It Was Nice While it Lasted
Two comments on the Canucks 6-0 loss to the Minnesota Wild tonight.
1) That was one of the worst performances I've ever seen from a hockey team. Only a handful of players looked interested and even they were merely adequate. Big party last night? Team has the flu? Minnesota poisons the visiting team's water supply?
2) The 'new nhl' and the crackdown on obstruction isn't going to last. In fact, it's already not lasting. You could actually see, as the game progressed, the Vancouver players catching on that if Minnesota was getting away with hooking and holding and obstructing them, they might as well do it in return, and they did. And, by and large, they got away with it too.
True, the Canucks were awful, but from what I saw, the Wild strategy was to sit back, play a boring defensive game and rely on goaltending, clutching and grabbing and counter-attacking to succeed and their plan worked perfectly. In other words, I hope you liked the 2003-04 NHL because it's going to be back real soon.
1) That was one of the worst performances I've ever seen from a hockey team. Only a handful of players looked interested and even they were merely adequate. Big party last night? Team has the flu? Minnesota poisons the visiting team's water supply?
2) The 'new nhl' and the crackdown on obstruction isn't going to last. In fact, it's already not lasting. You could actually see, as the game progressed, the Vancouver players catching on that if Minnesota was getting away with hooking and holding and obstructing them, they might as well do it in return, and they did. And, by and large, they got away with it too.
True, the Canucks were awful, but from what I saw, the Wild strategy was to sit back, play a boring defensive game and rely on goaltending, clutching and grabbing and counter-attacking to succeed and their plan worked perfectly. In other words, I hope you liked the 2003-04 NHL because it's going to be back real soon.
posted by Declan at
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
7 Comments:
Nice to see the 'nucks expose the Wild's explosive offense
Gaaah.
The franchise lost crediblity when McCammon gassed Burkie.
By
deaner, at 12:22 PM
The Wild's offense is terrible. It took an incredibly weak effort from the Canucks D (Jovanovski excepted) to allow Minnesota to score 6. It wouldn't shock me if they go the rest of the season without scoring 6 again (although if the Canucks don't shape up, they'll do it again on Friday)
Still, the problem wasn't the GM. The current players are capable of much better, they just didn't show it last night (for some reason).
Not that Burke won't be missed, but it will take a year or two for those effects to start being really felt.
By
Declan, at 4:41 PM
If the Canucks aren't above .500 at the middle of the season, Mark Crawford is going to get fired. In an act of desperation, they'll probably get Mike Keenan back, and he'll bring Messier out of retirement. It will take another ten years for them to repair the damage after that!
But seriously, the Canucks' power play is horrible, which is going to cost them many more games if they can't get that straightened out.
They also have to get rid of Cloutier, I can't see the Canucks winning a Stanley Cup with him in net with the way that he's playing.
By
Anonymous, at 12:27 AM
"The Wild's offense is terrible...."
Yeah - that was my point; most teams couldn't find a way to let the Wild pop in six. Truely pathetic - it will be interesting to see how they do tonight.
"Still, the problem wasn't the GM..."
Oh no, I didn't mean to suggest that it was - Nonis has essentially re-assembled the same group that Burkie had together for the last season, plus or minus some fringe guys due to cap limits or free-agency wierdness. I think Nonis is pretty capable in his own right, but so far he has done nothing to put his personal mark on the team; for practical purposes, this is still Burkie's team.
The problem was an ownership and attitude that would let a pissant little bean-counting fartcatcher fire the best GM in the league, a GM who has forgotten more hockey knowledge than the entire ownership group has any hope of ever learning, and who had assembled a pretty good team on the (relative) cheap after rescuing those same owners from the disaster they created in their last attempt to run the team without adult supervision.
By
deaner, at 9:10 AM
One feature of the salary cap and new CBA is having very little movement of free agents or player trades. It'll be tough to find someone better than Cloutier. The bummer is that I like the guy, but he's at his best when he gets angry, and he's been told to keep that in check. Idjits. Still, looks like Auld is maturing nicely...
The 'Nucks do this now and again - it's like they have to get all the piss-poor play for the week out of their system at one time, then get back to normal. Hope so, anyways.
We'll see tonight1!
By
Thursday, at 9:21 AM
The power play was bad against the Wild but otherwise it hasn't looked bad (IMO).
I'm more worried about depth on D than Cloutier, but having said that, I wouldn't place any money on the Canucks winning the cup as long as he is the #1 guy here. The cap will neutralize any advantage the Canucks could gain from their rabid support here (for example: buying up expensive free agent goalies), but it will put lots of money in the owner's pockets no matter how the team does, so I guess we can all be thankful for that.
Dean, don't get me wrong, I think we all agree that the way Burke was run out of town was shameful, I just didn't see how that was relevant to the debacle vs. Minnesota.
In truth, it's a long season, and one lousy game by the Canucks doesn't bother me that much. What made me sad was seeing how soon and how easily the 'new' NHL was going to turn back into the old NHL.
By
Declan, at 2:05 PM
"I just didn't see how that was relevant to the debacle vs. Minnesota."
No - it wasn't relevant to the Minnie game; it applied equally to the Detroit game or Edmonton. I think the franchise lost a lot of credibility when the Weasel did that, is all.
"...and one lousy game by the Canucks doesn't bother me that much."
I wouldn't be worried except that it would be nice to see "one lousy game" after ten or fifteen good games, or after three or four really strong games in a stretch of ten or twelve fair-to-average games. The way they were bad is a bit of a concern as well: the apathy and lack of effort is not a good indicator.
On the other hand, I don't care the way I would have the year before last; after the Weasel gunned Burkie I decided that if they wee going to be fair-weather owners, I am entitled to be a fair-weather fan!
By
deaner, at 2:52 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home