Lack of Offence is the problem

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
magnum44
CC Veteran
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 4:20 pm
Location: saskatchewan

Post by magnum44 »

I agree with the sentiments being posted but I don't realistically expect any changes. I think we just plod through the rest of the season and wait to try and swing some deadline deals when we can get the maximum return on our assets. I do think we should be rotating some of the Moose through the system though. I doubt schultz or hansen is going to spur the team on but it would be good for their development and give us a better idea of where they may fit in the future. As with Edler we just may find that they are better than anyone thought and a lot cheaper than carrying some of the bums we currently have.
You're only young once, but you can be immature forever
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Post by Arbour »

Nonis's initial mistake was electing to stand pat last year, until he was forced to make trades because of injuries. As others in this thread have pointed out it is preferable to make trades from strength, not because you are forced to. Nonis's prime window of opportunity was prior to the Olympics, before it became apparent to even the most naive hockey fan that there was something seriously wrong with the then chemistry of the team.

Given team financial realities Nonis should have looked to move Jovanovski from day one of last season. Nonis's job is one that demands he maximize his use of assets, and at the beginning of last season it should have been clarified as to what Jovanovski was asking, contract wise, and whether there was any chance of signing him. If Jovanovski's agent was reluctant to negotiate, then it should be treated as an indication that he is most likely not going to sign with the Canucks.

Instead Jovanovski walked for nothing, which has exacerbated the situation this year, since he was an asset which could have been transformed into added depth. This was based on a completely unfounded expectation by management that a team which had repeatedly exited early from the playoffs would somehow, if left together for one more year, do what it had on more than one occasion, confirmed it was incapable of doing. It now appears Salo may be a repeat performance of the Jovanovski situation.

Nonis's second mistake arose from the first, which resulted in questionable contracts being handed out to certain players, and now coupled with the Kessler fiasco, and the realities of the salary cap, plus some dubious free agent signings, the Canucks are in a situation where they are going to have to give up either prospects or draft picks or core players to change the complexion of the team. Trading a plumber gets you a plumber, and trading an overpaid under achiever (if even possible) gets you someone else's overpaid underachiever, except for that rare occasion where a change of scenery results in a player developing into something more than he previously was. Given present management's ability to ferret out hidden talent, I wouldn't hold my breath on that happening.

The third mistake is the assumption that the Sedin's would somehow develop into explosive offensive juggernauts capable of scoring enough even strength goals and igniting the power play, to carry the team through those periods where less talented players were unable to put the puck in the net. That is not and never has been the Sedin's game. They are primarily a puck control line. Their contribution complements a more explosive first line and takes up the offensive slack for more defensive third and fourth lines. They would also fit well into a team where there is more offensive balance between the lines.

Right now the Canuck's are a team that has no real personae, which is different from work ethic. They are not particularly fast, they do not physically dominate, they are not offensively gifted. What they do is what every other well coached NHL team does when it is faced with a lack of a predominate identity, they attempt to shut down the opposition and hope that their hard work results in a win.
User avatar
WCE
MVP
MVP
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:57 pm

Post by WCE »

Very well thought out and articulate post, well done Arbour.
Arbour wrote:
Right now the Canuck's are a team that has no real personae, which is different from work ethic. They are not particularly fast, they do not physically dominate, they are not offensively gifted. What they do is what every other well coached NHL team does when it is faced with a lack of a predominate identity, they attempt to shut down the opposition and hope that their hard work results in a win.
To me, this says it all. When we go into a game against a team other than Chicago or St. Louis we are essentially 'hoping' that things will fall into our favour. This isn't a team that can expect to win against decent competition on any given night regardless of circumstances.

It feels like as a general team strategy (Nonis on down to the players, including AV), we are closing our eyes and hoping the elephant in the room is gone when we open them back up.

