[PGT] Canucks @ Panthers Oct 21

[Devron]

1 hour ago, Rip The Mesh said:

Amazing stats for Quinn Hughes / Sorry. Captain Quinn Hughes!

 

 

Can’t play defence they said. Also F those people. Go Quinn! 

[JamesB]

4 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said:

That truly is an amazing stat. Remember the problem of "how do they find the right partner for Quinn?" It's early in this year's campaign, but just maybe

they got it.  That is a big; \/

 

4 hours ago, The Duke said:

It’s great to see Hughes - Hronek seriously tilting the ice, like they should.  It’s a reason I thought Tocchet would go that direction.

 

However, the “split them up” crowd gets some ammunition from these stats as well.  We really are putting all the eggs in one basket.  Especially with Myers struggling and (imo) no other RHD really playing at a solid NHL level. 

 

I am going to weigh in on this one. Play Hughes and Hronek together or split them up?

 

We all understand the logic of both positions. Play them together because they are really good together or play them on separate pairings so we can have two high quality pairings instead of just one.

 

As we saw last year, pretty much anyone looks at least ok partnered with Hughes. Juulsen, Schenn, and McWard all looked pretty good with Hughes, even though none of those guys is anywhere near being a legitimate top pairing NHL D-man. And Bear also looked good, and I don't think he is anywhere near being to top pairing RD either, although some might say he is not too far away.

 

But playing Hughes with any of those guys reduces his effectiveness. His offensive abilities are maximized when he does not have to cover for potential mistakes by his partner and his partner can actually support his offence. Giving up that benefit is a high cost. We don't want a Hughes-X pairing that is simply "ok" playing as the top pair. We want the Hughes pairing to dominate, as it does with Hronek. Those guys play big minutes and play against the other team's top line and still come out on top. That is a huge benefit.

 

So I think it makes sense to play Hughes and Hronek together.  You would not want two pure offensive guys together, or two pure puck carriers together, but Hughes and Hronek seem to complement each other very well, partly because they both have very good all-around games.

 

As for other guys, they have easier minutes if Hughes and Hronek play together, which helps them. Myers is still a problem, no matter who he plays with, but I think he is ok on the 3rd pairing in limited minutes. That probably means moving Friedman to the 2nd pairing with either Cole or Soucy. But, late in a close game, Soucy and Cole can put in some minutes together as the Canucks did against Florida.

 

The obvious answer is to sign Bear, but it will be a while before he is healthy and the Canucks would have to do something to create cap room. They would like to make cap space by trading Garland, but nothing has come together yet. While they are willing to retain salary, they don't want to give up additional assets. (Bringing in OEL and Garland while giving up a fairly high 1st round pick was probably the worst Canuck trade of all-time in the sense that it looked terrible from the moment it was made.)

[DeNiro]

8 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

 

I am going to weigh in on this one. Play Hughes and Hronek together or split them up?

 

We all understand the logic of both positions. Play them together because they are really good together or play them on separate pairings so we can have two high quality pairings instead of just one.

 

As we saw last year, pretty much anyone looks at least ok partnered with Hughes. Juulsen, Schenn, and McWard all looked pretty good with Hughes, even though none of those guys is anywhere near being a legitimate top pairing NHL D-man. And Bear also looked good, and I don't think he is anywhere near being to top pairing RD either, although some might say he is not too far away.

 

But playing Hughes with any of those guys reduces his effectiveness. His offensive abilities are maximized when he does not have to cover for potential mistakes by his partner and his partner can actually support his offence. Giving up that benefit is a high cost. We don't want a Hughes-X pairing that is simply "ok" playing as the top pair. We want the Hughes pairing to dominate, as it does with Hronek. Those guys play big minutes and play against the other team's top line and still come out on top. That is a huge benefit.

 

So I think it makes sense to play Hughes and Hronek together.  You would not want two pure offensive guys together, or two pure puck carriers together, but Hughes and Hronek seem to complement each other very well, partly because they both have very good all-around games.

 

As for other guys, they have easier minutes if Hughes and Hronek play together, which helps them. Myers is still a problem, no matter who he plays with, but I think he is ok on the 3rd pairing in limited minutes. That probably means moving Friedman to the 2nd pairing with either Cole or Soucy. But, late in a close game, Soucy and Cole can put in some minutes together as the Canucks did against Florida.

 

The obvious answer is to sign Bear, but it will be a while before he is healthy and the Canucks would have to do something to create cap room. They would like to make cap space by trading Garland, but nothing has come together yet. While they are willing to retain salary, they don't want to give up additional assets. (Bringing in OEL and Garland while giving up a fairly high 1st round pick was probably the worst Canuck trade of all-time in the sense that it looked terrible from the moment it was made.)

