Canucks Army Postgame: Canucks Show They Certainly Don't *Lack* Guts

Dimitri Filipovic
October 25 2013 09:27PM

Say what you will about the Vancouver and their performance during the 7-game roadtrip (and about people who begin sentences with "say what you will.."), but a 5-1-1 record all things considered is more than impressive. Especially considering the way they capped it off against the Blues with a 3-2 overtime victory. The operative term here is "gutsy", which I'm sure you'll see bandied about on your Twitter timeline, deservedly so.

Read on past the jump for a recap of what went down.

The Story

"Obviously given everything I've just mentioned, it's easy to see why the Blues are considered to be heavy favourites to take care of business in this game. However, let me just say that I wouldn't exactly be stunned if the Canucks put up a better fight than you may think they'd be capable of.. it's sports, and sometimes when something seems to be way too good to be true, it usually is. I'm just sayin'".

That was from the preview of the game which I posted this afternoon. As someone who has followed a variety of sports very closely for years now, I tend to get spooked when everyone and their grandmother talks about how lopsided a game is going to be. I wouldn't have put money on the Canucks winning or anything, but I just put it out there that I could definitely envision a scenario where they surprised people with their showing. I'm glad they made me look like I kinda sorta know what I'm talking about.

At the bottom of that preview was also a recommendation for a bet that would give you 6-to-1 if Ryan Kesler scored a goal and the Canucks won. Well.. he scored two of them (including the power play tally in OT that won the game), giving him 7 on the year now. That means he's now on pace for 44 goals, which would certainly make me (and many others) look silly were it to happen. I was fairly vocal in my opinion that he was more of a 25-goal guy this preseason, pleading with people to temper their expectations and settle down.

Obviously I didn't anticipate that he would be routinely playing in the mid 20's per game, with 54 shots on goal in 13 games to his name. I also didn't expect him to play with the Sedins at 5v5 like he has over the past handful of games. He has been ridiculous, and it's hard to even imagine what kind of shape the Canucks would be in right now wihtout him. I think it speaks to the mentality that has accompanied being a Canucks fan for life that I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop with him. But for now, there's nothing we can do but enjoy the ride..

Before the game I joked that it would be awesome to see John Tortorella pull a Gregg Popovich and send his stars home, conceding the loss in this one. I thought the Sedins actually had their least effective showing of the season in this game heading into the overtime period. I can't remember them generating fewer promising scoring opportunities than they did here, failing to ever really even sustain pressure with the puck possession we've come to expect from them. Hard to blame them though since they played 24 and 25 minutes respectively tonight after having topped 25 minutes last night as well. They must be exhausted. Plus, they played a part in setting up Kesler's winner with just 15 seconds left to go.

What followed the goal was one of the more bizarre endings to a game I've seen in some time.. as soon as Kesler scored David Backes went after Daniel Sedin (while Barrett Jackman went after Kesler), and a scrum ensued. Backes, ever the classy gentleman, finally received some penalty minutes with his misconduct and roughing penalty after it seemed like he could do as he pleased without the worry of a whistle throughout the game.

He blatantly went after Tom Sestito following a whistle in the 3rd period, and went down like a sack of potatoes to draw a penalty on Bieksa (which led to the 1st goal for the Blues) late in the 2nd. I'd love to hear what was going through his head when he went after Daniel on that play, but I doubt we'll here from him since he probably had to rush home to check on Kelly following the conclusion of the game. After all, Ryan Kesler is in town..

As for the newcomers, Pelletier and Archibald, I thought they were as effective as you could have hoped for in their season debut. That 4th line along with Yannick Weber actually had a couple of decent shifts, which pretty much instantly makes it the best showing from a Canucks 4th line that we've seen all year. Burrows is set to come back so we'll probably see one of them get sent back down, and I hope it's not Archibald, who I think has the potential to be a very serviceable depth forward at the NHL level.

The Numbers


Image via Extra Skater .

As you see by the shot attempt totals the Canucks were actually more than holding their through, oh I'd say, the first 30-35 minutes of the game. After that their heavy legs decided to really show, and by the end of the game you could tell they were just trying to hang on for dear life.

