| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
doublechamp7
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
278 Posts |
 Posted - 04/02/2011 : 08:25:58
|
Poll Question:
Everyone knows what the Canucks have done in the last 2 years in the playoffs. I'm sceptical of how good they can do despite their presidents trophy win this year. Can the canucks finally make themselves a playoff team and get past the second round this year? Please don't say they will win the cup just because you like them.
Bring back the Jets!
|
|
Edited by - willus3 on 04/06/2011 09:12:57
|
|
|
Dastardly Bastard
Top Prospect
22 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2011 : 06:14:29
|
I wonder who (beans) voted the Canucks (beans) would be out (beans) in the 1st round?
I don't (beans) want to name names (beans) but I have my suspicions (beans). |
 |
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 14:36:34
|
Wow – we're now up to four people who responded that the Canucks would be bounced in the first round.
I would take bets from anyone who thinks the Canucks will lose in the first round. Do these voters actually believe this, or is this just stirring up the pot?
I'm sure some of this information has been stated before, but here's where the Canucks sit right now:
• 1st place overall (Home ice advantage guaranteed for the entire playoffs)
• 1st in goals scored
• 1st in goals against
• Most wins by a goalie: Roberto Luongo
• Art Ross Trophy Winner: Daniel Sedin
• Most dominating line in hockey
• Top team on the power play
• One of the top two teams on the penalty kill
I could go on and on, and I'm not even a Canucks fan. But I am a hockey fan, and the Canucks are a very good hockey team, probably the best team in the NHL right now. If you're a betting man, you have to consider them a the favourite to beat whoever they play in the first round of the playoffs, which looks to be either Chicago or Anaheim.
I know upsets happen, and that's why the President's Trophy winner does not usually win the cup, especially considering that you have to win four rounds of the most grueling hockey to do so. Three out of the past ten cup winners won the President's Trophy, and if you go back the past 24 seasons, seven President's Trophy winners have gone on to win the cup. 30% odds is pretty good actually. Can anyone show me that finishing in 2nd place overall or 5th place overall is any better? |
|
|
|
ryan93
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
996 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 14:55:56
|
| In the other thread i voted that the Canucks would win the Cup, so obviously i'm not expecting them to go out in the first round. But that said, it wouldn't really shock me either if they were upset. In all likelihood, they are going to play a team in the first round who have 45 wins & 100 points. You don't have to look any further than last season playoffs, in particular the Eastern Conference where the top 3 seeded teams were all upset in the opening round. |
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 15:35:01
|
Yes, I agree that it wouldn't be shocking for the Canucks to lose in the first round. I think it's unlikely, but not impossible. I just wouldn't bet on it happening, at least not with even odds.
Looking back at the last 15 NHL seasons, the President's Trophy winner was knocked out in the first round five times, which shows that it happens. And especially recently, with Washington being bounced by Montreal last year, and San Jose getting upset by Anaheim in 2009.
It just doesn't happen more than 50% of the time. Better teams usually win, and to prove this point, take a look at how many teams below 5th in their conference go on to win the Stanley Cup. And that's why they call it an upset when it happens. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 19:40:07
|
A first round loss would not be as much of an upset as in years past, with more parity in the NHL now, the difference between first and 8th is not much. As Ryan says, we're probably playing a team that has 40+ wins and nearly 100 pts, so its not like they're slouches.
That being said, a first round loss would be perceived to be a massive failure in Vancouver, and would no doubt result in changes. I can only speculate, but I would think that AV would be done as coach, and MG might be done as GM. There would be shakeups with some players. Sedin's, Kesler, Luongo, and a few dmen would be safe. Everyone else would be looked at. It would be such a catastrophic finish to the season, and there would have to be a monumental collapse to cause it that would result in a lot of finger pointing.
The good news though, is that the core of this team will be together for another year at least - there will be no Chicago "fire sale" this offseason. Edler's contract is the first to expire after next season, and then there are no key expiries until the Sedin's 4 years from now. So should they lose first round, there would be time to keep the core together and build the supporting cast again. |
|
|
|
Guest8842
( )
|
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 20:55:07
|
| Looks like they're against Chicago and it's going to be the same result, Hawks in 6. |
|
|
|
Guest8842
( )
|
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 20:56:24
|
| Chicago will sweep them. |
|
|
|
Guest4607
( )
|
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 21:03:03
|
| Flames in 7 games when the make the playoff's |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 23:07:52
|
LOL guest 8842.....Am i drunk or something? I could have sworn i just read that you predicted Chicago to defeat Vancouver in 6 ("again"). Yet, just 77 seconds later, you predict a Chicago sweep! Does wonders for your credibility my friend! 
