[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs. Seattle Kraken ⏰ Nov. 18, 2023, 7:00 PM PT📍Rogers Arena

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

And they did didn't they? 

They're 7-3 in their last 10 considering their schedule's been brutal including 2 back to back games and an eastern road trip.

 

Coming into this season, what were you hoping for? 

 

I'm not sure if you're intentionally avoiding the issue or not.  The 10 game stretch started with the isles

Edited November 20, 2023 by stawns

[I.AM.THE.WALRUS]

18 hours ago, Western Red said:

Are you being serious?

Saw this - kuz has totally dropped off and Rick is working with him…

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/rick-tocchet-andrei-kuzmenko-canucks-coffee/wcm/c2c9c846-e046-48ed-91a2-e49ab90a60eb/amp/

[CanucksJay]

33 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'm not sure if you're intentionally avoiding the issue or not.  The 10 game stretch started with the isles

Oh sorry

I didn't realize you were cherry picking statistical time periods that best supported your claims. 

Why not look starting from the Florida game until the Islanders game (larger sample size) as we went 10-1-1 during that 12 game stretch where we beat many playoff teams like Florida, St Louis, Dallas and got screwed by a non call against NYR? 

Not sure why you are starting from the Isles game... what makes that the beginning of a 10 game period you are choosing to evaluate? 

At least my thought was just to look back at the previous 10 games which is more of an objective look at recent performance. 

I mean I guess if you want to narrow the scope more, we can also say let's look at the last 2 games where are a 0-2 team. It wouldn't make sense to extrapolate that to say we are an 0-82 team. 

 

Going into this season, what was your definition of a successful season for the canucks? 

 

For me, it was playoffs. If we make the playoffs after the disastrous past few seasons, I would have deemed it a success. 

What we are seeing now top 3 scoring leaders in all of the NHL, largest goal differential in the league, underachieving players finally playing up to their potential (Boeser) was unfathomable. 

 

Im honestly curious, what would your marker be for a successful season? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stawns]

13 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Oh sorry

I didn't realize you were cherry picking statistical time periods that best supported your claims. 

Why not look starting from the Florida game until the Islanders game (larger sample size) as we went 10-1-1 during that 12 game stretch where we beat many playoff teams like Florida, St Louis, Dallas and got screwed by a non call against NYR? 

Not sure why you are starting from the Isles game... what makes that the beginning of a 10 game period you are choosing to evaluate? 

At least my thought was just to look back at the previous 10 games which is more of an objective look at recent performance. 

I mean I guess if you want to narrow the scope more, we can also say let's look at the last 2 games where are a 0-2 team. It wouldn't make sense to extrapolate that to say we are an 0-82 team. 

 

Going into this season, what was your definition of a successful season for the canucks? 

 

For me, it was playoffs. If we make the playoffs after the disastrous past few seasons, I would have deemed it a success. 

What we are seeing now top 3 scoring leaders in all of the NHL, largest goal differential in the league, underachieving players finally playing up to their potential (Boeser) was unfathomable. 

 

Im honestly curious, what would your marker be for a successful season? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That was the entire discussion, that this next stretch of games was a run where true contending teams bank a lot of points because most of the games are against teams out of the playoff picture.

 

Islanders

Calgary

Seattle x2

Sj x2

Ana

 

With Col and Vegas as the only playoff teams in the bunch. 

 

 

That was the entire point, that top teams would expect to come out of that stretch with 6-7 wins, at least.

Edited November 20, 2023 by stawns

[CanucksJay]

22 minutes ago, stawns said:

That was the entire discussion, that this next stretch of games was a run where true contending games bank a lot of points because most of the games are against teams out of the playoff picture.

 

Islanders

Calgary

Seattle x2

Sj x2

Ana

 

With Col and Vegas as the only playoff teams in the bunch. 

 

 

That was the entire point, that top teams would expect to come out of that stretch with 6-7 wins, at least.