Which brings us to Eddie Lack, who was once again very solid. He stopped 22 of 24 shots he faced, and is surely showing both the Canucks brass and their fans that he can be relied upon to spell Roberto Luongo from time to time and avoid forcing the 34-year old to start more than somewhere between 60 and 65 games. 

As for the power play opportunity situation, the Canucks only drew 2 of them again in this one (one of which was a 4-minute minor that drew blood on a high stick). I highly doubt that the league is "against them", but it's hard not to take issue with the 2 infractions they were whistled for themselves late in the 2nd period when they're not getting any of those calls themselves. 

My one issue with Tortorella coming out of this game is why he didn't utilize the Higgins-Santorelli-Kassian combination more throughout the game. He started the game with Richardson on that line, but by the 2nd period Kassian was back up there and they were back to getting up to stuff. I really like that combination and think they have a chance to be effective. Kassian needs to stay out of the penalty box, and getting into a fight doesn't exactly help with that. Burrows' return to could put a wrench in those plans, though. Oh well.

7482b25b962fb1661ea9028fb4e0db36
Dimitri Filipovic writes about hockey on the internet, and is the Managing Editor of Canucks Army. You can follow him on Twitter @DimFilipovic, and email him at dimitri.filipovic@gmail.com.
Avatar
#1 DCR
October 25 2013, 09:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
18
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Dominating, as in being hemmed in their own end repeatedly by a scratch fourth line of two AHL'ers and a fringe NHL D-man?

St. Louis dominated parts of the game, but you can't justifiably argue that it was a "dominant performance."

Avatar
#2 PB
October 25 2013, 09:49PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
17
props

@NM00

THERE'S the Eeyore we all know and love!

Avatar
#3 The Voice In The Dark
October 26 2013, 02:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
15
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

So when the Canucks beat the Oilers, you were quick to jump on them beating a 'depleted Oilers squad' (or something to that effect). But when the depleted Canucks squad beats a well-rested, fully manned STL (considered by many to be an elite team), it's a "dominating performance by St Louis..."

A dominating performance by St Louis would have been a 6-2 STL win. Call this what it was. A decent performance by VAN, finding a way to win a game they probably shouldn't have won.

Personally, I think coaching played a big role in this win and the record on the road trip.

Avatar
#4 pheenster
October 25 2013, 11:42PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
14
props
S and M wrote:

The Canucks need to realize that the Blues are good but not quite there yet. The real standard lies with teams like Chicago, Boston, LA, San jose, Avs, Pens. The bar is much higher than what I see coming from the Canucks. If you can't beat those teams convincingly , you got no chance to win the cup. There's no such thing as a lucky champ.

You lost all credibility when you included the Avs in that statement.

Avatar
#5 DCR
October 25 2013, 09:45PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
13
props

Ugly OT win, but I'll take it. They worked hard for it and were running on the memory of fumes.

Avatar
#6 Ruprecht
October 25 2013, 10:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
11
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Irrespective of performance, another Win by the Canucks.

Avatar
#7 antro
October 25 2013, 10:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
11
props

@NM00:

Given that the Canucks had played the night before, and have 4 regular forwards injured, including 2/3 top 6 (depending on how you count), it was a piss-poor performance by St. L. They couldn't get on the board until they were gifted a two man advantage. They only opened up a fenwick advantage in the third. I don't know if anyone is counting scoring chances, but I don't think they got as many as they should have given the Canucks' fatigue. No doubt Backes' shenanigans at the end were motivated by his embarrassment.

Btw, when do we get to dig up what you wrote over the summer about Gillis' moves with guys like Santorelli and Stanton?

Probably not a dominant performance... ;)

Avatar
#8 orcasfan
October 25 2013, 09:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
10
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

That was true as far as zone time was concerned. But, given how the shots were almost level, I wouldn't call the St Louis performance exactly dominating. I think Vancouver played perfectly to the game plan laid out by Torts, and pounced on their opportunities.

