How can they make sense with Raymond.
- Scooby_Doo

i'd have

22/33/14
7/17/25
20/26/36
9/27/40

Ebbett will score if he gets on the ice. you can take that to the bank

i'd have

22/33/14
7/17/25
20/26/36
9/27/40

Ebbett will score if he gets on the ice. you can take that to the bank
- IanEsplen

Get booth off that second line... it has been useless pretty much all year.

Burrows and Kesler together have this sort of... cocky chemistry together... and I think works well... at least short term. I don't disagree maybe putting ebbett on the 2nd line is better than raymond.

But its not like raymond has been the problem this series... hes not the "go to" guy. I actually like how the lines are.. I would just take out Kassian and put in Duco.

i'd have

22/33/14
7/17/25
20/26/36
9/27/40

Ebbett will score if he gets on the ice. you can take that to the bank
- IanEsplen

1 goal in 17 career post season games... If you took that to the bank they'd call all your loans.

How can they make sense with Raymond.
- Scooby_Doo

I'd rather Ebbett than Raymond to be honest with you.

i'd have

22/33/14
7/17/25
20/26/36
9/27/40

Ebbett will score if he gets on the ice. you can take that to the bank
- IanEsplen

When it comes to this team and scoring I wouldn’t take anything to the bank. Scoring - not toughness, hits, or “standing up for each other” – has been our biggest issue. We haven’t scored more than 2 in the last 11 playoffs games. We start putting pucks in the net and the wins come with it. At its core hockey is still that simple of a game.

If Daniel can play (even if it’s just on the PP), boosts don’t come any bigger than that.

The game Mike Ricci scored a hattrick after getting in a fight and smashing his head open on the ice is my personal favourite. He was white as a ghost on his 3rd goal.
- micah555

It doesn't matter what Edler's intentions were, or what your "opinion" on the play is. It's a delay of game penalty, and there is nothing anybody can do about it this year. You've watched 85 games this year with that rule in place, it's not going to change simply because you don't like it. Sounds like just one more thing to whine about...

How about this, win game 4 and get it back to BC. Anything can happen in the playoffs.

- Mattjd123

Nice.

Canucks need Daniel back if they are going to win this series at all.

The difference between the pre-TDL Canucks and post TDL Canucks is night & day. With Hodgson we were top 3 in GPG in the league. Since trading him, we've averaged 2.23 GPG which if that were the case for the whole season would've had us 2nd last in the NHL UNDER the LA Kings... Only better than the Wild.

The Kings went in the opposite direction at the TDL. They were bottom 3 in GPG all season, but since the trade deadline have averaged 3.04 GPG which if that were the case for the whole season would've had them 4th in the NHL (1st in the Western Conference).

Nothing before these current rosters were set really mattered. LA is the better team.

It doesn't matter what Edler's intentions were, or what your "opinion" on the play is. It's a delay of game penalty, and there is nothing anybody can do about it this year. You've watched 85 games this year with that rule in place, it's not going to change simply because you don't like it. Sounds like just one more thing to whine about...

How about this, win game 4 and get it back to BC. Anything can happen in the playoffs.
- mxgsfmdpx

I don't think anyone has said the wrong call was made but simply sharing their displeasure with the rule and providing justification for that view. They are not whining at all but having a discussion and attempting to find a solution for a problem that many if not all fans would agree exists.

The difference between the pre-TDL Canucks and post TDL Canucks is night & day. With Hodgson we were top 3 in GPG in the league. Since trading him, we've averaged 2.23 GPG which if that were the case for the whole season would've had us 2nd last in the NHL UNDER the LA Kings... Only better than the Wild.

The Kings went in the opposite direction at the TDL. They were bottom 3 in GPG all season, but since the trade deadline have averaged 3.04 GPG which if that were the case for the whole season would've had them 4th in the NHL (1st in the Western Conference).

Nothing before these current rosters were set really mattered. LA is the better team.
- DrChristianTroy

You’ve provided the statistics I was too lazy to dig up myself. This speaks volumes and is even more reason why we need our leading (and only elite) scorer back in the side.

I don't think anyone has said the wrong call was made but simply sharing their displeasure with the rule and providing justification for that view. They are not whining at all but having a discussion and attempting to find a solution for a problem that many if not all fans would agree exists.
- hifi.

I'm starting to really like the puck over the glass = icing treatment. That really does just make too much sense.

All the best to Daniel but if he comes back early I wonder what his effectiveness will be. Will he power through the middle carrying the puck? If Brown gets within 10 feet of him will he have second thoughts? Is it worth risking his health (if he's not 100% cleared) for a first round win in what admittedly is a big hill to climb? When you think of Stanley Cup playoff heroics, you never think of the first or second round. My opinion is that this late in the series, his presence on the bench/ice will hurt more than help. Getting shots on goal hasn't been Vancouver's problem, it's been Quick. Maybe someone should run him. Oops, jeez. Coming from a Kings fan. Shouldn't have said that.