 

I felt like we already banked a lot of points where "grace" might be given for games like Cgy (for the reasons discussed) . I don't agree with your take that Seattle should be included in the "soft schedule". Did you know that they've already played 12 playoff teams including

Avs x 3

Canes x 2

Vegas

Tampa

Panthers

NYR 

Canucks

 

The fact that they are tied in points with the last wild card spot while having one of the toughest schedule so far makes me think that they are also poised to go on a run when they hit the "soft" part of their schedule. Let's not forget they knocked the Avs out of the playoffs last year. I'm just shocked that we now include Seattle with the other "should win" games. 

The game Saturday night was pretty much a coin flip as we had just as good of a chance to win. 

 

I would agree that the canucks should win the majority of their games against Islanders, SJ x 2, Anaheim, Cgy which we have done for the most part this season (minus Cgy) 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by CanucksJay

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

As usual, the enabler crowd completely misunderstand terminology.  When I say soft, I'm referring to the schedule, not the actual teams.  You're absolutely right, there are no easy games, but when you hit a stretch of games against teams below the playoff line you should expect to bank some points if you're truly a contending team.

 

To me, this stretch is going to show us who they really are.  Are they actually a real contender or are they sitting at wild card level?

 

I was reading that whole exchange and just scratching my head at how how hard these people work to feel so hard done by. I'm pretty sure I saw most of them going off every second comment about how ridiculous our last stretch was with the extra flight to Calgary or whatever it was they were bitching about. Now it gets mentioned how this next stretch is theoretically a little easier and games we need to win if we want to establish ourselves higher up in the league, and it's a revolt against that as well.

 

I'm not sure what the point of comparing schedules with other teams was either except to be whiny. The schedule is done according to the division you play in. Every team plays 82 games, plays against their own division more frequently and plays the opposite conference twice, all within the same timeframe from October to April. It's not fixed against the Canucks. If you get a tough stretch in one place logic dictates it has to be comparatively easier in another. Bottom line like you said if we're a contender the next stretch is one where we need to rebound and win most of them.

 

Even RT said Seattle had the same stretch of tough games as we did and the schedule is no excuse. He said we lost because we were staying out way too long and making poor line changes, like the one that led to Oleksiak having an uncontested slapper form 10 feet out. And of course there is the poor me whining about the refereeing yet again. Sheesh, it's embarrassing. That penalty on JT was 100% deserved ... you can't take a two handed swing at an opponent at center ice because you're too lazy to backcheck and not expect a penalty. That's why Tanev was laughing. It was a lazy boneheaded play from Miller that put us shorthanded. I'd be laughing too.

[stawns]

56 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

 

I felt like we already banked a lot of points where "grace" might be given for games like Cgy (for the reasons discussed) . I don't agree with your take that Seattle should be included in the "soft schedule". Did you know that they've already played 12 playoff teams including

Avs x 3

Canes x 2

Vegas

Tampa

Panthers

NYR 

Canucks

 

The fact that they are tied in points with the last wild card spot while having one of the toughest schedule so far makes me think that they are also poised to go on a run when they hit the "soft" part of their schedule. Let's not forget they knocked the Avs out of the playoffs last year. I'm just shocked that we now include Seattle with the other "should win" games. 

The game Saturday night was pretty much a coin flip as we had just as good of a chance to win. 

 

I would agree that the canucks should win the majority of their games against Islanders, SJ x 2, Anaheim, Cgy which we have done for the most part this season (minus Cgy) 

 

 

 

Isn't Seattle below the playoffs line?  Don't you expect teams at the top to beat teams outside of the playoffs picture?

 

Or do you not see Van as a team that should be near the top of the league?

[stawns]

47 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I was reading that whole exchange and just scratching my head at how how hard these people work to feel so hard done by. I'm pretty sure I saw most of them going off every second comment about how ridiculous our last stretch was with the extra flight to Calgary or whatever it was they were bitching about. Now it gets mentioned how this next stretch is theoretically a little easier and games we need to win if we want to establish ourselves higher up in the league, and it's a revolt against that as well.