Avatar
#9 Nolan
October 26 2013, 07:28AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
10
props

@Surrey Bob

I didn't know you could get cable at trailer parks.

Avatar
#10 PB
October 25 2013, 09:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
9
props

@NM00

I think I'd see it as more dominating if Lack had to stand on his head to win this one for the Canucks. For the first 40 minutes St. Louis looked rusty, as most teams with a week off might. Not particularly dominant, especially against the semi-NHL team Vancouver iced.

Avatar
#11 andyg
October 25 2013, 10:14PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
9
props

@NM00

Wrong

Go get glasses.

Avatar
#12 Mitch
October 25 2013, 11:27PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
8
props

@Surrey Bob

I wouldn't call it "choking", so much as "gutting out a win even though your legs refuse to move because you're playing your third ot game in the last four days and the guys you're playing have had six days worth of rest and this run-on sentence stopped making sense like fifteen words ago".

Seriously, I'd straight up call it that.

Avatar
#13 Ronan
October 26 2013, 08:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
8
props

It was a good game!

Avatar
#14 Ukeerob
October 26 2013, 01:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
8
props

The negativity here, except for a few,is ridiculous. The Canucks gutted out a win, ugly or not, at the end of a long road trip. StL was well rested and we were playing back to back games. We gave up a 2 goal lead but managed to get the second point in overtime. End of story. Sad how many of you twist everything around to seem hopeless. Your wives must love it when you come home, at least those that don't live in your mother's basement.

Avatar
#15 5mintuesinthebox
October 26 2013, 02:45PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
8
props
NM00 wrote:

"the Canucks did what they had to do to win."

You mean show up to the rink for a scheduled work day?

"Say anything you want but this was just a gutsy win"

I didn't know 'gusty' was a synonym for 'luck'.

"Admit it, youre impressed"

The only impressive performance the Canucks have had this season was last Saturday afternoon.

We are all Canucks...

How is it luck? The Canucks controlled play for 2 periods, and then the Blues were given a 2 man advantage on 2 calls that shouldnt even have been called. So if anyone was lucky it was the Blues. Without that 2 man advantage the Canucks win this game regulation by 2.

They did what they had to do to win. Weathering the storm through a 3rd period where they looked totally gassed, and then taking over play in overtime.

All of this on the tail end of a brutal road trip, missing what would constitute a 2nd line, with a 4th line of AHLers, and their back up goalie.

You can be as pessimistic as you wanna be. Disappoint will do that to a guy. Im just going to sit back and enjoy this one.

Avatar
#16 5minutesinhebox
October 26 2013, 05:41AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
7
props

@NM00

In the 3rd period yes. But the Canucks did what they had to do to win. These 5-3 killed their moment but they had owed play to that point. Yeah they were holding on for dear life in the 3rd (and Lack very impressive). Say anything you want but this was just a gutsy win. During this trip they showed they can roll with the big boys, outplaying Pitt and gutting this one out on the end of a ridiculous road trip.

Admit it, youre impressed

Avatar
#17 5minutesinhebox
October 26 2013, 02:31PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
7
props
S and M wrote:

The Canucks need to realize that the Blues are good but not quite there yet. The real standard lies with teams like Chicago, Boston, LA, San jose, Avs, Pens. The bar is much higher than what I see coming from the Canucks. If you can't beat those teams convincingly , you got no chance to win the cup. There's no such thing as a lucky champ.

Actually that is completely untrue. Luck plays a big part in winning the cup, or even getting there. Injuries, having your team hit its stride at the right time (see LA), getting lucky enough to win a round you probably shouldnt have (see Boston vs Tampa and Toronto).

I love how all of the sudden the Avs are elite. 10 games into the season and they are the team to beat? The Blues are probably the toughest team in the league to play against. They wont over power you with offence but their team defence transition game is excellent.

Considering the Canucks were on the end of a ridiculous road trip, being short an entire line, having a 4th line made up of AHLers (who played great), and it took the Blues a 2 man advantage to get back into the game, this was easily the Canucks most gutsy effort this season.

