This site has become infested by 10 year old brats who love to keep hammering the same nail.
- AlexF

It should all settle down after this week. If you don't respond then they'll eventually get bored and flock back to Augello's blog and porn.

I'd rather have Tanev on the first unit, IMO Garrison needs a pass-first D-man with him to set him up for one timers. I also think that Garrison needs to be on the opposite unit from the Sedins since they forget to use their d-men in the offensive zone at times and spend most of the time down low with the puck. I'd try something like this:


First Unit

Daniel - Henrik - Kesler
Edler - Bieksa


Second Unit
Burrows/Raymond/Hansen - Roy - Kassian
Garrison - Tanev

First unit should be solid, Bieksa is very good at holding the puck in the zone and Edler has some chemistry with the Twins. Two right shots on the ice should work well with the Sedins.

Second unit has Garrison getting set up from Roy or Tanev with Kassian screening the goalie, plus you play the hot hand out of those 3 wingers with this unit.
- Nucker101

Game after game we see the guy with the best shot on the team trying to take a one-timer while he's on his weak side. Is it any wonder he misses the net so often?

Pair Garrison with a right-hander instead of Hamhuis and get him blasting away from the center blueline on his strong side. I agree with keeping Edler with the Sedins' unit as they do have a history of some chemistry. I agree with all your suggestions here perhaps with the exception of Kassian in front on the second unit. If they ever get a powerplay they could maybe try him there and see how he does, but there's more of a skill to being the net guy than just being large. I suspect they'd be better off to go with a second unit PP of Roy, Raymond and Burrows plus Garrison and Bieksa or Tanev on the back end.

wow a little sour on the grapes? teams played chicken with gillis and he lost. what do the other teams gain? they keep their assets, and just as importantly, they let van and the league know they wouldn't take on foolish contracts for decent assets. leafs, philly, tampa, etc put the league on notice that they wouldn't do it. I'm not saying that gillis should have moved luongo for nothing, he should have jept him, but the other teams did what they should have too. gillis is going to either have to buy luongo out, trade him for cheap, keep him and schneider as a tandom, or cross his fingers a teams number one goes down with a season ending injury next year and they don't have a half decent backup.

edit... or trade schneider to a team like nj in the off season...

Very well said Lefty.


Also the NHL did change the rules to how a contract could be structured . They accepted the old contracts in the old CBA and now punish them in the New CBA .That rule should have been for any contract signed after the new CBA.

Other teams will be fighting Gary soon too when one of their back sliding contracts has them paying a guy like Kovi a high cap hit and he makes 10 points in a season.

Gillis will have Lu on LTIR from years 7 to 9 just like Pronger.
- VANTEL

Agreed. I've mentioned tha before. I'm really surprised they didn't grandfather in the existing contracts to the new CBA, since when the contracts were signed, they were lawful according to the CBA.

Figured there'd be a few owners/GMs who would have done more about this.

Game after game we see the guy with the best shot on the team trying to take a one-timer while he's on his weak side. Is it any wonder he misses the net so often?

Pair Garrison with a right-hander instead of Hamhuis and get him blasting away from the center blueline on his strong side. I agree with keeping Edler with the Sedins' unit as they do have a history of some chemistry. I agree with all your suggestions here perhaps with the exception of Kassian in front on the second unit. If they ever get a powerplay they could maybe try him there and see how he does, but there's more of a skill to being the net guy than just being large. I suspect they'd be better off to go with a second unit PP of Roy, Raymond and Burrows plus Garrison and Bieksa or Tanev on the back end.
- YeOldTimer

I thought Garrison preferred to shoot from the right side, which is always why he played RSD with FLA?

Edit: I meant to say he played RSD on the PP with FLA.

wow a little sour on the grapes? teams played chicken with gillis and he lost. what do the other teams gain? they keep their assets, and just as importantly, they let van and the league know they wouldn't take on foolish contracts for decent assets. leafs, philly, tampa, etc put the league on notice that they wouldn't do it. I'm not saying that gillis should have moved luongo for nothing, he should have jept him, but the other teams did what they should have too. gillis is going to either have to buy luongo out, trade him for cheap, keep him and schneider as a tandom, or cross his fingers a teams number one goes down with a season ending injury next year and they don't have a half decent backup.

edit... or trade schneider to a team like nj in the off season...
- ChrisMS

What sour grapes, bud?