 

I'm not sure what the point of comparing schedules with other teams was either except to be whiny. The schedule is done according to the division you play in. Every team plays 82 games, plays against their own division more frequently and plays the opposite conference twice, all within the same timeframe from October to April. It's not fixed against the Canucks. If you get a tough stretch in one place logic dictates it has to be comparatively easier in another. Bottom line like you said if we're a contender the next stretch is one where we need to rebound and win most of them.

 

Even RT said Seattle had the same stretch of tough games as we did and the schedule is no excuse. He said we lost because we were staying out way too long and making poor line changes, like the one that led to Oleksiak having an uncontested slapper form 10 feet out. And of course there is the poor me whining about the refereeing yet again. Sheesh, it's embarrassing. That penalty on JT was 100% deserved ... you can't take a two handed swing at an opponent at center ice because you're too lazy to backcheck and not expect a penalty. That's why Tanev was laughing. It was a lazy boneheaded play from Miller that put us shorthanded. I'd be laughing too.

It's exhausting and it seems so much worse here than it did at the old site.

[CanucksJay]

On 11/19/2023 at 8:46 AM, stawns said:

 

This part of the sched is as soft as it gets.  They needed to make hay over this run of games.

 

15 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I was reading that whole exchange and just scratching my head at how how hard these people work to feel so hard done by. I'm pretty sure I saw most of them going off every second comment about how ridiculous our last stretch was with the extra flight to Calgary or whatever it was they were bitching about. Now it gets mentioned how this next stretch is theoretically a little easier and games we need to win if we want to establish ourselves higher up in the league, and it's a revolt against that as well.

 

I'm not sure what the point of comparing schedules with other teams was either except to be whiny. The schedule is done according to the division you play in. Every team plays 82 games, plays against their own division more frequently and plays the opposite conference twice, all within the same timeframe from October to April. It's not fixed against the Canucks. If you get a tough stretch in one place logic dictates it has to be comparatively easier in another. Bottom line like you said if we're a contender the next stretch is one where we need to rebound and win most of them.

 

Even RT said Seattle had the same stretch of tough games as we did and the schedule is no excuse. He said we lost because we were staying out way too long and making poor line changes, like the one that led to Oleksiak having an uncontested slapper form 10 feet out. And of course there is the poor me whining about the refereeing yet again. Sheesh, it's embarrassing. That penalty on JT was 100% deserved ... you can't take a two handed swing at an opponent at center ice because you're too lazy to backcheck and not expect a penalty. That's why Tanev was laughing. It was a lazy boneheaded play from Miller that put us shorthanded. I'd be laughing too.

 

@stawnssaid NEEDED to make hay which is past tense meaning they already blew it or basically they squandered the opportunity to make hay. 

 

If he said they NEED to make hay, it's a completely different statement. They are only 30% of the way through the 10 games @stawnswants to evaluate and are 1-2 so far and the future is yet to be determined. We can also debate what the proper expectations are when looking at that "soft stretch of 10 games" and whether we agree with his criteria of what constitutes a "soft team" 

 

As mentioned they lost a game most ppl who watch enough hockey would know is understandable (Cgy) after a tough road trip and missing 3 starters in their lineup. 

I am normally automatic to buy tickets when van is in town but I struggled this time despite how well they were playing because it just felt like it would be a let down game. I've watched enough hockey to know and apparently vegas oddmakers agreed as the Flames were the favorites to win that game despite us coming in with a 12-3-1 record. How often do you see a "soft team" favored to win in those situations? 

Playing Seattle twice as I argued shouldn't be counted as "soft games" because they are actually a good team. 

Pointing out that Seattle is not a soft team by referencing last year's record and playoff performance along with their tough schedule up to this point in which I am actually using @stawnsown method for evaluating "soft games" (playing playoff teams vs non playoff teams), is actually an obective way of evaluating whether they should be deemed as a "soft" team according to @stawnscriteria. Yet even despite the tough schedule, Seattle is currently tied in points for a wildcard spot. 

Not sure if you know but "strength of schedule" plays a major factor in sports and is a stat that many people use when evaluating the strength of a team. 