I don't care if Nonis has the balls or brains to publically state what is wrong with this team in the media (lack of true talent and offensive skill couple with bad contracts that limit his ability to solve the former). The reality of the situation has become apparent to everyone, stated publically by team officials or not. I would however like to know what his plan is going forward, and he needs to make a choice one way or the other. Either we scrap this year and maximize value on assets like Salo (who if healthy should lands us a 1st round pick and a B level prospect using last year's TD as a measuring stick, eg. Brendan Witt who Salo is head and shoulders above in terms of overall play), or we need to make a trade to get some more offense.

I am pretty much resigned to our fate this year, the cap won't let us do anything that will drastically improve the team.

The trouble for Nonis and Co. though is that while some us are willing to open our eyes and realize the futility (ie. the elephant), many just might open them to other T.V. stations.

Not a good spot for Nonis to be in with a brand new owner...
"We Will Rise Again"

- Fan's sign from the final game of the 05/06 season
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1441
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by DonCherry4PM »

magnum44 wrote:I agree with the sentiments being posted but I don't realistically expect any changes. I think we just plod through the rest of the season and wait to try and swing some deadline deals when we can get the maximum return on our assets. I do think we should be rotating some of the Moose through the system though. I doubt schultz or hansen is going to spur the team on but it would be good for their development and give us a better idea of where they may fit in the future. As with Edler we just may find that they are better than anyone thought and a lot cheaper than carrying some of the bums we currently have.
Well said. I don't really see a big trade on the immediate horizon either, and that being so, it would seem that we are just going to have to sit tight for the season or at least until the trade deadline. But while we are waiting and sucking anyway, we might as well be giving time to our prospects to develope. It's not like our goal scoring would decrease were we to give some time to Hansen or Shultz, like you said, or Mason or Reid or Jaffrey (were we to sign him). Might as well give these guys playing time as opposed to Santala, Chouinard and Bulis. I realize Chouinard is our so-called "face-off" specialist but so far not too impressed. And you never know, we may find a diamond in the rough.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
sic puppy
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:37 pm

Post by sic puppy »

Thought provoking, Arbour, and while I agree with most of what you point out as contributing to this year's woes, it is with the benefit of hindsight.
Arbour wrote:Nonis's initial mistake was electing to stand pat last year, until he was forced to make trades because of injuries.
While this has been debated as far back as the olympics last year, very few saw the probability of the injuries that hit the Nux blue liners while playing for their team.

As I recall, most were looking forward to a re-energized Bertuzzi, not a decimated defence.
Arbour wrote:Given team financial realities Nonis should have looked to move Jovanovski from day one of last season.
Jovo was part of the core players that were given one last kick at making a run in the post season. Argueably one of the prominent leaders in the room and on the ice. The quarterback of the power play.

IMO Nonis doesn't look to unload him at the start of the season. Then the injury. He played in basically one game in Jan and the last 5 games of the year.

While I will agree that as the year went on, the possibility of keeping the majority of the core was looking less likely, the Luongo deal was still a long way off. If...and I agree it's a big "if", the Florida trade doesn't happen, is Jovo still with the Nux ?

The fact that Jovo walked for nothing is certainly unfortunate. However, looking at what Nonis knew then, it's possible Jovo was going to re-sign with the Nux.
Arbour wrote:Nonis's second mistake arose from the first, which resulted in questionable contracts being handed out to certain players, and now coupled with the Kessler fiasco, and the realities of the salary cap, plus some dubious free agent signings, the Canucks are in a situation where they are going to have to give up either prospects or draft picks or core players to change the complexion of the team.
I agree the Chouinard salary amount was mystifying to me, however, I'm not sure what other signings were questionable. Again in hindsight, the amount given to Bulis isn't warranted on production to date, but other salaries seemed to be in line with league market value.
Arbour wrote:Right now the Canuck's are a team that has no real personae, which is different from work ethic. They are not particularly fast, they do not physically dominate, they are not offensively gifted. What they do is what every other well coached NHL team does when it is faced with a lack of a predominate identity, they attempt to shut down the opposition and hope that their hard work results in a win.
Well put. That is probably the best description I have heard in trying to pin point this issue. For those of us who suggested that tearing apart the core would probably result in this type of team and system, it certainly is showing their short commings thus far into the season.