To me all it means is that they need to go out and get a solid 4/5 RHD to play with Cole. Doesn’t have to be some legit top 4 just a guy that’s an upgrade on Myers.

 

Soucy and Myers should be an okay bottom pair that gets the job done. The weakness right now is that second pair.

[Jam126]

4 hours ago, MightyCPC said:

Myers is not soft. Myers is an asset to this team. Probably not worth the money, but an asset nonetheless. 

He really puts the "ass" in "asset".

[Rekker]

19 minutes ago, Kragar said:

 

JB didnt sign that contract though.  He dumped some other ones he did sign (IIRC) by taking that on.

 

OEL did ok to start with us I recall, but his stay didn't age well.  Maybe not 7m cap hit worth, but it got rid of Eriksson.

Of course JB didn't sign OEL to that. But he took on that cap hit for that player. JB and his staffs pro scouting was atrocious. Meh, whatever, gotta move on I suppose. 

[Pure961089]

When Petey is doing things that haven't been done by a Canucks since Mogilny back in 95-96, when you have to go back close to 30 years to find comparable dominance you know what you're seeing is special.  And the kicker is I don't think Petey has peeked. I saw some hesitation to unload his one-timer on the PP at times in the game.  I think he'll get better and that poses the question. How dominant can Pettersson be when he reaches his ceiling?  I don't think he's there yet. 

Edited October 22, 2023 by Pure961089

[SV.]

I found it was interesting that Myers was allegedly benched for most of the third (it certainly looked that way), yet, the team still conceded two goals and allowed FLA to tie things up for a brief moment.

I'm not defending Myers, but I think this tidbit of info certainly dispels any myth that he's been single-handedly holding back the team.  It's on the whole team to defend better and play a complete game.

[cripplereh]

7 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

When Petey is doing things that haven't been done by a Canucks since Mogilny back in 95-96, when you have to go back close to 30 years to find comparable dominance you know what you're seeing is special.  And the kicker is I don't think Petey has peeked. I saw some hesitation to unload his one-timer on the PP at times in the game.  I think he'll get better and that poses the question. How dominant can Pettersson be when he reaches his ceiling?  I don't think he's there yet. 

Think this was s what the new regime saw.

 

EP awesome, Miller a good hard worker, QH just great , Hronek who plays smart and good goaltending.

 

Getting the right fit of players with them we can go all the way.

 

So far many smaller tweaks have worked but we may need a few more to get there.

 

 

Letting out players develop in the A helps.

 

I think they are doing a great job and this teams core players can get us to the dance.One maybe two more years we should be a contender.

[Mrwipeout]

well this year i feel confident we are playoff bound (and yah sure..anything can happen there)....to say more then that is too much of a gamble...but players will develop and change...and as u say...maybe we wil be considered contenders in a year or 2....

[NHL Tyranny]

Now might be a good time to package Garland and Boeser for our second pairing D.

[MikeyD]

It wasn't a great game but it was decent enough!

 

Would like to see a bit more creativity in our offense. It was a big change tonight and led to some goals. Only having a north/south game is bad. Needs variety. Kuzmenko was needed and he delivered!

 

As everybody knows, PDG was great tonight. This is what happens when you let your prospects develop a bit and actually give them games AND opportunity.

 

Actually thought Brock had his worst game tonight by a mile. Looked very lethargic.

 

Can't wait for Blueger to come back. 

[MikeyD]

Oh also I've been watching Buffalo games.

 

Dahlin isn't even close to the same realm as Hughes is. Hughes is gonna get robbed of the Norris this year. I'm calling it. 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I'd like to see a Cole - McWard pairing once he's back from injury (is he injured or did we send him down?).  Cole will make up for his rookie mistakes and he'll learn from Cole the pro tips/tricks.

[Dr. Crossbar]

53 minutes ago, SV. said:

I found it was interesting that Myers was allegedly benched for most of the third (it certainly looked that way), yet, the team still conceded two goals and allowed FLA to tie things up for a brief moment.

I'm not defending Myers, but I think this tidbit of info certainly dispels any myth that he's been single-handedly holding back the team.  It's on the whole team to defend better and play a complete game.

 

Not defending him either but ...

 

Essentially Myers is the new Edler from a whipping boy perspective.

[Rip The Mesh]

Rick isn't all that pleased about the way the team comes out into the neutral zone. He doesn't want to see them get trapped

Generally the team feels pretty up and is going to enjoy the time off but not too much. Obviously still much to work on.

A rare chance not to be right into another game, when on the road. Yikes! From what I know, Nashville is a fun place...

[Rekker]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Not defending him either but ...

 

Essentially Myers is the new Edler from a whipping boy perspective.