Good teams find a way to win. Its that simple. It doesnt need to be pretty all of the time, but you dont go 5-1-1 on a road trip just being lucky.

Avatar
#18 JFR
October 26 2013, 02:33PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
7
props

I think it's time for Torts to take a fine from the league and blow up at the refs for their calls vs the Canucks and non-calls for their opponents. Every time I watch an opposing teams broadcast they talk about the Canucks "reputation" for diving and cheap shots.... It's bS and it seems the refs have bought into it. Take the fine and put a spot light on the refs. The retribution won't be much because the opposition has double the PPs already. Guess with all that puck possession time the Nucks never get held tripped or interfered with. Ridiculous!

Avatar
#19 Josh
October 26 2013, 04:36PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
7
props

@Hard Puck City

The Avalanche won the cup 12 and 17 years ago.... Outside of having Roy and Sakic as coach and GM, and the uniforms, I'm going to say there's basically nothing connecting these Avs to those Avs.

Avatar
#20 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:34PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
6
props

@DCR

The Canucks had 62% of the shot attempts at 5 on 5.

http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-10-25-canucks-blues

That's a dominating performance.

Avatar
#21 Ruprecht
October 28 2013, 12:22PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
6
props
Hard Puck City wrote:

The team I cheer for has won at least one cup. And you cheer for a team that will never win one. Competitive team? You're not talking about the Canucks, are you? Cause what they do can't be considered competitive, it is called " wasting people's time".

Just as I figured...again. No answer, nothing of substance just hiding behind insults and name calling, pure cowardice. Let me know when you are at least brave enough to admit to all of the people you take pleasure in annoying here who you cheer for. Until then, I know you, I've met you many times and it's always an exercise in tolerance.

That's about the last you hear from me kid, unless you want to come over to the Island and have a beer and watch a game and jaw a little at a real person.(OPEN INVITE FOR YOU ONLY) Or you surprise everybody and come up with something intelligent to discuss. Maturity comes a little later for some. But, good luck to that team you cheer for...that nameless team that has won a cup at least once, the one so proud of cheering for you always forget the name and find yourself back here. LOL, LOL, LOL.

Avatar
#22 Ted
October 26 2013, 12:58AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
+1
5
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Hey! Look everyone! Everyone's favorite troll came out to play! Everyone, say hello to Moron00!

Avatar
#23 pheenster
October 26 2013, 02:13AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
5
props
S and M wrote:

Why? Because the Av's won two Stanley Cups before and they have a better record than the Canucks so far? I lost credibility with you? Hahaha. You lost all logic with me with that reply.

It's funny how so many of you say that it's not the whole time the franchise but the current standing that counts. Well, had I said the Canucks have been bad since they came into the league, I'm sure you would say " it's a new management, you can't count all those other years Canucks have sucked." Ok, now when the AV's are playing better than the Canucks since the start of this season somehow that don't mean the AV's are any good? Shall Say that the AV's have two cups and the Canucks have none? Or will that make me lose credibility with you? The Canucks have sucked since 46 years ago, and they still suck now. Can you understand that or do I have to make a chart for ya?

If you wanted to prove that you're a moron, you could have typed a lot less.

Avatar
#24 Senrik Hedin
October 26 2013, 11:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
5
props

Probably should talk about Kesler as a RW. Torts clearly did not like Kesler's tendency to go one on one (or one on two often) by himself as a centre to get a shot way on the rush. If you rcall, AV also expressed this somewhat impetuously in a media scrum, prompting Kesler to retort that AV should tell it to his face.

By moving Kesler to the wing, Torts is effectively taking that out of that individual game, forcing him to use his strength as a puck retriever, protecting the puck, playing around the net and getting in position to shoot, rather than creating by himself.

Granted AV probably couldn't do this due to lack of depth in the middle (not that this team is deep in the middle), but having Santorelli and Richardson certain helps.

Canucks brass often reminisced about that time when Kesler played wing to Sundin, so I'm sure they welcome this change.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Burrows comes back. Will Torts go back to one of the best lines in the NHL with Burr and twins or stick with BeastModo? I tend to think the latter, but it probably depends actually on not Kesler or Burrows play, but Santorelli's.