Were we the fans truly believing that the acquisition of Luongo in this first year would solve all of these challenges ? Some posters thought so.

This is still a team in progress, while it may be frustrating to watch, in the long run, we can only hope that it turns out like the re-build in Calgary and the about face of the Wild. After all, this is the model for winning in the post season.
User avatar
sic puppy
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:37 pm

Post by sic puppy »

DonCherry4PM wrote: Might as well give these guys playing time as opposed to Santala, Chouinard and Bulis.
I keep reading posts that infer Santala should be tossed for player A or B. Mostly someone from the Moose.

Of the 28 games the team has played, he's playing 5-7 minutes in 9 games as a 4th line center and his salary is the League minimum. :?
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Post by Arbour »

smalien wrote:Thought provoking, Arbour, and while I agree with most of what you point out as contributing to this year's woes, it is with the benefit of hindsight.
smalien, the problem was evident from the very beginning of Nonis's tenure as GM. Before the Canucks elected not to renew Burke's contract, Burke indicated that changes were to be made and it would involve the core group of players. His observations were made immediately following and as a result of another early departure from the playoffs. Given Burke's public observations one can only speculate as to the closed door management discussions, but it must have been apparent to the then management team that changes were coming and player's jobs were on the line.

When Nonis inherited the GM job in May of 2004, he reacted like a deer caught in the headlights of car and virtually froze. His excuse for doing nothing was his stated faith in the existing team, a team that had repeatedly under performed in the post season, and whose abilities had been called into question by his mentor. To exacerbate the situation further he then signed Morrison and Cloutier to questionable contracts in spite of the looming realities of a salary cap.

Don't forget that Nonis had all of the lockout year to determine what direction he wished to take the team. Not many new general managers have the luxury of a year of relative inactivity to mull over the strength and weaknesses of their team. Prudence would also dictate, given the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement, and the possibilities of a pending salary cap, the effect of the latter on the movement of players would be a primary concern. Many teams planned for that eventuality. Nonis didn't.
smalien wrote:Jovo was part of the core players that were given one last kick at making a run in the post season. Argueably one of the prominent leaders in the room and on the ice. The quarterback of the power play.

IMO Nonis doesn't look to unload him at the start of the season. Then the injury. He played in basically one game in Jan and the last 5 games of the year.
Your argument only applies if you accept Nonis's logic, which I see as more of an excuse to do nothing. It was pretty evident by the beginning December of 2005 that the Canucks were a festering sore. Short of tattooing "trade me" on his forehead, Bertuzzi's on ice performance, coupled with a team that seemed generally disinterested in making an effort most nights, were pretty strong indications that something had to be done. Nonis elected to do nothing, and then came the wave of injuries which resulted in frantic scrambling to get the team into the playoffs.

Regardless of whether Jovanovski was a core player, in my opinion, Nonis was obligated to clarify at the earliest possible time whether he intended to pursue his rights as a free agent. Jovanovski's value as an asset diminished as the year progressed and his pending free agency loomed. The possibility of injury should also have been a factor for Nonis's consideration. It is not an unforeseen eventuality when dealing with players as business assets, and it can effect the value of the player in any potential trade.
WCE wrote:I am pretty much resigned to our fate this year, the cap won't let us do anything that will drastically improve the team.

The trouble for Nonis and Co. though is that while some us are willing to open our eyes and realize the futility (ie. the elephant), many just might open them to other T.V. stations.
WCE I suspect that possible trading partners will become more available after the Xmas freeze, but as you point out the Canucks don't have a lot of cap room to work with. If movement is going to be made it will almost necessarily involve one of the Canuck's bigger salaries. As it stands Naslund has a no trade contract, Luongo is an untouchable, and Kessler can't be traded.