The intention of any delay of game penalty is to keep the puck in play. The NHL is trying to shore up instances where players artificially control the flow of the game. Thus the new icing rule. The new touch-up offside rule. Eliminating the two line pass rule. If you're going to say it should be up to the ref's discretion as to whether or not it's intentional, why not extend that to icing? How can you really tell? You can't, and it's an absurd idea. Icing is icing. Puck over the glass is puck over the glass. The point is that the players have to weigh the consequences of risky plays. It's a sound rule.

I'm starting to really like the puck over the glass = icing treatment. That really does just make too much sense.
- cryptical77

Agreed. Every team has suffered or benefitted from the delay of game penalty at some point over the course of the year.

Considering the referees have the discretion to call delay of game when a player falls on the puck (which they rarely if ever call). Why not take the discretion right out of the equation for shooting the puck over or falling on it and treat it like an icing. As you said though, it really does make to much sense.

I can't believe I never thought of it in that manner before.

All the best to Daniel but if he comes back early I wonder what his effectiveness will be. Will he power through the middle carrying the puck? If Brown gets within 10 feet of him will he have second thoughts? Is it worth risking his health (if he's not 100% cleared) for a first round win in what admittedly is a big hill to climb? When you think of Stanley Cup playoff heroics, you never think of the first or second round. My opinion is that this late in the series, his presence on the bench/ice will hurt more than help. Getting shots on goal hasn't been Vancouver's problem, it's been Quick. Maybe someone should run him. Oops, jeez. Coming from a Kings fan. Shouldn't have said that.

The intention of any delay of game penalty is to keep the puck in play. The NHL is trying to shore up instances where players artificially control the flow of the game. Thus the new icing rule. The new touch-up offside rule. Eliminating the two line pass rule. If you're going to say it should be up to the ref's discretion as to whether or not it's intentional, why not extend that to icing? How can you really tell? You can't, and it's an absurd idea. Icing is icing. Puck over the glass is puck over the glass. The point is that the players have to weigh the consequences of risky plays. It's a sound rule.
- mattyj2001

I'm sure Daniel won't be back if he's still suffering any symptoms. 100% is a strange concept for health, but if he's dizzy or has headaches, he won't play.

Icing actually has interpretation in it. The linesman can deem the player was able to catch up with the puck or in the case of a pass.

If, in the opinion of the Linesman, any player (other than the goalkeeper) of the opposing team is able to play the puck before it passes his goal line, but has not done so, play shall continue and the icing violation shall not be called. This includes the situation whereby the opposing team, while in the process of making player substitutions during the play, are able to play the puck, but choose not to do so to avoid being called for too many men on the ice. Icing should not be called.

The Linesman shall have discretion to wave off apparent icing infractions on attempted passes if those passes are deemed receivable (attainable). In order for the Linesman to wash out the icing for this reason, the receiving player’s stick must be on the attacking side of the center red line and he must be eligible to receive the pass (e.g. he cannot be in an off-side position and cannot be involved in a player change that would result in a too many men on the ice penalty if he were to play the puck).

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26494

All the best to Daniel but if he comes back early I wonder what his effectiveness will be. Will he power through the middle carrying the puck? If Brown gets within 10 feet of him will he have second thoughts? Is it worth risking his health (if he's not 100% cleared) for a first round win in what admittedly is a big hill to climb? When you think of Stanley Cup playoff heroics, you never think of the first or second round. My opinion is that this late in the series, his presence on the bench/ice will hurt more than help. Getting shots on goal hasn't been Vancouver's problem, it's been Quick. Maybe someone should run him. Oops, jeez. Coming from a Kings fan. Shouldn't have said that.

The intention of any delay of game penalty is to keep the puck in play. The NHL is trying to shore up instances where players artificially control the flow of the game. Thus the new icing rule. The new touch-up offside rule. Eliminating the two line pass rule. If you're going to say it should be up to the ref's discretion as to whether or not it's intentional, why not extend that to icing? How can you really tell? You can't, and it's an absurd idea. Icing is icing. Puck over the glass is puck over the glass. The point is that the players have to weigh the consequences of risky plays. It's a sound rule.
- mattyj2001

I realize as a fan of a team down 0-3 I’m in no position to talk sh!t or sound too confident in anything, but I believe that if Daniel was in Game 3, even just on the PP, we’d have had an OT game on our hands at the very least. It’s not the quantity of shots that matters but where those shots originate. Any elite goalie would have saved 60 shots of the perimeter variety we fired in Game 3.