For all of MG's mistakes in the past, add Santorelli and Richardson to the good side of his resume. But it's still too early to see if either or both could bring their game consistently. I have been quite skeptical of Santorelli so far, but certainly looks to be a Wellwoodian find.

Avatar
#25 Senrik Hedin
October 26 2013, 03:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
5
props

The dichotomy of opinions here appears to be a reflection of different perspectives in life rather than any observation of a hockey team haha

Avatar
#26 Nolan
October 26 2013, 05:11PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
5
props

@GeezMoney

He also has very intelligent and witty responses. Ha!

What I find amusing is that for someone who hates the canucks and all of their fans so much, this TPT spends an awful amount of time watching the games and reading and replying to our comments. Must be pretty lonely over there in his trailer. Wait... holy crap, they have Internet in the trailer parks now too?

Avatar
#27 Nanodummy
October 26 2013, 09:02PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
5
props

To those who think the Avs are a truly elite team, who'd like to bet $100 dollars they finish ahead of the Canucks this year?

Avatar
#28 Nolan
October 28 2013, 01:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
5
props

@Ruprecht

Well said, sir.

Hard puck is probably a leafs fan. Won the cup at least once... but not since 67'. Now that's a successful team!!! Haha

Avatar
#29 NM00
October 25 2013, 09:33PM
Trash it!
32
trashes
+1
4
props

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Avatar
#30 GeezMoney
October 25 2013, 10:30PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
4
props

No David Booth, no problem. Another win?

And Santorelli once again looked great. I also felt that Kassian had a really good first half of the game but faded as the game went along. Forgiveable under the circumstances.

A win is a win. Especially after a long road trip against a great team, in a building most aren't expecting you to win in.

Avatar
#31 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:40PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
4
props

@antro

"Btw, when do we get to dig up what you wrote over the summer about Gillis' moves with guys like Santorelli and Stanton?"

You may dig it up now.

And while you're at it, dig up where you thought those guys were going to play big roles...

I'll gladly give Gillis credit for those moves, though.

At the least, hopefully the Canucks won't have to trade assets for a rental on the way to a 1st round loss vs LA or SJ...

Avatar
#32 Senrik Hedin
October 26 2013, 10:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
4
props

Impressed with Lack. Tracked the puck well all game and was in good position for the most part especially considering he hasn't played much hockey in the past year and this season.

Blues controlled the play for the most part, and had a couple of lucky bounces go our way, but considering the circumstances, a gutsy effort to get the two points. Really thought we could get blown out considering how the Blues have been playing.

Certainly not our best effort, but glad with a 5-1-1 road trip.

Avatar
#33 NM00
October 26 2013, 01:40PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
4
props

@Ted

Something tells me you think January 7, 2012 was game 8 vs Boston...

Avatar
#34 Ruprecht
October 26 2013, 03:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
4
props
JFR wrote:

I think it's time for Torts to take a fine from the league and blow up at the refs for their calls vs the Canucks and non-calls for their opponents. Every time I watch an opposing teams broadcast they talk about the Canucks "reputation" for diving and cheap shots.... It's bS and it seems the refs have bought into it. Take the fine and put a spot light on the refs. The retribution won't be much because the opposition has double the PPs already. Guess with all that puck possession time the Nucks never get held tripped or interfered with. Ridiculous!

Not while we're winning. Besides, it's fruitless to take your gripes with the league out through the press and has historically done more bad for teams than good. Send a tastefully packaged video to prove your case, ask them to look into it and move on. We earned the reputation, now we have to earn our way out of it. From what I've seen this year I think we're well on the way to doing that.

Avatar
#35 GeezMoney
October 26 2013, 04:37PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
4
props
Surrey Bob wrote:

COMMENT REMOVED

Record broken, but he keeps playing that song. That song, that song THAT SONG!!!

(Must be an Oilers fan, if he likes broken records!)

