[PGT] Canucks vs Predators Oct 31

[CanucksJay]

1 hour ago, Vollmilch90 said:

It is so nice to have fun again watching hockey. I am not sure yet if Tocchet is good enough to lead a team to a Stanley Cup but he sure is exactly what this team needed after all those years.

 

This game was sloppy at best but these were the games we always ended up losing last year. 

 

There are still a lot of questions left in this very young season:

 

I feel like Hroneks success is tied to Hughes. His positioning and defensive play is good but in my eyes he has been a rather bad passer. A lot of turnovers and he often sets up his teammates for trouble because of passes into the feet. Before the canucks pay him big in the offseason I really want a good look of Hronek without Hughes. 

 

Friedman was ok but he should not be a 6 with a contending team. 

 

The stars are producing but there is very little contribution from the bottom six. For playoff series there has to be a lot more depth scoring. 

I guess Bains could bring that after a trade makes room for him. 

 

But it's great that we can have fun in the meantime while looking for these answers. 

I feel like if we eventually have the luxury of making Hronek carry his own pairing, we should do that to properly gauge his value. 

We can always move him back with Hughes if he can't. He should then be paid accordingly.

Edited November 1, 2023 by CanucksJay

[Rrodja]

Love that Miller got benched but upped it in the 3rd. Everyone has an off day. But what a lesson to the younger players.

 

You need a time out and once you've apologised and understood you actions we're unacceptable maybe I'll let you you go out and play with the neighbours again. It's your own time your wasting!

[Rrodja]

15 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

I feel like if we eventually have the luxury of making Hronek carry his own pairing, we should do that to properly gauge his value. 

We can always move him back with Hughes if he can't. He should then be paid accordingly.

Hronek has proven that Hughes is elite and although he can play with anyone - you put another good player next to him he will be given even more time and space given the opposition don't know who to cover. We need another Hronek to split up H&H. It'll come given who we have in the system. But if we could get one more decent puck moving defensively sound D... That would be ace. But everyone has a moon on spiky twig like thing right???

[iceman1964]

6 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

Yeah his comment regarding Keenan was bang on. 

Glad he's experienced the a hole coaches to know that throwing Miller back on in the 3rd will make him not only a better player but a guy that will continue to play hard for RT and the team. 

 

Here's the truth, a coach needs to be a bit of a hard ass but loveable at the same time. Guys need to respect and listen to him but also love him and play for him. I believe that's what's happening now on this team. 

Bruce was a nice guy but too nice. 

I believe as much as the players liked him, they took advantage of him. This resulted in lack of accountability and ultimately did the team a disservice. 

 

This is so much better than the Canucks country club we watched for many years. This current atmosphere is where the best players thrive and get excited to come to the rink. RT has helped change the culture for the better

I find that ironic in a way, most players are playing for millions of $ and you'd think that would be enough motivation to play and the love of the game as well but appears not to be the case so it does indeed have a lot to do with a coach who knows when to be hard and knows when to reel it back. 

[Cloutierfan4life]

Shout out to Tomlinson. He has been fantastic with Shorthouse. I was a little worried when Cheech left but I am very pleased with his takes .

[cripplereh]

18 minutes ago, Cloutierfan4life said:

Shout out to Tomlinson. He has been fantastic with Shorthouse. I was a little worried when Cheech left but I am very pleased with his takes .

I kinda find him lame.

[AK-19]

17 hours ago, JamesB said:

My summary:

 

1. Kind of a nervous start. The first significant play was Petey pushing the puck back to Myers at the point. It looked like Myers could have played the puck easily but he hesitated, then retreated, leading to a 3-on-1 rush, a hook by Myers, and a penalty shot. Fortunately, Foudy fell down on the penalty shot and Demmer made a good save. Myers was better after that and got an assist and was +2, but his underlying numbers were not good.

 

2. Speaking of Demmer, he played an excellent game. The team with the better goalie won in what was otherwise a close game.

 

3. Nashville had the edge in the stats and by the eye test through 2 periods, but the Canucks came out strong in the third and were able to lock down a fairly comfortable win.

 

4. Petey got the hattrick but, in my view, Hughes was the star of the game, although they were both very good, as was Hronek. Statistically, Hughes and Hronek were dominant as a pair (again).

 

5. We saw the "bad" JT Miller from last year for the first two periods, taking 3 bad penalties and just looking hot-headed and out of sorts. Tocchet made the right call by leaving him on the bench for the last part of the second period. First, it is the right message. Second, Miller was hurting the team. He came out much better in the third (the "good" JT Miller) and, among other things, scored a goal. Boeser made a nice play on that goal and set a nice screen on one of Petey's goals. Nice to see Boeser on the scoresheet again and he played hard.