@Gawdzukes

Its funny that using logic and common sense is considered "whiny or bitching". I'll just grunt next time so you understand better. 

Lastly what was your point on going on and on about the Seattle game? You talked about all the reasons why we lost. There's no argument there. RT said it and I agree with his take because that's what I saw too. What's funny is despite all our issues, we were very much in the game and lost to what I view as a good team while we weren't at our best.  That's a different story from losing to a "soft team". 

 

 

 

[Gawdzukes]

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

It's exhausting and it seems so much worse here than it did at the old site.

 

It almost seems like whatever statement you make there is a legion of people there to disagree. If you say the schedule is soft you're wrong, if you say we should and need to win the next subset of games you're wrong. If you point out that our play has lapsed you're a wet blanket. It is exhausting.

 

Hopefully we get back to the basics and string together some wins again. You can't win them all but this is an important stretch, hard, soft, unfair, whatever the hell it is people want to name it.

[CanucksJay]

14 minutes ago, stawns said:

Isn't Seattle below the playoffs line?  

 

Do you think Seattle will miss the playoffs this year? 

 

If we beat Seattle but lose to current 8th seed Arizona, is it more palpable? 

 

When Anaheim was in a divisional playoff spot, would it be ok if we lost to them? 

 

All I'm saying is less than 20 games into the season, I don't think your criteria for evaluating the strength of a team is correct when determining which games should be considered soft. 

 

Over an 82 game season, the cream will rise to the top and we generally know as we get further into the season which teams are legit and which ones are a flash in the pan. 

While Canucks started amazing, they very well too could end up as a 6-8 seed. It would be disappointing but within a realm of possibility. 

 

I would be shocked if Arizona and Anaheim finish the season ahead of Seattle and to look at the current standings and call Seattle soft is a bit foolish on your part when 

1) we're less than a quarter of the season in

2) we ignore that Seattle up to this point has had a pretty rough schedule. 

 

I'll ask you again, what was your expectation for Vancouver when coming into this season? 

 

It would help frame where you are coming from. 

 

 

[Gawdzukes]

15 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

 

 

@stawnssaid NEEDED to make hay which is past tense meaning they already blew it or basically they squandered the opportunity to make hay. 

 

If he said they NEED to make hay, it's a completely different statement. They are only 30% of the way through the 10 games @stawnswants to evaluate and are 1-2 so far and the future is yet to be determined. We can also debate what the proper expectations are when looking at that "soft stretch of 10 games" and whether we agree with his criteria of what constitutes a "soft team" 

 

As mentioned they lost a game most ppl who watch enough hockey would know is understandable (Cgy) after a tough road trip and missing 3 starters in their lineup. 

I am normally automatic to buy tickets when van is in town but I struggled this time despite how well they were playing because it just felt like it would be a let down game. I've watched enough hockey to know and apparently vegas oddmakers agreed as the Flames were the favorites to win that game despite us coming in with a 12-3-1 record. How often do you see a "soft team" favored to win in those situations? 

Playing Seattle twice as I argued shouldn't be counted as "soft games" because they are actually a good team. 

Pointing out that Seattle is not a soft team by referencing last year's record and playoff performance along with their tough schedule up to this point in which I am actually using @stawnsown method for evaluating "soft games" (playing playoff teams vs non playoff teams), is actually an obective way of evaluating whether they should be deemed as a "soft" team according to @stawnscriteria. Yet even despite the tough schedule, Seattle is currently tied in points for a wildcard spot. 

Not sure if you know but "strength of schedule" plays a major factor in sports and is a stat that many people use when evaluating the strength of a team. 

@Gawdzukes

Its funny that using logic and common sense is considered "whiny or bitching". I'll just grunt next time so you understand better. 

Lastly what was your point on going on and on about the Seattle game? You talked about all the reasons why we lost. There's no argument there. RT said it and I agree with his take because that's what I saw too. What's funny is despite all our issues, we were very much in the game and lost to what I view as a good team while we weren't at our best.  That's a different story from losing to a "soft team". 