Avatar
#36 GeezMoney
October 26 2013, 05:01PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
4
props

@S and M

Well, the Avs are playing really well. But so are the Blues, so your point, like spoiled milk, lacks consistency.

Then again you're here to trololol, so there is that as well.

Avatar
#37 andyg
October 25 2013, 10:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
3
props

@NM00

Wrong

Go get glasses.

Avatar
#38 Ted
October 26 2013, 12:57AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
3
props
Mitch wrote:

I wouldn't call it "choking", so much as "gutting out a win even though your legs refuse to move because you're playing your third ot game in the last four days and the guys you're playing have had six days worth of rest and this run-on sentence stopped making sense like fifteen words ago".

Seriously, I'd straight up call it that.

That's OK. English is Surrey Bob's second language and it shows. He makes you look like a genius.

Avatar
#39 Hard Puck City
October 26 2013, 06:07AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
+1
3
props

@5minutesinhebox

Yeah, man, just admit that you're impressed when you're not impressed. Hahahahahaha! He wants you to admit that this regular season win is the rule, not the exception. Cause we all know the Canucks are as reliable in the post season as a broken condom.

Avatar
#40 NM00
October 26 2013, 09:04AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
3
props

@The Voice In The Dark

There's a pretty big difference between Edmonton without their top 2 centres (and Ottawa for large stretches of last year, for example) and the Canucks without three top 9 wingers.

And where exactly did I "jump" on the Canucks for the performance against Edmonton?

I suggested people calm down after the Canucks were dominating play against the Oilers and Calgary and, you know, wait until their is some better comp...

St Louis controlled play at 5 on 5 against a tired/thin Canucks group.

Vancouver (without Burrows) controlled play at 5 on 5 against a Penguins team without Letang, Neal & Bennett last Saturday.

A performance for which I gave the Canucks full marks, by the way.

Shockingly, the groupthink homers on here can't stop foaming at the mouth long enough to see the parallels between the St Louis game and the Pittsburgh game...

The Canucks won a game last night in which they were outplayed.

Last Sunday the Blue Jackets won a game in which they were outplayed.

So it goes...

Avatar
#41 tomfiSh
October 26 2013, 09:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props

Question, When is Tom Sestito gonna get some love on this site??

I was somewhat vocal in the comments a few weeks back about how i thought people were being too quick to write him off as an AHL plug.

He easily had his best game as a Canucks last night. He played over 11 minutes, threw some hits (1 massive hit on Oshie), pushed play forward all game with good dump ins and board play, and of course got in a fight (with Ryan Reaves no less).

With the 4th line in flux the Nucks really needed him to step up and play with some purpose, like an NHL hockey player, and he did that last night.

I think it's time for some people to eat their words a bit.

Against a big tough St.Louis team, Sestito looked great. I think he provides some real bite in these types of "gutsy" games.

Avatar
#42 pheenster
October 26 2013, 10:14AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
+1
3
props
S and M wrote:

If you didn't want to sound like a double standards - two faced - hypocrite, you could have not typed anything at all.

Stay in school, kids.

Avatar
#43 The Voice In The Dark
October 26 2013, 01:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props

The Canucks certainly didn't play that well throughout every game of the monster trip, but the important thing is that they found ways to win games they shouldn't have.

Going 5-1-1 on the trip, with the injuries and PP differential, etc., and grinding out a win against the well-rested 'elite' Blues (despite being outplayed in the third) are all good signs. And things are only going to get better from here on, with the players coming back from injuries and fully adjusting to Torts' system.

I've never put a lot of stock into the first 20 games of any season, but the points we're picking up here certainly won't hurt.

Avatar
#44 NM00
October 26 2013, 06:18PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
+1
3
props
Ted wrote:

It be flattering if he was just a pessimist. NoMind00 is a negative bitch and I don't think life has been too kind to him. I just hope he goes off and becomes a 'fan' of some other team. He claims to be a Canucks fan - the Canuck haters are more positive than turd00.

While I find your rage amusing...

"Comments are moderated. Pretend your mom is reading over your shoulder."