Daniel and Hank together cycle the puck in a way that creates space for themselves and others they play with (ie Burrows). This space is what’s been sorely lacking for us in this series, the attempts on goal way too obvious. I can’t speak for his ability to handle hits as it’s all been very secretive but if you doubt the offensive that can be generated by the twins tandem, feel free to watch highlights from the last Kings-Canucks playoff series.

- Scooby_Doo

This.

I realize as a fan of a team down 0-3 I’m in no position to talk sh!t or sound too confident in anything, but I believe that if Daniel was in Game 3, even just on the PP, we’d have had an OT game on our hands at the very least. It’s not the quantity of shots that matters but where those shots originate. Any elite goalie would have saved 60 shots of the perimeter variety we fired in Game 3.

Daniel and Hank together cycle the puck in a way that creates space for themselves and others they play with (ie Burrows). This space is what’s been sorely lacking for us in this series, the attempts on goal way too obvious. I can’t speak for his ability to handle hits as it’s all been very secretive but if you doubt the offensive that can be generated by the twins tandem, feel free to watch highlights from the last Kings-Canucks playoff series.
- AlexF

Damn you Keith, damn you.
With Daniel I think it would be safe to say it is at the very least 2-1 kings but I would be willing to argue it would have been 2-1 in favour of the Canucks. Fortunately in some possible world it is or even 3-0 for the Canucks but rather disappointedly, it is not the case in the actual world.

I know we are down 3-0 but if we win tomorrow night I like are chances going home to make it 3-2 and the pressure will be on LA in game 6. If Daniel is back and everyone is playing where they are best suited I like the chances of forcing a game 7. Of course they need to win tomorrow and Sunday but I am not willing to give up yet. What do you think realistically about their chances of coming back?

Damn you Keith, damn you.
With Daniel I think it would be safe to say it is at the very least 2-1 kings but I would be willing to argue it would have been 2-1 in favour of the Canucks. Fortunately in some possible world it is or even 3-0 for the Canucks but rather disappointedly, it is not the case in the actual world.

I know we are down 3-0 but if we win tomorrow night I like are chances going home to make it 3-2 and the pressure will be on LA in game 6. If Daniel is back and everyone is playing where they are best suited I like the chances of forcing a game 7. Of course they need to win tomorrow and Sunday but I am not willing to give up yet. What do you think realistically about their chances of coming back?
- hifi.

Based on what I’ve seen thus far, 10%. That’s from an optimist. That percentage will of course increase with every win but it’s extremely difficult to knock-over 4 games in a row against the team that just beat you 3 in a row. There’s usually a reason a team is down 0-3, and not a good one.

To put it bluntly, 3 team in 42 years have been able to manage such a comeback.

Please, someone out there guarantee me that this is AV's last season as a Canuck coach. Pack-up and jettison the other two as well.

When you are coaching the best team during the regular season into this sloppy playoff mess we see before us then a change needs to be made.

Gillis needs to know that he (frank)ed up at the trade deadline. I like Kassian and think that he'll be a great power forward but this trade deadline was not the time to make that deal. Kassian played 3:55 last game! How the hell is that going to make a team (or even the player) better? I'm positive that AV forced that trade to happen. I want that tool gone from behind our bench.

Please, someone out there guarantee me that this is AV's last season as a Canuck coach. Pack-up and jettison the other two as well.

When you are coaching the best team during the regular season into this sloppy playoff mess we see before us then a change needs to be made.

Gillis needs to know that he (frank)ed up at the trade deadline. I like Kassian and think that he'll be a great power forward but this trade deadline was not the time to make that deal. Kassian played 3:55 last game! How the hell is that going to make a team (or even the player) better? I'm positive that AV forced that trade to happen. I want that tool gone from behind our bench.
- bloatedmosquito

A friend of mine pointed out Kassian's turnover to Kopitar, and said "that's why AV doesn't play him"... I pointed out to my friend, "no, the turnover was caused because AV doesn't play him".

Based on what I’ve seen thus far, 10%. That’s from an optimist. That percentage will of course increase with every win but it’s extremely difficult to knock-over 4 games in a row against the team that just beat you 3 in a row. There’s usually a reason a team is down 0-3, and not a good one.

To put it bluntly, 3 team in 42 years have been able to manage such a comeback.
- AlexF

On top of that I think only 4 professional sports teams have done it that is including the 3 in the nhl.

If we were in the penguins situation I would not like our chances but given the fact that all three games could have gone either way I am a little more hopeful. I don't necessarily think we were the better team in any of the games but I see no reason why we can't be if the team plays how we know it can. It is not like LA has completely dominated the canucks.

When I first saw the schedule I was upset at how sporadic the games were but that could be blessing now. I guess we will have to wait and see.