Nux....I've said it before, i'll say it again. There are no gimme's like there were in the past! A decade ago, a #1 was dominant over a #8 and often swept. Nowadays, 8 seeds can win! I can only hope the Canucks play as well as they have during the regular season. If they do, they likely cannot be defeated in a 7 game series!
IF they do lose early (round1 or 2), i agree AV "could" be gone. However, i don't think Gillis is going anywhere. Although i've always said the coach isn't as much to blame as some think, it could be percieved that it's time for a change there. MG doesn't deserve the blame when he's helped build a team that runs away with the President's trophy and then struggles in the post season. |
|
|
|
Guest2512
( )
|
Posted - 04/05/2011 : 03:46:48
|
| Vancouver will always carry the "choker" tag, this year will be no different. |
|
|
|
Oilearl
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
268 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2011 : 09:45:14
|
| Canucks do have a history that causes the above comments to exist. They are a solid regular season team with a definate SJ shark comparison to shake. IMHO it's their western coference to lose this year. If Malholtra was healthy I would be forced to accept them as potential cup winners. Now their are teams that can beat them in the lower seeds. |
|
|
|
doublechamp7
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
278 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2011 : 13:06:24
|
I find these results quite interesting, out of 112 votes, 80 say either 1st round knockout or Stanley Cup, I think it probably will be either or, or possibly a second round defeat. If they can get over the 3rd round hump, they will have the confidence to win it all.
Bring back the Jets! |
|
|
|
Guest7443
( )
|
Posted - 04/05/2011 : 22:12:34
|
| Vancouver is definately ready for the playoffs after their terrific 2 game effort against the leagues worst team. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2011 : 22:41:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7443
Vancouver is definately ready for the playoffs after their terrific 2 game effort against the leagues worst team.
Yeah, prob a good thing they won't be drawing the Oilers in round one!
On a more serious level, they do say teams tend to coast once they've wrapped up their spot (one which can't change), but that's pretty dangerous. I sure hope they can turn it on when needed, cuz i don't wanna see them glide into the playoffs on a 4 game losing streak and with just two games left, it's possible.
I wonder if individually, guys play a little more cautiuosly in a hope to stay healthy? I'm not saying they particularly "coast", but maybe not do some of the little things they normally would? Things like, shot blocking, going into the corner, etc?
Just a thought more than anything. I'm not trying to make excuses for them, because really, there's no excuse for losing to the worst team in the leauge in back to back games! The Canucks simply haven't played well! |
|
|
|
Guest4024
( )
|
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 03:35:27
|
Interesting note on the past.
In each of the years following an Olympics hosted in Canada, the host city has finished first in the league and gone on to win the Stanley Cup.
Montreal in 1977
Calgary in 1989
Vancouver in 2011? |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 04:54:43
|
@Dastardly, I have said on countless occasions they will be knocked out in the 2nd round. I didn't vote on the this at all. But I do appreciate the effort!!
@Alex, keep telling yourself that the Canucks are coasting. I'm not sure if you watched the games but I watched both. I can very frankly and honestly say that Edmonton did not win those games nearly as much as Vancouver lost those games. Weak, half hearted effort from many players but I would not say coasting. It has been in the media for the past week about AV being unhappy with Vancouver's effort.
As a fan, I would be concerned with my team playing poorly with a lack of effort at this point in the year. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 06:02:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
@Dastardly, I have said on countless occasions they will be knocked out in the 2nd round. I didn't vote on the this at all. But I do appreciate the effort!!
@Alex, keep telling yourself that the Canucks are coasting. I'm not sure if you watched the games but I watched both. I can very frankly and honestly say that Edmonton did not win those games nearly as much as Vancouver lost those games. Weak, half hearted effort from many players but I would not say coasting. It has been in the media for the past week about AV being unhappy with Vancouver's effort.
As a fan, I would be concerned with my team playing poorly with a lack of effort at this point in the year.
Well, Vancouver could bomb this playoffs - who knows, it's all a crapshoot.
But I strongly disagree with looking at a team's play a week or two before the playoffs, and equating that with how they will do there. It's a mixed bag of final ten game records for the previous cup champs, with a few mediocre performances thrown in there.
That being said . . . the Canucks have gone 7-3-0 in their last 10. I see that as very good!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
FutureKesler
Rookie
Canada
122 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 06:36:43
|
Hey Slozo! At least the canucks are in the playoffs unlike your golfers- ooops! i meant leafs. I still say they'll get to the third round then lose.
Kesler is the TRUE Nucks Captain. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 06:44:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by FutureKesler
Hey Slozo! At least the canucks are in the playoffs unlike your golfers- ooops! i meant leafs. I still say they'll get to the third round then lose.