Avatar
#45 5mintuesinthebox
October 26 2013, 06:24PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
3
props

@S and M

Well you are simply wrong if you think luck does not play a part in winning a cup. Completely and utterly. You think you understand what Im talking about but you clearly are missing the point. Ask any NHL coach or player and they will tell you there is luck involved in winning a cup. I have heard it thousand times. Key players get injured, team doesnt gel, a team rides an all of the sudden how goalie to wins over a superior team, bad penaity calls costing a team games, In playoffs anything can and does happen, and not all of it is related to how skilled the two teams facing considered before it started.

Luck isnt the be all end all, and I never implied it was. Of course it takes skill to win the Cup, thanks for pointing that out Capt Obvious. But there is luck involved whether you think so or not

"Your idea of luck in pro sports as a big reason why the cup is won is false and it cheapens their accomplishments. "

What the hell does this even mean?

Avatar
#46 Ruprecht
October 27 2013, 10:30AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
+1
3
props
Hard Puck City wrote:

Mr. Roy came to the Av's this time as a coach and changed the culture of the team. As a player, Roy could not stand losing, he wants his players that way as well.

The Canucks, on the other hand and their fanboys don't mind losing, make excuses for losing, compare themselves to crappier teams whenever they lose, blame someone else when they lose or simply ignore the fact that they lost because they won;t do what it takes to win. The Canucks simply don't care if they lose, they CAN stand it, their fans tolerate it, they brush it aside, accept it and are proud of it. The Canucks are a 'brand', a mascot..anything but a real competitive team that hates losing.

The best part about being a Canuck fan is they are nothing like that team you cheer for. You know, the team that's so pathetic that they drove you here for kicks, because they can't provide you the entertainment and excitement that cheering against the Canucks provides. The team that makes you waste your time here daily, the team that disappointed you sooooo much that you had to go underground acting like a 12 year old under the guise of Hard Puck City.....Just so everybody is clear here and you have the opportunity to show you have a spine, WHAT IS THE NAME OF THAT TEAM AGAIN?

Avatar
#47 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:36PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
+1
2
props

@Ruprecht

True.

But if we're going to praise the performance against Pittsburgh (without Letang, Neal and Bennett by the way), the performance by St Louis also deserves praise...

Avatar
#48 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 01:10AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
+1
2
props

@Ted

Ah, 'No Standards Teddy'. Still trying to get other people to HAVE NO STANDARDS...WHAT A SHOCK. LMFAO

Avatar
#49 S and M
October 26 2013, 01:17AM
Trash it!
10
trashes
+1
2
props

@pheenster

Why? Because the Av's won two Stanley Cups before and they have a better record than the Canucks so far? I lost credibility with you? Hahaha. You lost all logic with me with that reply.

It's funny how so many of you say that it's not the whole time the franchise but the current standing that counts. Well, had I said the Canucks have been bad since they came into the league, I'm sure you would say " it's a new management, you can't count all those other years Canucks have sucked." Ok, now when the AV's are playing better than the Canucks since the start of this season somehow that don't mean the AV's are any good? Shall Say that the AV's have two cups and the Canucks have none? Or will that make me lose credibility with you? The Canucks have sucked since 46 years ago, and they still suck now. Can you understand that or do I have to make a chart for ya?

Avatar
#50 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 02:50AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
+1
2
props

@The Voice In The Dark

It's called " hypocrisy "...something the fanboys here have in abundance. But if you counter their argument, they will call you a "troll" or an " Oilers fan ". The fanboys will look for anything to blame for their teams ailments. It's the refs faults, Bettman, the rules, the big bad Bruins, the schedule, the Oilers. It's never the team, their fat useless GM, the Sedins, Luongo, the scouts.

Just look at 'No standards Teddy', he's the epitome of low self esteem and low aim. These folks aim for nothing, and are proud of everything.And Rogers Arena is full of these failure appreciating and failure deserving tools. Mark your calender. The Canucks will reach 50 years without having won anything. People who plant crap will always harvest crap.

Comments are closed for this article.