Hopefully Nonis has an eye to the long term development of this team, and doesn't look for a short term fix by mortgaging the future. Unless by the end of December things drastically change, it should be apparent as to how this team will fare, and again hopefully Nonis will have a more solidified idea as to the direction he wishes to go ie build or stay the course. If it is the latter, then other than the above three, no one should be untouchable, however, that is also a precarious road to walk for obvious reasons, given the Canucks are now under new management, Nonis has no track record as a previously successful GM and the obvious expectations of current season ticket holders.

Unfortunately, if the Canucks continue to drop further out of contention, Nonis's tenure as GM becomes all the more shaky, and the temptation is to look for the quick fix when faced with the real possibility of pending unemployment.
User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly »

The reality of the situation has become apparent to everyone, stated publically by team officials or not. I would however like to know what his plan is going forward, and he needs to make a choice one way or the other.
I think the problem here is you have a very inexperienced GM who he himself is not so sure how to rebuild a team. Its all very easy when you have the players and things are going well ... you negotiate contracts and move on etc. Different situation now.
Were we the fans truly believing that the acquisition of Luongo in this first year would solve all of these challenges ? Some posters thought so.
Yeah maybe they were ... there is though definitely more to it than just the Luongo acquisition and the loss of Bert ... as mentioned losing Jovo was huge ... even Baumer added a bit of an offensive flare thats missing. I really like the comment by WCE that we are a team right now without a distinct personality ... very true ... its like the team is trying to find themselves ... almost like a game of pickup hockey where you get different players on your team each week.

Grizz
User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly »

Jovanovski's value as an asset diminished as the year progressed and his pending free agency loomed. The possibility of injury should also have been a factor for Nonis's consideration. It is not an unforeseen eventuality when dealing with players as business assets, and it can effect the value of the player in any potential trade.
Jovo's value did diminish that year ... no question about it .... one might say that DN should have traded him before he fled but I think he probably tried to but couldn't get what he felt was value in return ... also knowing that he was free at the end of the year and there was potential issues with injury why would a GM give up some of their assets to acquire him.
WCE I suspect that possible trading partners will become more available after the Xmas freeze, but as you point out the Canucks don't have a lot of cap room to work with. If movement is going to be made it will almost necessarily involve one of the Canuck's bigger salaries.
Not only do they don't have a lot of cap room they have players with higher salaries who are underachieving. Thats a tough sell for any GM. The other scary part is that it doesn't seem like we have much depth in our youth so it could be tough slugging for a few years.

I do hope DN has a concrete plan but I must admit I am concerned that his lack of experience will have him spinning his wheels. A lot of times managers who are young or inexperienced really work hard and try to give an impression that alot is happening but in reality there isn't a whole lot of big picture stuff actually being accomplished.

Maybe I am wrong ... hopefully I am !!! Likely though its something we might not really be able to see completely for a while or until some more time passes ... becomes hindsite then.


Grizz
Last edited by Grizzly on Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Madcombinepilot
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7093
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:54 am
Location: Saskatoon, Sk.

Post by Madcombinepilot »

I have to wonder about coaching.

Everyone is on the Nux as an unskilled scoring team, but I just don't buy the theory that people forget how to shoot the puck. I would have to wonder if the coaching style change (we now play the cycle as opposed to the crash the net/overload one side styles) has players in practice coached from a defensive standpoint as opposed to an offensive standpoint.
Crow would coach a 3 on 2 in the offensive zone. He would coach the 3 players forward, and getting the puck to the net. AV seems to coach a 3 on 2 from the defensive zone, working with we have 3 players back, and the 2 on offence are on thier own. I just wonder if all the defensive coaching has made guys forget what worked for them in the past when they are in the offensive zone. Our younger players seem to be trying to model themselves after the twins and not doing what was successfull for them in junior.
Perhaps we just need some more time on simple shooting drills and a little less time on the defensive end.