 

6. The bottom 6 forwards are certainly trying to get on the scoresheet, and Lafferty and Beauvillier succeeded and played pretty well overall. Once again, Suter had chances but is now 0-for-9. Hogs played with energy but might be getting too "fancy" again. He needs to drive the net and get the puck on net. Joshua played with more energy (after getting called out by the coach again), and he was credited with 4 hits tonight, leading the team. I am guessing he did enough to stay in the line-up.

 

7. Not a picasso, but I'm sure we will all take it, with very heavy reliance on Hughes, Petey, and Demmer.

 

8. Now we just need to focus on Thursday against San Jose. This is another test. We passed the "decent start" test, the "tough road trip" test, the "home game trap" test, and beat Nashville in their "revenge game". The next test is "can we focus and beat a weak team", which is a test the Canucks have often failed in the past. But I think things are different with Tocc (and Hughes and Petey).

 

Boo!

 

 

I always look forward to your post game comments! I've found them more insightful than most broadcasters. 

[stawns]

2 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

I feel like if we eventually have the luxury of making Hronek carry his own pairing, we should do that to properly gauge his value. 

We can always move him back with Hughes if he can't. He should then be paid accordingly.

I just don't get that line of thinking.  You keep those two together for as long as the chemistry lasts.

26 minutes ago, cripplereh said:

I kinda find him lame.

Agreed, I wish DeBrusk came to SNP

[Cloutierfan4life]

35 minutes ago, cripplereh said:

I kinda find him lame.

I'll take him over Debrusk any game. 

[Canuckle]

26 minutes ago, stawns said:

I wish DeBrusk came to SNP

Edited November 2, 2023 by Canuckle

[CanucksJay]

17 minutes ago, stawns said:

I just don't get that line of thinking.  You keep those two together for as long as the chemistry lasts.

 

I guess the question is, how much is Hronek worth? Do we pay him like a 70 pt D man? 

How do you gauge what his true value is when you have an elite guy like Hughes as his partner? 

Hey I'm all for not splitting them up if he's willing to take a contract given to a typical top 4 guy that puts up 40-50 pts but it also wouldn't be fair to Hronek if he can actually put up 70 pts without Hughes. If that's the case, he should be making elite money too. 

Conversely, if he can't put up 50+ pts without Hughes, it probably means that we should factor the Hughes affect when looking at Hroneks next contract. Otherwise, we should have signed Schenn like A 30pt d man who leads the league in hits... Yet he was only worth a late 3rd at the TDL... 

The fact Schenn was able to leverage his time with Hughes to land a 3 year 8.25m contract at a ripe age of 34 tells me guys that play with Hughes will end up with bloated contracts that they probably don't deserve. And this is coming from a huge fan of Schenn. 

My fear is that Hronek's asking price also could be astronomical and he prices himself out of affordability. A short stint away from Hughes could help illustrate whether he's a 5.5-6m guy or an  8m+ guy

 

Again, this is all a non issue if Hronek isn't looking for elite money. 

[CanucksJay]

1 hour ago, iceman1964 said:

I find that ironic in a way, most players are playing for millions of $ and you'd think that would be enough motivation to play and the love of the game as well but appears not to be the case so it does indeed have a lot to do with a coach who knows when to be hard and knows when to reel it back. 

True. But maybe when you have millions of dollars, it's hard to get motivated because you're life is set anyway

[Canuckle]

1 minute ago, CanucksJay said:

True. But maybe when you have millions of dollars, it's hard to get motivated because you're life is set anyway

 

See: Dustin Byfuglien

[Silent Man]

1 hour ago, AK-19 said:

I always look forward to your post game comments! I've found them more insightful than most broadcasters. 

And better written than most media

[Silent Man]

12 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

 

I guess the question is, how much is Hronek worth? Do we pay him like a 70 pt D man? 

How do you gauge what his true value is when you have an elite guy like Hughes as his partner? 

Hey I'm all for not splitting them up if he's willing to take a contract given to a typical top 4 guy that puts up 40-50 pts but it also wouldn't be fair to Hronek if he can actually put up 70 pts without Hughes. If that's the case, he should be making elite money too. 

Conversely, if he can't put up 50+ pts without Hughes, it probably means that we should factor the Hughes affect when looking at Hroneks next contract. Otherwise, we should have signed Schenn like A 30pt d man who leads the league in hits... Yet he was only worth a late 3rd at the TDL... 

The fact Schenn was able to leverage his time with Hughes to land a 3 year 8.25m contract at a ripe age of 34 tells me guys that play with Hughes will end up with bloated contracts that they probably don't deserve. And this is coming from a huge fan of Schenn. 