Fans of other teams are the ones coming here and acting like asses...

I thought Garrison preferred to shoot from the right side, which is always why he played RSD with FLA?
- Fosco

On the PP, you switch sides. Tanev should play set up man on the left side, Garrison tees up on the right side.

Oh please, yes.

It seems that individual lines only have continued success when they're able to dominate their opposition in some specific way. i.e. Size & strength or speed or playmaking ability, etc.

The Sedins and their pass & cycling game has always been successful when they get favorable defensive matchups and are eventually able to cause breaksdowns in defensive coverage. Doesn't happen as often in the playoffs, but it sure keeps the other team's top D pair busy.

Kesler, Raymond and Grabner was an exciting line combination for a few games a number of years ago and we saw something similar again recently when Schroeder was centering Raymond and Hansen. They were able to bottle up teams in their own zone and create turnovers using their speed on the forecheck. Getting this type of line out against a slower D pairing causes all kinds of havoc.

LA Kings have had success using big bodies all on one line, dumping the puck in and overpowering teams below the goal line.

To know what this team is really capable of, I'd like to see the following combinations stay together until they can establish some chemistry and a style of play that dominates their opposition:

Sedins and Burrows stick to their time-tested cycle game.
Roy between Raymond and Hansen for a speed line.
Kesler between Kassian and Higgens for a line that grinds down low on the forecheck and gets bodies to the front of the net.
Lapierre between Wiese and warm body #3 on a dump/chase/hit 4th.

Unfortunately AV seems to prefer having lines that are 'balanced' or have a little of everything. End result seems to be that they just end up getting dominated by the opposition. If he could ever be persuaded to go with this other philosophy....
- YeOldTimer

Good post. I also liked that Raymond-Kesler-Grabner line and thought it showed real promise for the cup of coffee it was given. It's a real shame we lost Grabner but cest la vie.

I would like to see a Raymond-Roy-Kesler line personally, but that probably asking for too much

What sour grapes, bud?

Fans of other teams are the ones coming here and acting like asses...
- Fosco

ian's blog was the sour grapes... not trying to be an ass, just giving my humble opinion... and his blog's tone was one of irritation and bewilderment

example of sour grapes

But hey, you'll be okay, I'm sure your Dan Cloutier, Corey Schwab, and Mika Noronen will be able to take you to the promise land.

On the PP, you switch sides. Tanev should play set up man on the left side, Garrison tees up on the right side.
- DrChristianTroy

I meant to write on the PP. Fixed.

ian's blog was the sour grapes... not trying to be an ass, just giving my humble opinion... and his blog's tone was one of irritation and bewilderment

example of sour grapes

But hey, you'll be okay, I'm sure your Dan Cloutier, Corey Schwab, and Mika Noronen will be able to take you to the promise land.
- ChrisMS

People actually read the blogs on this site ?

Kidding, Ian...read em every day

People actually read the blogs on this site ?

Kidding, Ian...read em every day
- Fosco

I've never actually read any blogs besides friday trade day which is terminated now.

For the record, Luongo's contract doesn't suck. Zetterberg, Hossa, Franzen and Duncan Keith all have similar contracts. What sucks is Mike Gillis made a commitment to Lu and he didn't follow through with it. Where as teams like Chicago and Detroit, who made long term commitments to players, stuck with their guy.

It only sucks because he's trying to trade it! He should be honouring his commitment and trading Schneider as they are currently comparable talents.
- LeftCoaster

The commitment shouldn't have been made in the first place. With a blue-chipper on his way & Luongo coming off a pretty shocking choke job (allowing the Blackhawks to mentally own him), he should have been given a "show us you can avoid melting down when it matters" short term extension (at the most), or dealt for a King's ransom including a stop-gap vet goaltender to usher in the Schneider era. Signing Luongo to a lifetime extension at that point in time couldn't have been more polar opposite to the moneypuck philosophy Gillis claims to believe in.

