I Watched This Game: Canucks vs Colorado Avalanche, March 28, 2012

Something about this game seemed vaguely familiar, like I had watched a carbon copy of it just a couple nights ago… For the second game in a row, the Canucks faced a desperate team on the edge of the playoff bubble, and for the second game in a row, the Canucks shut that team out 1-0.

The biggest difference between the two games, of course, was the goaltender doing the shutting out. On Monday, against the Kings, Roberto Luongo made an early goal by Manny Malhotra stand as the game-winner with 38 saves, including 17 in the third period. In this game, versus the Avalanche, Cory Schneider made an early goal by Chris Higgins stand as the game-winner with 43 saves, including 16 in the third period.

Meanwhile, I looked for changes in the Matrix when I watched this game.

Canucks 1 – 0 Avalanche

  • If the Canucks are the movie Magnolia, and Schneider is Hoffman, that means Luongo is Tom Cruise. The hair fits. (very, very NSFW)
  • The most unexpected event of this game was easily David Booth dropping the gloves and schooling Mark Olver in a first period fight. In the last meeting between these two teams, Olver laid a leaping hit on Chris Tanev and Booth challenged him then to no avail. But this time, Olver was looking for a scrap. Big mistake: Booth ripped Olver’s helmet off and got several good punches in, winning the fight with ease.
  • There were a few odd calls in this game. Shortly after Booth’s fight, Maxim Lapierre got called for charging. Sportsnet showed the replay of Lapierre lightly bumping Shane O’Brien, leaving John Garrett to say “That can’t be it.” I checked. It was. But Colorado had a weak call of their own, as Matt Hunwick was charged for delay of game when he deflected a Henrik Sedin centring pass over the glass. If that penalty is by the book, it’s a stupid book, like “Winning Lotto/Lottery for Everyday Players, 3rd Edition.”
  • On the plus side, the Canucks scored their only goal of the game while killing off Lapierre’s bogus penalty. When the aforementioned Hunwick bobbled the puck at Vancouver’s blue line, Chris Higgins alertly left the puck alone and burst past Hunwick, knowing that Samme Pahlsson would get to the puck first. Pahlsson’s breakaway pass was perfect, and Higgins made no mistake, snapping the puck past Semyon Varlamov’s blocker. I’m not sure why he didn’t deke the defenceman first, then take a slap shot from the blue line, but it worked.
  • That wasn’t the only Canucks breakaway in this game, but Varlamov bailed out his teammates every other time, first stoning Booth, then beating Kesler to a loose puck, and finally giving Malhotra nothing to shoot at. If the Canucks convert on one of those chances, this game would be a lot less tense. That said, since this game meant approximately nothing to the Canucks, it wasn’t that tense to begin with. If it was less tense, everyone involved would have spontaneously fallen asleep.
  • There were a couple anxious moments in the second period when Henrik Sedin twisted his leg while being knocked to the ice by Jan Hejda. He limped slowly off the ice, causing heart palpitations throughout the Canucks fanbase. Really, I’m not sure why everyone was so worried. It’s not like we don’t have another Sedin. Oh…right…
  • Fortunately, Henrik didn’t miss a shift. I knew he was fine when he took a hooking penalty shortly after. That’s his league-leading 12th hooking minor on the season, which I believe is a career high.
  • John Shorthouse pointed out that Alex Burrows and Trevor Linden share a birthday. As suggested by Betsy the Bulie, that needs to be a provincial holiday. Be sure to celebrate Clutch Day this April 11th by driving a manual vehicle, listening to Clutch, or carrying a small purse.
  • With the stellar performance of Schneider, the Canucks likely could have coasted to the victory. Instead, the final minutes of the game featured two of the most effort-filled moments of the season. While killing off a penalty to Pahlsson, Alex Burrows held the puck below the Colorado goal line for a good 20 seconds, out-battling three Avalanche skaters. Then, in the dying seconds, Chris Higgins skated hard to beat out an icing call, preventing a defensive zone faceoff. These guys are aware they’re only making $2 million a year, right? Wait, nevermind, that’s a lot of money.
Tags: , , , , ,

62 comments

  1. prophet
    March 29, 2012

    Some of the links don’t work…like the sign one.
    Would love to see it.