Kesler is the TRUE Nucks Captain.
You bring this karma onto yourselves, Canucks fans. A totally unnecessary shot at the Leafs, when I am actually defending your team's play.
You deserve to lose first round. 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 07:20:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
quote:
Originally posted by FutureKesler
Hey Slozo! At least the canucks are in the playoffs unlike your golfers- ooops! i meant leafs. I still say they'll get to the third round then lose.
Kesler is the TRUE Nucks Captain.
You bring this karma onto yourselves, Canucks fans. A totally unnecessary shot at the Leafs, when I am actually defending your team's play.
You deserve to lose first round.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Yeah, i'm shaking my head at that one too Slozo, after reading your comments? Sometimes i wonder if people read entire posts before commenting on them???
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 07:38:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
@Alex, keep telling yourself that the Canucks are coasting. I'm not sure if you watched the games but I watched both. I can very frankly and honestly say that Edmonton did not win those games nearly as much as Vancouver lost those games. Weak, half hearted effort from many players but I would not say coasting. It has been in the media for the past week about AV being unhappy with Vancouver's effort.
As a fan, I would be concerned with my team playing poorly with a lack of effort at this point in the year.
And speaking of whether or not someone reads entire posts??? Beans, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe the way i wrote my post, it came off wrong? But i did say:
I'm not trying to make excuses for them, because really, there's no excuse for losing to the worst team in the leauge in back to back games! The Canucks simply haven't played well!
Admittedly, i saw very little of either game. I have read and listened to what's being said about their play from both "experts" and hockey fans, including the opinion you just supplied. You just said "Weak, half hearted effort from many players but I would not say coasting. It has been in the media for the past week about AV being unhappy with Vancouver's effort."
How can you say a "weak half hearted effort" is not coasting??? To me, that makes absolutely no sense as that is exactly what i would call it! Coasting isn't meant to mean simply floating around the ice. It's a term used to say a team isn't giving it's all! Kinda like saying they're only putting forth a "weak half hearted effort". 
Bottom line is this. It's been said many times over the years that there is an automatic tendency for teams to "coast" once they've wrapped up their spot and have little to play for. I'm talking, no home ice to shoot for, no better seeding to shoot for, etc. It's been said before that it's not always a good thing to have to play these meaningless games down the stretch because it's inevitable that teams will lack the drive they would normally have, then have to amp it up again for the playoffs.
As for being a concerned fan, i am. I did say that i don't wanna see the Canucks go into the playoffs on a losing streak. I worry that they could come out cold/flat against a first round opponent and hand them game 1 on home ice.
Believe me, i'm concerned, and if you got any other message about what i said and thought i was simply making excuses, my post must have come off wrong. That certainly wasn't the intention.  |
Edited by - Alex116 on 04/06/2011 07:40:13 |
|
|
|
Guest9945
( )
|
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 08:39:44
|
| I was looking forward to cheering them through a long playoff run. But after watching them lose back to back games to the Oilers farm team, I have my doubts (especially after coach ripped them for mailing in their previous effort - not much of a response from the players). Sadly it looks like they are rounding into their normal playoff form... |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 10:05:00
|
quote:
Weak, half hearted effort from many players but I would not say coasting
I believe that "weak half hearted effort" is the actual definition of "coasting".
I don't think anyone in Canuck land is particularly worried. Saturday's game was a hangover game, and I expected a better effort last night - but as you said, a team can beat any other team on any given day. The Canucks are definitely not playing they way they should right now - someone at work mentioned they almost appear to be trying to avoid getting hurt before the playoffs begin. For Salo and Bieksa, thats not a bad strategy
The last 2 games coming up, I expect they'll be a ton better.
Also - kudo's to AV and Luongo for subbing in Schnieds last night, so he can get enough appearances for his name to appear on the Jennings Trophy should the Canucks win. He'll get one of the last 2 starts as well, which will put him at 25 appearances. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 10:26:11
|
Well, I guess we will agree to disagree as I see a difference between a team that has it in the bag and is coasting and team putting in a weak effort. Coasting still have some kind of structure. Players are still playing, they just might not be digging for loose pucks or going to dirty areas of the ice. Weak effort is poor timing, poor execution, poor everything.
There is a difference but the definition is irrelevant.
The important thing is that over the past 6 weeks the Canucks have been virtually unbeatable. Then, to lose 2 games back to back to a far inferior team not only does something in the Vancouver dressing room but also in the oppositions dressing room.
If Vancouver plays Chicago or any other playoff team anywhere near the way they played against the Oilers, the are done like disco. |
|
|
|
Guest4607
( )
|
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 11:16:44
|
| Vanchoker's done in the first round No matter who they Play... |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 11:21:43
|
quote:
If Vancouver plays Chicago or any other playoff team anywhere near the way they played against the Oilers, the are done like disco.