My fear is that Hronek's asking price also could be astronomical and he prices himself out of affordability. A short stint away from Hughes could help illustrate whether he's a 5.5-6m guy or an  8m+ guy

 

Again, this is all a non issue if Hronek isn't looking for elite money. 

Anson Carter case maybe to some degree?

[Squirter]

Everyone needs to take a slight discount to keep this thing together for a championship run

[-dlc-]

1 hour ago, cripplereh said:

I kinda find him lame.

He's very bland. Knowledgeable, but no real personality being shown. I used to like the fun banter between Shorty and Cheech...it filled the dead air nicely.

[Pure961089]

This past year made it 30 years a Canadian team hasn't won a cup.  So I have some questions.  Is it possible to use an AI bot with all the data you can feed it to calculate the odds? And 2, since we have in depth analytics of players do you think Bettman would ever agree to the refs being held to the same scrutiny?  Somehow I think these analytics would be a disaster for Bettman and the NHL if someone ever ran a thousand simulations through an AI bot.   Let's see the results. 

[JeremyCuddles]

1 hour ago, cripplereh said:

I kinda find him lame.

I think/hope we just need to give it time for them to feel each other out to speak. There was a time Shorty put a comment out as a joke, and Tomlinson went with a serious answer and it was super awkward. It's gonna be a long 5 years til Ferraro can be a full time color guy though if Tomlinson doesn't improve much. I been listening to the opposing team's feed mostly as of late. Cause I don't really vibe with Tomlinson at all. Feels like a lot of what he says means nothing. Lol.

[Googlie]

8 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Hughes' nickname is a non-factor. 

 

Appropriate though  -  100+ points gets you lots of hugs

[Sell.the.team]

2 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

 

I guess the question is, how much is Hronek worth? Do we pay him like a 70 pt D man? 

How do you gauge what his true value is when you have an elite guy like Hughes as his partner? 

Hey I'm all for not splitting them up if he's willing to take a contract given to a typical top 4 guy that puts up 40-50 pts but it also wouldn't be fair to Hronek if he can actually put up 70 pts without Hughes. If that's the case, he should be making elite money too. 

Conversely, if he can't put up 50+ pts without Hughes, it probably means that we should factor the Hughes affect when looking at Hroneks next contract. Otherwise, we should have signed Schenn like A 30pt d man who leads the league in hits... Yet he was only worth a late 3rd at the TDL... 

The fact Schenn was able to leverage his time with Hughes to land a 3 year 8.25m contract at a ripe age of 34 tells me guys that play with Hughes will end up with bloated contracts that they probably don't deserve. And this is coming from a huge fan of Schenn. 

My fear is that Hronek's asking price also could be astronomical and he prices himself out of affordability. A short stint away from Hughes could help illustrate whether he's a 5.5-6m guy or an  8m+ guy

 

Again, this is all a non issue if Hronek isn't looking for elite money. 

 

If his asking price is astronomical you ship him off for futures.  If we can get him on an 8 x 8 contract (or less hopefully) then I think you take it.  If we go that route then I think we play him like a no 2 dman with Hughes and worst case if we can't resign Quinn we have a fallback plan.  It always amazed me in all the offseason dead time that the radio guys didnt really seem to consider him as a legit partner for Hughes.  There is nothing wrong with having an elite D pair that can play 25-30 mins a night each and I think our team has shown so far that the bottom 4 can handle themselves.

[Huggy Bear]

10 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Hughes' nickname is a non-factor. 

What nickname?

[Rip The Mesh]

Taking every opponent seriously, making sure is team does....

[Silent Man]

3 hours ago, -dlc- said:

He's very bland. Knowledgeable, but no real personality being shown. I used to like the fun banter between Shorty and Cheech...it filled the dead air nicely.

It called chemistry. They had it big time

Shorty and Tom as well.

But this time around- not so much, in my opinion, anyway.

[kilgore]

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

Maybe.  Have also watched him use his gigantic stick a half dozen times and save a sure goal (deflecting off it).    Maybe we should just leave him alone for awhile and see how he adjusts.   So far he's been good the past few games.   At least he's no longer been asked to defend as much against the McDavid's and McKinnon's of the league too.  

 

Yup. Like I said, when he's good he's very good. His reach with the stick is something not too many other defensemen have. The key is minutes played for him. And matchups like you say. As long as Tyler understands his new role, he's a much better fit. And the times he's on the ice he's not labouring which gets him in trouble. And he's more alert not to have so many brain farts. But he'll still have them time to time.