    Awesome IWTG btw.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Lenny
      March 29, 2012

      Right click and open link in new window, or whatever the PC equivalent is.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  2. Shand
    March 29, 2012

    Schneiders shutout was so much better than Luongos

    coolfacedotjpg

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +15 (from 31 votes)
    • John Andress
      March 29, 2012

      Is it safe to assume that this post is an example of sarcasm because if it isn’t it is certainly another word beginning with “S”? Stupidity. Being charitable, I am sure that we will all give you the benefit of the doubt.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: -13 (from 25 votes)
    • Superreggie
      March 29, 2012

      Lol

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
    • John Andress
      March 29, 2012

      My apologies. I just read Cam Charron’s game recap over at Canucks Army and now understand the context of your post.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
    • Nick
      March 29, 2012

      Both shut-outs were strong performances … I do agree, though, that Colorado had the stronger push and more legitimate scoring chances than LA.

      And Cory did need to come up bigger than Lu did.

      But it’s not Lu’s fault that the Kings were not as good as the Avs.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +25 (from 25 votes)
    • Peps
      March 29, 2012

      Gingers rule!

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  3. peanutflower
    March 29, 2012

    Maybe Lapierre’s phantom call was a makeup call for him being the third person in on Booth’s fight. That’s what the AVs boards are yelling about. They would have won the game if Lapierre hadn’t butted in, you know. Olver deserved to get beat on. I actually pretty much enjoyed that game. I’m so glad Don Taylor finally gave in and that ridiculous excuse for hair right off his head. He looks so much better.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +13 (from 15 votes)
    • Warpstone
      March 29, 2012

      I think opinion’s on Don Taylor’s hair depend on your generation.

      I grew up watching Sportspage, so when Taylor relents and gives up the mop for an old-man hairstyle… I’m reminded of how old I am too. :(

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +17 (from 17 votes)
  4. hockeyispretty
    March 29, 2012

    From Jory’s Jewels:

    “Looks like Alex Edler has gotten another bad batch of Easton sticks as two exploded in the first
    11 minutes to open the game. The second, on the power play, almost hit Sami Salo in the head.” Nooooo. Thumbs up if we all want Edler to pick a different company, one without a secret anti-Canucks mole involved in the manufacturing process. *lines toque with another layer of tin foil*

    Hig Trick: “Chris Higgins opened the scoring vs. Colorado giving him three consecutive goals scored on the Avalanche going back to last Saturday’s game.” Two game winners in a row, too. Wooo-hoo! Go Higgy!

    “Rogers Arena was sold out for the 400th consecutive game giving Vancouver the third longest streak in professional sports behind the Boston Red Sox (712) and Dallas Mavericks (437).” Wooo-hoo! Go Canucks fans! We’ll beat the Mavericks fans easy if that isn’t an active streak; I wonder if we can beat the Red Sox fans?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +16 (from 18 votes)
    • Cam Charron
      March 29, 2012

      I think Rogers Arena has a higher capacity than Fenway Park. Or they’re very similar.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
      • Cam Charron
        March 29, 2012

        Nevermind, with the modern renovations they can pack in 35,000 Bostonians.

        Because that’s exactly what you want: “How can we fit more drunken idiots from Boston into the same, close space at once?”

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +28 (from 28 votes)
        • JDM
          March 29, 2012

          Outdoor facilities will ALWAYS have greater capacity at the pro level.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
    • Chris the Curmudgeon
      March 29, 2012

      I was just about to write a comment about those sticks. Edler must break 100 of them in a year.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
  5. Zach Morris
    March 29, 2012

    Hamhuis seemed downright ornery in last night’s game. Were he and Booth mad they didn’t get invited to “Passion”?