 

 

 

 

I don't understand how our strength of schedule can be much different than the teams in our own division. Each team plays 26 divisional games, 24 intra-conference games, and 32 inter-conference games, resulting in every team in the league playing every other team at least twice. They also play 41 home games and 41 away games.

 

https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/nhl/nhl-season-structure-what-is-the-schedule-format-bm15/

 

That means our schedule is almost the same as everyone in our own division. Bottom line is you have to win more games than 8 (typically) other teams in your conference to make the playoffs. Also, most all teams if closely matched as is the league with parity the odds go to the home team, which is why Calgary was favored the other day. I bet quite frequently so I'am very aware of the odds and how they work. I find the scheduling in the NHL very fair, what makes our schedules tough is we are located the furthest away from the majority of teams and have some extra travel as a result. No grunting necessary.

 

I wasn't responding to you so my comments on the Seattle game where directed at the people making excuses yet again as to why we lost. So tiresome. We lost because we didn't play overly well and the bounces favored Seattle in the end. Every game we lose isn't because the referees are corrupt and the schedule makers are conspiring against the poor Canucks. I don't call that logical. I call that whining pure and simple.

 

I agree we lost to a decent team but we have to win the majority of those if we want to be in the playoffs right? I think that is what @stawns is trying to convey here.

[CanucksJay]

38 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I don't understand how our strength of schedule can be much different than the teams in our own division. 

 

I agree we lost to a decent team but we have to win the majority of those if we want to be in the playoffs right? I think that is what @stawns is trying to convey here.

 

Over the duration of an 82 game schedule, yes our division rivals play the same opponents the same number of times.  When you pick a smaller sample size though, the schedule hasn't balanced out yet. 

If the canucks played

 

Vegas

Col x 3

Carolina x 2

Florida (W) 

Tampa (L) 

St Louis  (W) 

NYR (OTL) 

Arizona

Van

 

What would our record look like? 

 

Wed be 2-1-1 and would still need to play 8 more games against playoff teams that include Avs x3, Carolina x2, Vegas and Arizona.  

 

Unlike Seattle who's played 12 games against playoff teams though, we've only played 7 games against playoff teams total. 

 

Florida (w) 

NYR (OTL) 

Tampa (L) 

Philly (L) 

Stl  (w) 

Stars (w) 

Leafs (L) 

 

3-3-1

That means we are winning the majority of the games we should be winning against non playoff teams (9-2) 

 

To look at the body of work so far and say we needed to take advantage of our easy schedule doesn't make sense to me because I feel like we already have. That's why we are comfortably in a playoff spot and have the 3 top scorers in the NHL. 

 

My question to @stawnsis, what was a realistic expectation of this team heading into the season? 

I don't think anyone would have said starting with a record of 12-3-1. 

We've lost 2 now and are at 12-5-1. We have winnable game tonight to bump the slump and go to 13-5-1.

 

Like let's take a step back here. What is it that we are expecting from this team?

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by CanucksJay

[stawns]

53 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

 

Over the duration of an 82 game schedule, yes our division rivals play the same opponents the same number of times.  When you pick a smaller sample size though, the schedule hasn't balanced out yet. 

If the canucks played

 

Vegas

Col x 3

Carolina x 2

Florida (W) 

Tampa (L) 

St Louis  (W) 

NYR (OTL) 

Arizona

Van

 

What would our record look like? 

 

Wed be 2-1-1 and would still need to play 8 more games against playoff teams that include Avs x3, Carolina x2, Vegas and Arizona.  

 

Unlike Seattle who's played 12 games against playoff teams though, we've only played 7 games against playoff teams total. 

 

Florida (w) 

NYR (OTL) 

Tampa (L) 

Philly (L) 

Stl  (w) 

Stars (w) 

Leafs (L) 

 

3-3-1

That means we are winning the majority of the games we should be winning against non playoff teams (9-2) 

 

To look at the body of work so far and say we needed to take advantage of our easy schedule doesn't make sense to me because I feel like we already have. That's why we are comfortably in a playoff spot and have the 3 top scorers in the NHL. 