Yes, I believe that is understood by all.
I think having it in the bag with 2 weeks to go in the season - and really having the conference sewn up nearly 3 weeks ago - has been bad for the Canucks. A certain amount of complacency was there right after they won the conference, but ever since the presidents trophy win they've been pretty awful, and don't seem to really care right now. While I think it will change come playoff time, I'd really like to see it change in the last 2 games. |
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 11:28:45
|
I don't see any significant difference between "coasting," "putting in a weak effort," "mailing it in," etc., but that's just semantics.
I watched the last two Oilers-Canucks games, and I saw a team (Vancouver) who did all of the above.
I wouldn't be terribly concerned about these recent losses to the Oilers. The Canucks won their previous five games, and in their last 15 games (including the two losses to the Oilers), the Canucks are 12 and 3. There's nothing on the line right now, and this includes the team that just beat them two times in a row. The Canucks will finish up their season with two more nothing games. The Wild have nothing to gain, and I suspect the Flames will be mathematically eliminated when the two teams meet on Saturday night. Regardless, the Canucks' goal will be to finish the season as healthy as possible. I wouldn't be surprised if they sit a few key players.
I think the Canucks will be fine by playoff time. I just wish there was some way to collect bets from everyone who thinks they will lose in the first round. I don't dispute that upsets happen, but even the "President's Trophy jinx" only relates to the regular season points leader losing 30% of the time, whether you go back 10 years, 15 years, or 24 years! Those odds I would take to the bank!
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 11:52:55
|
Beans, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of the word "coasting" as it pertains to NHL hockey? But wait, everyone says i agree with everything you say, so this can't be???
Coasting to me though, implies a negative, such as, not trying their hardest. Sounds similar to a weak effort, no? Pretty much nothing good can be said about a player "coasting".
However, i have a feeling that if i had said ".....teams tend to put in a weak effort once they've wrapped up their spot...." that you'd still disagree with me and think i'm using that as an excuse, much like you figure i did with the "coasting" comment. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2011 : 11:56:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
If Vancouver plays Chicago or any other playoff team anywhere near the way they played against the Oilers, the are done like disco.
I don't think you're gonna have many people, Canucks fans included, who will argue with you on this! |
|
|
|
Guest0740
( )
|
Posted - 05/16/2011 : 21:26:26
|
In 1988, Calgary hosted the Winter Games, and in 1989, the Flames won the President’s Trophy and the Stanley Cup. As you surely have picked up on by now, Vancouver Canucks hosted the 2010 Winter Games, and in 2011, the Canucks have won the President’s Trophy.
The Vancouver Canucks have won the President’s Trophy as the NHL’s best regular season team, but as many other clubs can tell you, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll win the Stanley Cup. History is on the side of the Canucks, however.
As Bob McKenzie of TSN pointed out Monday , the last two times a Canadian city hosted the Olympic games, the NHL team from that city had a nice little parade the following year. Montreal hosted the Summer Games in 1976, and in 1977, they were the NHL’s best regular season team. They also won the Stanley Cup.
All that’s left is a Stanley Cup, right? The Canucks would be the first Canadian team since the 1993 Canadiens to win the Cup,
|
|
|
|
Guest1488
( )
|
Posted - 05/17/2011 : 08:36:09
|
| Maybe Toronto and Edmonton should put in bids for the next Olympics XD |
|
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
Posted - 05/17/2011 : 13:46:30
|
Interesting to see this thread extended, and it's particularly interesting to see some of the earlier predictions. (Was the person who predicted that the Blackhawks would sweep the Canucks in round one being serious or just delusional?)
As it relates to the newer comments (about cities which have hosted the Winter Olympics who have gone on to win the Stanley Cup), I'm sure most of you have also heard (or considered) that the New York Islanders won the cup just after the Lake Placid (New York) Olympics. And in 2002, the Colorado Avalanche won the cup, and they were the closest NHL franchise to where the 2002 Olympics took place. (Salt Lake City.)
None of this really matters though. But if you're inclined to believe in these coincidences, you can forget about this happening in 2014. (Unless the NHL expands to Sochi, or somewhere else in Russia!) |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2011 : 14:52:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4178
Interesting to see this thread extended, and it's particularly interesting to see some of the earlier predictions. (Was the person who predicted that the Blackhawks would sweep the Canucks in round one being serious or just delusional?)
4178 (you really should sign up with a name!)...Scroll up and have a look at my first post in this thread and you'll have your answer to what's bolded above. Or if nothing else, you'll see the poster was a moron and likely just trying to stir things up. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Can the Canucks do it? 