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +23 (from 23 votes)
  6. jenny wren
    March 29, 2012

    Although there was no guarantee,
    it still seemed somewhat sad to see
    Canucks not scoring five on three;
    howe’er, after a charging call
    where really was no charge at all,
    the Avs were playing five on four
    when Higgins found a way to score
    with an assist from Sammy P!

    It was a game Avs had to win,
    but Cory would let nothing in.
    While Colorado’s hopes are gone
    Vancouver keeps on keeping on.
    Now just two points behind the Blues,
    they’ve five more games they’ve not to lose!

    Jenny Wren

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +4 (from 6 votes)
  7. sgolesor
    March 29, 2012

    “I’m not sure why he didn’t deke the defenceman first, then take a slap shot from the blue line, but it worked.”

    Because that’s Kesler’s move. Duh.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +42 (from 42 votes)
  8. Warpstone
    March 29, 2012

    The last two games might not be 80′s era end-to-end action, but it’s been really appealing in terms of nuts and bolts play if you’re a Canucks fan.

    It’s playoff hockey folks. Physical, risk-adverse and generally “toight like a tiger.”

    BTW, I’m less worried about the PP now that the team has made a concerted effort to reduce odd-man rushes against our goalies.

    Guys like Tony Gallagher might be ripping AV a new one for winning with boring hockey, but you’d have to never have seen a single playoff series to not admit that these games have been perfect for setting the template for first round play.

    BTW, re the PP: I’m pretty sure the lack of an overt net-presence is simply to reduce the chance of injury to Kesler or Burrows. The 1st PP unit is stuck on the perimeter pretty much all shift. It’s so noticeable that I’ve got to believe this is down to coaching considerations (i.e. don’t let your stars get chopped in the ankles for meaningless games), rather than a lack of interest in covering the crease.

    Note: if the above is true, I still don’t see why they can’t at least experiment with a bigger guy like Kassian or Lapierre disrupting the crease on the PP. You never know, we may just identify a Holmstrom-type as an option against teams with a strong PK.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +25 (from 25 votes)
    • peanutflower
      March 29, 2012

      I agree. I stopped reading Gallagher a long time ago. He’s gone off the rails a bit. I personally don’t care what style of hockey they play. Not at all. While I love how the Canucks played last year, if they can win the whole thing (cross fingers and everything and not even saying the name or nothing) playing this style of hockey I’m sure not going to think it’s less of an achievement and less of a victory. Whatever it takes, boys. Whatever. Just do it.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +21 (from 21 votes)
      • tj
        March 29, 2012

        Does Gallagher actually have a readership, or one that respects instead of laughs at him? I just can’t understand how this man continues to get column space and now (shiver) air time. He’s a real embarrassment.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +15 (from 15 votes)
        • John in Marpole
          March 29, 2012

          Apparently his fan-base of real fans, all work @ 1040, because the only times I ever hear someone treat Gallagher’s opinions as anything other than stupid is when one talking head or another (often also an employee of The Province) gush about his ‘great column today’. *Puke*.

          Regular listeners to 1040 will note that he and Ferraro never share air-time. The contempt that Ray has for Gallagher , on the rare occasion that his name comes up while Ferraro is on-air, is measured in long tonnes, not short tons.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +10 (from 10 votes)
        • Warpstone
          March 29, 2012

          I wouldn’t go that far. I generally find Gallagher to be incredibly insightful and able to point out flaws that most insiders are afraid to poke at:

          * Colin Campbell and NHL HQ’s numerous conflicts of interest
          * AV’s arrogance (love AV, but you have to admit that he has quirks like any other good coach)
          * the silliness of Henrik’s ironman streak
          * protection of Luongo from scrutiny.
          * Sean Thornton’s complete BS about how many fights he’s had before in a period. ;)