I suppose. But Eddy is a far superior Dman to Myers. Always has been imho

[Ghostsof1915]

23 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Not defending him either but ...

 

Essentially Myers is the new Edler from a whipping boy perspective.

Edler's only issue is he lost a step in terms of speed. His positioning, defensive awareness, everything else was there.

[The Duke]

1 hour ago, SV. said:

I found it was interesting that Myers was allegedly benched for most of the third (it certainly looked that way), yet, the team still conceded two goals and allowed FLA to tie things up for a brief moment.

I'm not defending Myers, but I think this tidbit of info certainly dispels any myth that he's been single-handedly holding back the team.  It's on the whole team to defend better and play a complete game.

Yes.  Thought it was interesting.  We got absolutely caved for shots in the 3rd as well. 
 

IE - simply “getting rid of” Myers does nothing to move the team forward and it’s a self correcting issue this offseason anyways. 
 

Right now the goal should be getting the whole team playing better - Myers included. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

12 minutes ago, Rekker said:

I suppose. But Eddy is a far superior Dman to Myers. Always has been imho

 

True about Edler overall being better.

 

But Eldler's last couple years here - in here - were very similar to the Myers backlash.  Let's not forget that. 

[JamesB]

37 minutes ago, NHL Tyranny said:

Now might be a good time to package Garland and Boeser for our second pairing D.

I agree, but there is no team in the NHL that could (or would) absorb that cap hit. Only "win-now" teams would make that trade and they pretty much all have approximately zero cap space. And we would need a good RD in return to justify the trade. Right now, Boeser is playing a key role on  a very good "second" line, that is scoring and playing against the other team's top line most of the time. Yes, he is expensive but, so far this year, he has played well enough to justify his cap hit. Losing Boeser would hurt the team right now. I would make the trade if we got a good RD back, but I don't see it happening given the cap situation around the league.

[Dr. Crossbar]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Edler's only issue is he lost a step in terms of speed. His positioning, defensive awareness, everything else was there.

 

The Edler backlash was similar to Myers. 

[Devron]

24 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Not defending him either but ...

 

Essentially Myers is the new Edler from a whipping boy perspective.

Edler was unfairly a whipping boy. His last few years here he was more of a 2nd/3rd defencemen. He was forced to be the no.1 guy but also was never a problem. He needed to be surrounded by better. Him and Tanev were on an island 

[coolboarder]

3 hours ago, -dlc- said:

I'm so tired of the narrative that we win because "soft schedule, etc." and when we lose "no excuses".

 

It all comes into play. No road schedule is "soft"...flying and changing up the routine so early in the year takes some adjustment. Especially when a team HAS had a flu bug running through the bench.

 

Travelling a total of about 5,000 miles and being "on the road" for 2 weeks isn't really a soft schedule. It's much lighter than our usual start of season, I'll give you that. But also factor in the change in time zones and earlier starts.

 

Wins don't have to be pretty...it's the points that count. But somehow, when we collect 2 points it always comes with asterisks for some.

 

This is not really a "soft" schedule (especially considering that Edmonton, Florida, and Tampa are all ranked higher than our team)

Deb, about 5 or 6 years ago with a lot of time on my hand, I was obsessed with the Canucks travel plans and finding a way to reduce travelling schedule and how to reduce the total air miles that seems to be averaging 45,000 to 49,000 miles without even including Seattle into equation.  I was able to figure out that would have them down to 39,000 miles if the NHL adopts this even without Seattle being factored in.  It's quite possible to pare it down even further to 38,000 miles.  Keeping in mind that Eastern teams travel average is about 35,000-38,000 miles a year.  I also factored it in with border travel as well.  If you are curious for more details, ask away and I'll post it.  It was very interesting, way different from the NHL's current annual destinations for each teams.  If the Canucks travel plan could go under 40,000 threshold, the Canucks will be a lot fresher with more energy at the end of the season.  It does make a big difference.  

Edited October 22, 2023 by coolboarder

[Dr. Crossbar]

2 minutes ago, Devron said:

Edler was unfairly a whipping boy. His last few years here he was more of a 2nd/3rd defencemen. He was forced to be the no.1 guy but also was never a problem. He needed to be surrounded by better. Him and Tanev were on an island 

 

I agree but I'm saying the behavior/backlash was very similar. 

[JamesB]

26 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Not defending him either but ...

 

Essentially Myers is the new Edler from a whipping boy perspective.

Edler was always well-respected here. He lost a step late in his career, but he is one the top D-men ever to play for the Canucks. He is the Canuck career leader in pts. for a D-man.  A lot of people, including me, were sorry that he was not re-signed.

 

I don't think there is any comparison beween Edler and Myers.  Edler did take some criticism at times, but Myers has taken a lot more, and he deserves it.