 

My question to @stawnsis, what was a realistic expectation of this team heading into the season? 

I don't think anyone would have said starting with a record of 12-3-1. 

We've lost 2 now and are at 12-5-1. We have winnable game tonight to bump the slump and go to 13-5-1.

 

Like let's take a step back here. What is it that we are expecting from this team?

 

But that's not what the discussion was.  The discussion was about this specific 10 game stretch.  I'm happy to discuss the bigger picture, but you jumped into a discussion and took it in a completely unrelated direction.

 

If I remember, you and I actually agree on where we think they are.  I think they are a wild card team and what we've seen in the last 6-8 games indicates that is true.......that they settling into their lane after over achieving in the early part of the season......and that is where almost every single person here thought they'd be.  They had some success early on and people kind of forget where this team really is.......this stretch will give us a better indication of who they are, imo.

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

 

Over the duration of an 82 game schedule, yes our division rivals play the same opponents the same number of times.  When you pick a smaller sample size though, the schedule hasn't balanced out yet. 

If the canucks played

 

Vegas

Col x 3

Carolina x 2

Florida (W) 

Tampa (L) 

St Louis  (W) 

NYR (OTL) 

Arizona

Van

 

What would our record look like? 

 

Wed be 2-1-1 and would still need to play 8 more games against playoff teams that include Avs x3, Carolina x2, Vegas and Arizona.  

 

Unlike Seattle who's played 12 games against playoff teams though, we've only played 7 games against playoff teams total. 

 

Florida (w) 

NYR (OTL) 

Tampa (L) 

Philly (L) 

Stl  (w) 

Stars (w) 

Leafs (L) 

 

3-3-1

That means we are winning the majority of the games we should be winning against non playoff teams (9-2) 

 

To look at the body of work so far and say we needed to take advantage of our easy schedule doesn't make sense to me because I feel like we already have. That's why we are comfortably in a playoff spot and have the 3 top scorers in the NHL. 

 

My question to @stawnsis, what was a realistic expectation of this team heading into the season? 

I don't think anyone would have said starting with a record of 12-3-1. 

We've lost 2 now and are at 12-5-1. We have winnable game tonight to bump the slump and go to 13-5-1.

 

Like let's take a step back here. What is it that we are expecting from this team?

 

 

I didn't expect anything after last year's performance to be honest. Now that they've shown they can actually play hockey at an NHL level systems wise I expect they should at least be in the playoff picture. We've shown we can beat anybody I think.

 

We've had a phenomenal start and that's great. Unfortunately in this league it's very easy to go from top to bottom in a hurry so I think it's important we don't slide into losing 10 game stretches. I think that's where the comment of it being a "soft" schedule comes from. Merely in the sense that these are very winnable games considering the last couple of games where we admittedly faced some adversity and faltered a bit. Running into some more serious injuries and also the emotion of the Isles game certainly took their toll. Now it's time to right the ship if we want to continue being a top 3 team in the division.

[CanucksJay]

23 minutes ago, stawns said:

But that's not what the discussion was.  The discussion was about this specific 10 game stretch.  I'm happy to discuss the bigger picture, but you jumped into a discussion and took it in a completely unrelated direction.

 

If I remember, you and I actually agree on where we think they are.  I think they are a wild card team and what we've seen in the last 6-8 games indicates that is true.......that they settling into their lane after over achieving in the early part of the season......and that is where almost every single person here thought they'd be.  They had some success early on and people kind of forget where this team really is.......this stretch will give us a better indication of who they are, imo.

Im hoping that our guys aren't a wild card team. I'm hoping they are a top 3 team in the Pacific and give vegas a run for their money for the rest of the season. I truly think all we are missing is a top 4D and maybe an upgrade on a forward position. The issue I had with your comment was that losing the game in Cgy where even the bookmakers had Cgy favored to win followed by a loss to a good Seattle team (where we didn't play all that well but still had a good chance of winning) shouldn't undo all the good things they have accomplished so far this season. 

Its similar to when we lost in Philly and Tampa and the world was ending for some but then we went on an 8-0-1 run. 