          He’s just a curmudgeonly guy. No doubt he’s going to be irritating at points. Sometimes he misses the mark, especially when the team is winning ugly–he has an axe to grind against AV’s tactical conservatism. At the same time, if you listen to him on the radio, you’ll often find that his praise for the Sedins and other players when they are at the top of their game is glowing.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +11 (from 15 votes)
          • tj
            March 29, 2012

            I guess my curmudgeonly self came out in my comment. It seems as though Gallagher has one salient point (he was, I think, the first to bring up the CoHo agent/father scenario) to a dozen hair-brained ones. He often overreaches worse than a newbie blogger. Maybe if they gave him less column space he’d have to edit out some of the ridiculous? I don’t know, tbh, I don’t listen to 1040, and only come across Gallagher’s columns when I google ‘Canucks’ or occasionally read a Sunday Province. I can’t actually look at him during his TV segments. Maybe there are worse critics out there, but it seems he has a lock on finding the miserable in every Canucks story. Does he ever say anything positive or rationally hopeful?

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)
            • John in Marpole
              March 29, 2012

              @ tj:

              The CoHo Agent/father thing was still spun by Skeletor as being all AV’s fault, rather than a 50/50 thing or – the unthinkable – a parent interfering in an adult child’s athletic career. There is no way that Mr. Lindros… I mean Mr. Hodgson, would ever do that, right?

              I do recall positive stories by Gallager wrt the hiring of MG as GM. And it is just a rumor that the motivation for that happy tune had something to do with a Tony not liking Nonis, or the fact that prior to being hired by the Canucks Gillis and Gallagher were on quite friendly terms, as are all player agents, apparently.

              VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
          • John in Marpole
            March 29, 2012

            We’ll have to differ on our opinion of Gallagher. When they put his life story on celluloid the only actor suitable for playing him is Nicolas Cage, he has years of experience playing kooks who believe in conspiracy theories. The one difference being that in past movies Cage’s character has turned out to be correct.

            His knowledge of hockey is minimal, at best.

            The yardstick to measure his credibility by is that almost without exception, real hockey people, i.e.: players/coaches and insiders much closer to the game than he, never agree with his spin on things. That same yardstick applies to much of the silliness that is broadcast or written about hockey. If the people that live and breathe in the game don’t agree, go with the people who have been there & done that. They know.

            On 1040 alone I’ve heard both Ferraro and Tomlinson sneer at things that Gallagher has said, many times.

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)
            • vancityt
              March 29, 2012

              @ John I think we’re actually in agreement. Gallagher’s CoHo point was not fully explored by him, and definitely came off bitter, even malicious, but it was a point that no one yet had been exploring. He turned on the light, smugly, to reveal something nasty in the woodshed, but ended up just exposing the woodshed’s location. The rest of the journos stepped in, pushed him aside, and began looking for the real dirt.

              Long-winded metaphor aside, my point is that it’s pretty sad Gallagher’s the guy they invite to the party just for a chuckle. Now I’m starting to feel sorry for the ol’ coot ;)

              VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
              • tj
                March 29, 2012

                (oops, old moniker was saved on this rarely used work computer–tj)

                VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
              • Michael
                March 29, 2012

                You need never apologize for a good metaphor. Beats the heck out of a handful of similes.

                VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. tj
    March 29, 2012

    I think we can safely assume that Booth, in his off-ice life, really does fight bears (with and without cross-bows). He’s just been more Zen Master about it till now.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +16 (from 16 votes)
  10. sarah
    March 29, 2012

    I understand that Booth kept his helmet on for his fight, but it would have been kind of awesome if he had removed his helmet and let his long, blond locks flow free for it…

    Also am I the only one who has wondered if some of the Canucks are trying to get a head start on their playoff beards? I definitely thought Booth looked a little scruffier than normal.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +13 (from 13 votes)
    • Nick
      March 29, 2012

      I cringe every time Booth fights … he’s had serious concussions and should know better.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +11 (from 11 votes)
      • vancityt
        March 29, 2012

        Hence leaving on the helmet? I’ve never seen him fight–does he do it very often?

