be able to win games. Oilers always outshot Canucks last season and never won a game against Canucks in regular season, almost losing to us in Playoffs. I think they need to play better defensively and Silovs needs to be better. Otherwise long shots from the blueline should not go in as regularly as they did last night since expected goals for Flames was 2 Canucks played horrible team defense last night, and the defensive core was a mess. It will take some time for the new guys to learn the system. That was what was great about Cole; he already knew the system and hit the ground running in a Top4 role top start the year. Forbort and Des, not so much; they looked lost. I'd almost try to flip Myers and Des for a bit for this reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: I agree. Petey looked fine out there, he was engaged and made some plays. McBaby did fuck all yesterday but he gets a free pass because he's McBaby. Too funny... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 2 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: With Suter and Dakota in, Tocchet could manage Sprongs minutes to be mostly used as a PP guy and short bursts when we need offense. Sprong should be given limited minutes since he is not good away from the puck but his shot is elite. Suter-Miller-Boeser Hoglander-Pettersson-Debrusk Joshua-Blueger-Garland Heinen/Sprong-Raty-Sherwood Aman/sprong I think Suter and Dakota will allow us to be more tighter defensively. I was thinking how having Dakota back is a big factor. Canucks lacked that wall guy who can play physical when the temperature rises (like it did vs CGY). I was wondering if plugging Joshua in w Debusk/Petey might work, but of course Garland/Bleugar/DJ is battle tested. Suter isnt flashy but he’s dependable as hell and battles. Im curious what they can do w Sprong. He can skate, but how hard is he willing to work? Raty obviously is learning. Once they can get him comfortable, D zone play will be better as well. He has a ways to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 4 minutes ago, JayDangles said: Yes that's true, but posting 3 shots on the entire 2nd period is pathetic. It's OK to give up a few extra perimeter shots, but when the shot are that lopsided it also tells you that the Canucks have zero possession and control. That means we spend way too much time defending and the results will always be the same. The Canucks backed off, yes. But Calgary also was outshot in the first 15-5, so it's not like the game was completely lopsided. And Calgary got away with a whole lot of stuff in the last two periods where, by the way, they had zero penalties. And it's not like they were super disciplined either. The interference penalty was ridiculous....Lomberg was elbowing, hooking, interfering all game and when we gave some back...in the box. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, -dlc- said: Shots overall were 26-24 If Silovs was better this game might've gone the other way. The shot totals don't tell the game though. Canucks DOMINATED in 1st, then just disappeared for 38 minutes. Sure, if Silovs makes a couple saves, Canucks win......but it doesn't excuse how they just disappeared for 38 minutes. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, BC_Hawk said: Canucks played horrible team defense last night, and the defensive core was a mess. It will take some time for the new guys to learn the system. That was what was great about Cole; he already knew the system and hit the ground running in a Top4 role top start the year. Forbort and Des, not so much; they looked lost. I'd almost try to flip Myers and Des for a bit for this reason. Yeah, Cole is better defender and so is Zadorov. We took a bit of a hit on D this summer which is why am hoping Allvin can get Andersson off the Flames. Not sure we have the money, space or trade asset for Weegar but Andersson would be fine in a top 4 role Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 Do I laugh, do I cry, or both 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, BC_Hawk said: Sure, if Silovs makes a couple saves, Canucks win...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayDangles Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 3 minutes ago, -dlc- said: Shots overall were 26-24 If Silovs was better this game might've gone the other way. Well yes in the end they were, but if you remove the 1st which we all agree was stellar, then it paints a much more realistic picture of the issue. I believe we had what? 3 shots in the 2nd, 5 in the 3rd. I'm sorry but the whole team needs to be better. That was a terrible last 2/3rds and I don't blame Silovs one bit. If canucks were carrying the play and dominating and Silovs let in some bad goals that's on him. But the canucks disappeared completely. That's on them 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 2 minutes ago, Defcon1 said: Yeah, Cole is better defender and so is Zadorov. We took a bit of a hit on D this summer which is why am hoping Allvin can get Andersson off the Flames. Not sure we have the money, space or trade asset for Weegar but Andersson would be fine in a top 4 role Its more a familiarity thing; hopefully Des and Forbort come around. I still think the 3rd pair is an experiment that will probably be dealt with by trade in Dec/Jan. Incoming guy will probably be a 2nd pair, but whomever he offsets will n=move to 3rd. I really like Andersson, but don't think we have the juice to get that deal done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlwaysACanuckFan Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 Tocchet to Gonchar and Foote just before practice trying to prevent "year and half ago Canucks" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 3 minutes ago, -dlc- said: OR if the team showed up after 1st intermission, they could have cruised to a win. The lose is on the Team more than Silovs. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon1 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 5 minutes ago, Goose said: I was thinking how having Dakota back is a big factor. Canucks lacked that wall guy who can play physical when the temperature rises (like it did vs CGY). I was wondering if plugging Joshua in w Debusk/Petey might work, but of course Garland/Bleugar/DJ is battle tested. Suter isnt flashy but he’s dependable as hell and battles. Im curious what they can do w Sprong. He can skate, but how hard is he willing to work? Raty obviously is learning. Once they can get him comfortable, D zone play will be better as well. He has a ways to go. Raty can be a 4th line center for now once Joshua comes back and lines go back to normal. Garland and Joshua with Blueger was our best line for most of the season last year so hope we get back to that. Also Suter does have chemistry with Miller and does clean up any defenive deficiency on their line and seems to be good to have him playing again. Am not a big fan of Aman, not sure what they see in him since he doesnt do anything particularly well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayDangles Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 5 minutes ago, -dlc- said: The Canucks backed off, yes. But Calgary also was outshot in the first 15-5, so it's not like the game was completely lopsided. And Calgary got away with a whole lot of stuff in the last two periods where, by the way, they had zero penalties. And it's not like they were super disciplined either. Canucks also took advantage of our multiple powerplays. Deb it's OK to admit they totally shit the bed for 2/3rds of the game. It wasn't close. They didn't even deserve the 1 point. We didn't "almost have them". Hopefully they regroup and figure out what went wrong, but I'm sure no player in the dressing room is thinking they almost won, they are all thinking "wow we were lucky to tie it and even make a game out of it." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlwaysACanuckFan Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 6 minutes ago, Coconuts said: Do I laugh, do I cry, or both To me it feels like bad karma, where we laughed at the fact the Oilers got smoked meanwhile we blew a 3 goal lead after dominating a team that's not supposed to make playoffs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.