I feel like this is a similar situation. It's too early to say we blew it or to label ourselves as a wildcard team. 

What I do know is that up up to this point, our guys have surpassed all expectations coming  into this season and the hope would be that they can keep it going for as long as possible. 

 

[CanucksJay]

1 minute ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I didn't expect anything after last year's performance to be honest. Now that they've shown they can actually play hockey at an NHL level systems wise I expect they should at least be in the playoff picture. We've shown we can beat anybody I think.

 

We've had a phenomenal start and that's great. Unfortunately in this league it's very easy to go from top to bottom in a hurry so I think it's important we don't slide into losing 10 game stretches. I think that's where the comment of it being a "soft" schedule comes from. Merely in the sense that these are very winnable games considering the last couple of games where we admittedly faced some adversity and faltered a bit. Running into some more serious injuries and also the emotion of the Isles game certainly took their toll. Now it's time to right the ship if we want to continue being a top 3 team in the division.

Agreed with you there. 

 

Now is time to right the ship starting with a home game against the sharks to break our 2 game losing stream. Get back to hard work and systems and start a new streak.

[Gawdzukes]

1 minute ago, CanucksJay said:

Agreed with you there. 

 

Now is time to right the ship starting with a home game against the sharks to break our 2 game losing stream. Get back to hard work and systems and start a new streak.

 

Exactly. The games against Calgary and Seattle are completely understandable. The deck was stacked against us but like you said we still kept it close. Calgary I thought was our worst game of the year almost though.

 

Now we've had a day to sit back and absorb the situation the team needs to get back to the buy in that got them where they are. Like you said it starts tonight with complete effort from everyone now that we've had time to adjust.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

Im hoping that our guys aren't a wild card team. I'm hoping they are a top 3 team in the Pacific and give vegas a run for their money for the rest of the season. I truly think all we are missing is a top 4D and maybe an upgrade on a forward position. The issue I had with your comment was that losing the game in Cgy where even the bookmakers had Cgy favored to win followed by a loss to a good Seattle team (where we didn't play all that well but still had a good chance of winning) shouldn't undo all the good things they have accomplished so far this season. 

Its similar to when we lost in Philly and Tampa and the world was ending for some but then we went on an 8-0-1 run. 

I feel like this is a similar situation. It's too early to say we blew it or to label ourselves as a wildcard team. 

What I do know is that up up to this point, our guys have surpassed all expectations coming  into this season and the hope would be that they can keep it going for as long as possible. 

 

I never said it did, I said top teams bank the points when they play teams below the playoff line and this stretch was a critical stretch where they need to do that.  If they're truly a top team they will ........I think we're seeing them come back to reality.  

 

Over the course of 82 games, I don't see them.as a divisional playoff team, though their great start could put them in the mix.  I'm happy with wildcard

[Dizzle]

On 11/20/2023 at 5:47 PM, stawns said:

But that's not what the discussion was.  The discussion was about this specific 10 game stretch.  I'm happy to discuss the bigger picture, but you jumped into a discussion and took it in a completely unrelated direction.

 

If I remember, you and I actually agree on where we think they are.  I think they are a wild card team and what we've seen in the last 6-8 games indicates that is true.......that they settling into their lane after over achieving in the early part of the season......and that is where almost every single person here thought they'd be.  They had some success early on and people kind of forget where this team really is.......this stretch will give us a better indication of who they are, imo.

I think ‘over achieve’ is a bit of an understatement based on where most of us thought they would be. They flat out blew the doors off the building.

 

While I’m cautious in predicting anything at this point, I also think the statement, ‘people forget where this team really is’ might be a little premature (assuming it means, ‘they’re a borderline wildcard team’). I think it’s fair to say they have - at the very least - earned the right for fans to wait and see if that simply isn’t accurate anymore. 

 

 

[N4ZZY]

On 11/19/2023 at 4:57 PM, Googlie said:

 

Or Suter. Losing our best defensive D-man and our best defensive forward is a tough hill to climb

 

Yeah. Any reports of him coming back?