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. Andre
    March 29, 2012

    Despite the entertainment value from last night’s game, I’m glad we won’t see a gnat like Olver in the playoffs.

    On the other hand, there’s no clearer example of the Canucks playoff readiness then when even zen masters like Booth are willing to drop ‘em and fight aggravating opponents. Then again, maybe Kassian ought to have one just to round out into form.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +13 (from 13 votes)
  12. Nick
    March 29, 2012

    Interesting post-game analysis of Schneider by Gary V and Don T afterwards.

    Valk attributed Schneider’s stellar technical ability, in part, to how he goes down “falling backwards” rather than “falling forward on his stomach.”

    And how goalies who fall forward often have no chance, once they’re down.

    The irony is that Valk absolutely loves Lu … and Lu falls forward a lot.

    Would have been interesting to hear what Garrett had to say about this.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +9 (from 9 votes)
    • VanFan85
      March 29, 2012

      I noticed that very point this morning while watching the highlight package. Schneider falls on his rear and is very efficient at shimmying around on it and he is able to pop right back up when needed where as Luongo falls on his stomache and is essentially useless and out of the play if the puck is moved back outside the crease area, I don’t know how I didn’t notice it before now.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +8 (from 8 votes)
  13. Nick
    March 29, 2012

    Zack should be back with Lapierre on the 4th line and hitting everyone in sight. That’s the only place that seems to bring out the best in him. When he plays with Henrik, it looks like he has no idea where to go or what to do.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +12 (from 12 votes)
  14. Nick
    March 29, 2012

    .937 SV% … I don’t know why folks here are not more blown away by that.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +11 (from 11 votes)
    • Warpstone
      March 29, 2012

      We are. It’s great. But he’s still a backup. Say what you will about playing big games, but you never really know how good a goalie is until he’s given the burden and pressure of a number one role.

      If Schneider loses, no one will start a campaign about how he’s a giant albatross on this team’s shoulders. No one will pin the entire setback on his shoulders–he had probably the worst period of either goalie at home against Nashville and everyone just moved on. Also, no one will fail to properly scrutinize the skaters and coaches who need to better address the systemic breakdowns Schneider had to face in a losing effort.

      There is a qualitative difference between being a backup or tandem goalie and being the de factor starter. It’s why Halak and Elliot in St. Louis are unlikely to win the Vezina. When you play 50+ games a season you face a greater chance of regressing to the mean and suffering extreme swings of puckluck.

      Please note, I’m not saying Schneider isn’t good. He looks like he’ll be the sort of guy you build a team around. But he’s still not playing as a starter yet and that’s why his stats and achievements are usually viewed within the context of his role as a backup.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +12 (from 24 votes)
      • peanutflower
        March 29, 2012

        Exactly. Well said. I argue that point constantly (but no one listens…).

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)
      • Nick
        March 29, 2012

        “yes but he’s just a backup” is not quite what I meant by BLOWN AWAY

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
      • Nick
        March 29, 2012

        Back up goalie or not … no Vancouver goalie has done what Schneider is doing over a lot of games. Luongo was a Vezina finalist last season with his best ever numbers as a Canuck … .928 SV% and 2.11 GAA, but had no chance to win because of Tim Thomas.

        And to put this in perspective, people raved about Tim Thomas’s season last year, and how it was so off-the-charts and a “season for the ages.” His numbers were .938 SV% and 2.00 GAA.

        Schneider’s are .937 SV% and 1.97 GAA. His virtually matching one of the best seasons on record is incredible. We’ll never see this again in Vancouver.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)
        • Showbot
          March 29, 2012

          Tim Thomas, last year, played 57 games. This year, Cory Schneider has played 30, and faced half the shots Thomas did last year. The stats aren’t comparable.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
        • Warpstone
          March 30, 2012

          Nick, again great stats but, as Showbot points out, you’re dealing with sample sizes and contexts that are different enough to make your comparison an apples to oranges scenario.