Here's the problem, its not Luongos contract. It's Cory Schneider's contract. 5.3 million for your starting goalie is fine, that's pretty standard. The Canucks had Lou in the #1 spot who would be capable of getting the team into the playoffs every year and giving them a chance to win. Then they decided that the back up goalie could do that too and signed Cory to a deal for too much money for a back up. Other teams see this and know Canucks have put themselves in a position where they are at a disadvantage having too much money tied up in goalies and as a result will not give up anything signifigant in a trade. Now had the Canucks first traded Luongo and then signed Scheider to his deal things would have been a hell of a lot easier for them.
- Colin_Smith

It should all settle down after this week. If you don't respond then they'll eventually get bored and flock back to Augello's blog and porn.
- Nucker101

Augello's blog or porn? Tough choice.

We should sign Pavel Bure for the rest of the season.

Bure Roy Kesler

Is there a Canuck fan anyone feels sorry for more than Esplen?
- systemtool

Why? Cause he lives in Alberta.

On the PP, you switch sides. Tanev should play set up man on the left side, Garrison tees up on the right side.
- DrChristianTroy

I actually liked the way the pp looked with Kesler firing from the left side. However, they had Edler on it instead of Garrison.

Stick Burrows in front, have the Sedins do their thing and have Kesler and Garrison as shooting threats on each side.

The commitment shouldn't have been made in the first place. With a blue-chipper on his way & Luongo coming off a pretty shocking choke job (allowing the Blackhawks to mentally own him), he should have been given a "show us you can avoid melting down when it matters" short term extension (at the most), or dealt for a King's ransom including a stop-gap vet goaltender to usher in the Schneider era. Signing Luongo to a lifetime extension at that point in time couldn't have been more polar opposite to the moneypuck philosophy Gillis claims to believe in.
- DrChristianTroy

Agree 100% on the commitment, for whatever reason Gillis didn't have enough foresight to think another good goaltender would come thru the system in the next eight years (we already had one). Regardless, the commitment was made!

We should sign Pavel Bure for the rest of the season.

Bure Roy Kesler
- DrChristianTroy

Burrows-Roy-Kesler
Booth-Roy-Kesler
I'm happy with either. Hell Higgins with the Roy-Kesler duo work

Sedins-kassian
Higgins-kesler-burrows
Hansen-Roy-Booth

Why? Cause he lives in Alberta.
- A_SteamingLombardi

How can u feel sorry for a canucks fan in Alberta? At least he gets to watch his team in the playoffs, unlike most in Alberta

Bill Watters ‏@RealBillWatters27m
According to sources who are not related, but impecca nonetheless,TML offered PHX,Kadri,Frattin & a 1st for Keith Yandle.more to come 4sur

Bill Watters ‏@RealBillWatters27m
According to sources who are not related, but impecca nonetheless,TML offered PHX,Kadri,Frattin & a 1st for Keith Yandle.more to come 4sur
- pker2theend

No way. Dear god if that trade went down

Agreed. I've mentioned tha before. I'm really surprised they didn't grandfather in the existing contracts to the new CBA, since when the contracts were signed, they were lawful according to the CBA.

Figured there'd be a few owners/GMs who would have done more about this.
- Fosco

Very little can pass for logic in that circle and the owners seem terrified of Bettman, or at the very least appropriately marginalized by his majority vote clause he had implemented some time back.

This.

Having lines with specific roles and styles will give each player a specific role and identity on this team and will help them be more consistent. Also each lines specializing in different aspects will make them that much harder to defend against teams, slower teams might struggle against the speed lines while speedy and smaller teams would struggle against the lines that cycle and go to the net. Having a defined shutdown line frees up the other lines to play more offensively and over a playoff series, the opposing top line will have some games where they don't contribute offensively if you line match hard.
- Nucker101

AV can always go back to his mixmaster when they're on the road and don't have last change but at home when you do, put your opponent back on their heels in whatever way you can. His blended lines never look dangerous ... except in their own zone.