October 17 2012 11:05AM
Last week I took a look at what Milan Lucic was. If teams are trying so hard to re-create him, I think we need to learn exactly what Lucic is. I concluded the hulking former Vancouver Giant was a fundamentally-flawed hockey player, and the perception of his talent varies year-to-year which, creates a crisis of expectation. You just don't know what you'll get each year out of Lucic scoring-wise, but he's a tremendously-effective forward.
His beat-em down game, while ugly to watch, works. He's a plus possession player who helps his team generate shots and chances. It's the conversion ratio that's a little off. His PDO, which has ranged from 977 to 1045 throughout his career, is volatile and unpredictable. Is that what we can expect out of the great power forwards?
October 15 2012 04:19PM
Headshots are a Canucks Army feature where we link to the day's freshest news, and other assorted Canucks web-goodies. If you've written a blogpost, produced a tribute video, birthed a clever .gif into existence, or have a hockey related cause that you'd like to see promoted in this space - please e-mail Thom at firstname.lastname@example.org
October 09 2012 09:59AM
The times that we, as a blogosphere, spend searching for "the next Milan Lucic" may be better off understanding who the first Milan Lucic is. He's a relevant topic of conversation, since he is generally the first player brought up in those insane "the Canucks need to draft more Giants" discussions.
And why not? Lucic is 6'4", 200 lbs and a legitimate crazy person on the ice. He's scored 56 goals over the last two seasons, hits everything that moves and fits the rugged "bull-in-a-china-shop" descriptor. But just what the heck is so valuable about Milan Lucic that makes him such a desirable, and rare, character?
For that, I think we need to look a bit more at Lucic's history.
October 05 2012 12:29PM
I was doing some reading today and came across this quote from one Mark Spector:
For example, you'll never have come to an agreement with a member of the Vancouver Canucks organization about that team's propensity for diving or referee baiting.
For familiar Canucks Army readers, you may recall that that doesn't seem quite right. There is at least one published example of at least one member of the Vancouver Canucks calling out his team for diving and referee baiting:
October 02 2012 06:43AM
Something this blog has yet to ever have, a genuine reflection of Anson Carter. Sure, there have been mentions, but there's a point to be made about Carter being the legitimate difference between the Dave Nonis and Mike Gillis iterations of the Vancouver Canucks organization.