          For one thing, nobody considers Schneiders contribution a “season’s worth of work.” It’s 30 games. A significant contribution, but not the same as what a starter endures. In fact, you can also make the case that while Schneids spells Luongo and protects him, Luongo has also done a pretty job most season of preventing Schneider from being put in tough situations too (i.e. playing two nights in a row or after a bad game). It’s all conjecture.

          I don’t know if people recall this, but Troy Gamble had better numbers than Captain Kirk too. I’m not saying that Schneider is not starter-material, just that the backup’s stats are not comparable to a starter’s in most cases.

          VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • hockeyispretty
      March 29, 2012

      I don’t know why folks say folks are not blown away by that :) So often you get comments going, “Schneider is awesome! He is so underrated!” That is a) right and b) totally wrong. He’s mentioned at least once a game by every commentator even if he isn’t playing. He’s always described as good enough to be a starter. No one ever mentions a fault of his, actually (for instance, a few commentators have noticed that he will be even better once his puck handling skills are worked up a bit, but you usually get a thumbs down for saying so, and no commentator ever says this.)

      Everyone was a bit surprised he got this game after the way Luongo just played, but no one criticized that. If Schneider had had a 38 save shutout and Luongo got the next start, there would be plenty of commentary and criticism. (I’m not saying it wasn’t a good move to play him- I’m saying, people are definitely blown away by Schneider.)

      He’s great, and he’s getting full credit for his greatness.

      And he has an advantage: every time he plays, he’s playing hungry, with something big to prove and his future position in the league to consolidate and his big break-in contract still to make. No night-after-night slog, no legion of put-downs and no fans booing him and saying he isn’t worth what he’s paid. Warpstone is right & says it all about the pressure and grind.

      Schneids is great and I love him, but it bewilders me when people say he’s underrated or doesn’t get the credit he deserves.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
      • hockeyispretty
        March 29, 2012

        My first “commentator” should read “comment writer on a blog” or similar. No word for us, is there?

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
        • Daniel Wagner
          March 29, 2012

          There is on PITB. Here, you are considered a “Bulie.”

          VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
          Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
          • Showbot
            March 29, 2012

            I read that as “Bully”. =/

            VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
            • hockeyispretty
              April 1, 2012

              Let’s pronounce it more “Byu-lee”, like in Ferris Bueller, or even “boo-lee”, as opposed to like bull. Then we won’t be bullies but can still be bulies.

              VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. VanFan85
    March 29, 2012

    I’ve said all along that the Canucks should try Kassian in front of the net on the PP just like how Chicago put Byfuglien there. I can see why they haven’t been sending guys there lately, no point in getting banged up and possibly injured in meaningless games. Maybe once the playoffs start things will change.

    Another observation I have made lately is Kesler looks like he is ready to roll, we have seen flashes of Beastmode® in the last few games but it only ever last a couple of shifts. Maybe AV is doing to Kes what he is doing to Kassian – giving him the fatherly hand-on-shoulder and the “not yet son” talk. I also have this sneeking suspision that Kassian also has a Beastmode. He has that real wild look in his eyes (like a caged dog smelling fresh meat) and there are times where it looks like he is playing very tenative and holding back, I have a feeling AV is holding him back slightly as well. It’s going to be a glorious day in Canuck land when AV releases the hounds.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +20 (from 20 votes)
    • warren
      March 29, 2012

      i think you are right about AV with Kesler and Kassian. Interesting how the last few games there are certain facets of the game that are isolated by the way personnel is placed differently than we are accustomed to…

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
    • Frank
      March 29, 2012

      That’s how I feel about all the games during the last month or so. All the experimenting with lines, both on offence and defence, was to see how different players gel together on different lines. But at the same time, it prevented them from getting into the groove (too) early.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
    • VanFan85
      March 29, 2012

      I think AV learned a hard lesson in last year’s SCF. He was very set in his lines and D pairings all season long and didnt really shuffle the deck all that much and when the injuries hit and all the lines got jumbled up nobody had a clue on how to play with one another. That’s ok in the regular season – not in the SCF. I think it’s the right move juggling lines and defensive pairings around to get players comfortable playing with each other in different situations. One thing I have noticed in the d pairings is something totally different than we have seen the last couple of years. It has always been one offensive defenceman paired with one defensive defenceman – Edler and Salo (offensive and defensive) Bieksa and Hamius (Offensive and Defensive) Tanev and Whoever (Defensive and offensive) . Lately AV has been pairing Bieksa and Edler (Offensive and Offensive) Tanev and Hamius (Defensive and Defensive) and whoever else fills out the bottom 6 so the Canucks have 1 pair of offensive defensmen and one pair of TRUE shut down defensemen. Yes having Edler and Bieksa paired together could be a liablility but the idea of pairing Hamius and Tanev, the teams 2 best defensive defencemen, is a great idea. The Canucks are very well-structured now with defined offence and defense forward lines and defence pairings. Scoring lots of goals and winning games by trying ot outscore oppenents is exciting and fun to watch but isnt sustainable in the long run (ask Washington how it worked out for them) playing a defensively sound/structured game gives them a better chance at winning games even when the offence is stuggling.
      Last year (and most of this year) the biggest problem with the Nucks was when they werent scoring they werent preventing goals either. If they lay the ground work now to prevent goals like this – when the offense does decide to come back it will be much easier to win games – especially in the playoffs.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +9 (from 11 votes)
  16. Lenny
    March 29, 2012

    April 11th, Clutch Day, should be a national holiday, not just provincial.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +15 (from 15 votes)
    • obituary mambo
      April 2, 2012

      OMG — I’m famous! Hey, you guys aren’t stock traders/real estate investors, are you? I’ve recently been followed by a rash of them, which is odd to say the least. Contemplating changing my user name…

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
      • obituary mambo
        April 2, 2012

        BTW, I will be carrying an absolutely stunning clutch on the 11th.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. natevk
    March 29, 2012

    I liked how Higgins caught that breakaway

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
    • Brent
      March 30, 2012

      I’m thinking that this could become a new hockey slang term. It sounds pretty cool even if it is completely wrong. Kind of like “catching the wave” or “catching air” which literally make no sense, but they have a more metaphysical meaning. Maybe that lame-oh CW writer knows more that we think he(?she) did. OK maybe not.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  18. Josh
    March 29, 2012

    Loved that game. The offence will come, and as an athlete, I value defence before offence. It seems to me most people who have played any sport at any kind of a high level understand that defence wins championships.

    On Booth’s fight:
    It was awesome to see Olver get his ass kicked (he really needed that), and I’m happy that Booth took the initiative and stepped up. THAT SAID, I do not like players with visors keeping them on in a fight. Hate it. You should take your bloody visor off if you’re going to scrap. I understand Booth has a concussion history, but I feel pretty strongly about the visor thing; I don’t know that Booth should be fighting at all, in consideration of this.

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
    • hockeyispretty
      March 29, 2012

      I think it would be more cnosistent if everyone took off helmets like gloves for a fight, but since no consensus has been reached by the guys themselves, I don’t really have a problem with people who leave the helmets on.

      VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
      • Josh
        March 29, 2012

        Helmets I don’t have a problem with. I have a problem with guys leaving a sheet of hard plastic over their face when they get into a fight. If you get into a fight you’re taking the risk of getting punched in the face, I don’t think you should be forced to take the risk of f-ing up your hand on someone’s visor.

        VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  19. the real bob
    March 29, 2012

    schenider with the hat trick of shutouts against the avs

    VA:F [1.9.16_1159]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)