Of course, AV coud just be drilling the defensive end into thier heads to get the system instinctive, and work on offense later..... which would explain the lack of trades from DN. (AV tells DN that the talent is there, andhe is only working on one thing at a time to be sure the players get in down pat before moving on to the next thing)

I have no actual facts on my little theory, I am just trying to look at our offensive woes in a different way. It would be nice if a couple of our insiders gave us a little insight as to what is happening.

What we need is a couple guys to go watch a practice and see what they are working on the most...
The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with until you understand I am in charge.
User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly »

Everyone is on the Nux as an unskilled scoring team, but I just don't buy the theory that people forget how to shoot the puck.

Some of the games I have watched this year the Nux haven't even had a decent opportunity to shoot the puck let alone see if they can. Sometimes the shots are there but the quality of chances aren't great ... other times though there is a quality chance and they simply miss ... the net, the puck ... whatever ... its seems like from nite to nite it can be a mixed bag of everything.

I think it would be a pretty hard team to coach ... its one of those questions you have to ask yourself in alot of areas ... if you are weak at something, do you work hard at it to get better or do you just realize that you aren't gifted in that area and then just focus on what you know you can do. ie work on offence because its weak or leave it alone and focus on defence because you are better at it .... Two completely different theories and styles of leadership/management/coaching etc.

Tough call ... but here we are a quarter of the way through the season and we still aren't sure what we should be working on ... maybe that is coaching or upper management decision and there is a bit of floundering going on ...

Grizz
User avatar
sic puppy
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:37 pm

Post by sic puppy »

As mentioned in my first response, I agree with a lot that you have posted. However, a number of situations transpired that caused a reaction that for the most part (and I repeat, in hindsight) have led to how Nonis has shaped the team to date.

The fact that the team under perforned last year (not making the post season) started a reaction that most agree was the right thing to do. That was to dismantle the team and re-tool from the goal tender out. Emphasis on team defence that would carry them into the playoffs where that style/system wins championships.

The fact that Nonis was able to get Luongo, was the first step. Now he has to complete the pieces that will indeed complete the puzzle. Any one thinkjing that this team would do that in the first year after the surgery that was done on this team is dreaming.
Arbour wrote: smalien, the problem was evident from the very beginning of Nonis's tenure as GM. Before the Canucks elected not to renew Burke's contract, Burke indicated that changes were to be made and it would involve the core group of players. His observations were made immediately following and as a result of another early departure from the playoffs. Given Burke's public observations one can only speculate as to the closed door management discussions, but it must have been apparent to the then management team that changes were coming and player's jobs were on the line.
Your key comment being "one can only speculate". Nonis made it quite clear that the core was to be given one more opportunity. The fact that they missed the playoffs by 3 points given the injury factors, IMO justifies his decision.
Arbour wrote: When Nonis inherited the GM job in May of 2004, he reacted like a deer caught in the headlights of car and virtually froze. His excuse for doing nothing was his stated faith in the existing team, a team that had repeatedly under performed in the post season, and whose abilities had been called into question by his mentor. To exacerbate the situation further he then signed Morrison and Cloutier to questionable contracts in spite of the looming realities of a salary cap.
Certainly at the time the contract extensions to Cloutier & Morrison were questionable, but not out of line with other teams. Now comes the speculation. Do you know who was going and who was staying ? Again, the Luongo signing was not even on the radar and we don't know what Nonis had in mind to re-tool this team if they came up short in the post season.
Arbour wrote: Don't forget that Nonis had all of the lockout year to determine what direction he wished to take the team. Not many new general managers have the luxury of a year of relative inactivity to mull over the strength and weaknesses of their team. Prudence would also dictate, given the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement, and the possibilities of a pending salary cap, the effect of the latter on the movement of players would be a primary concern. Many teams planned for that eventuality. Nonis didn't.
And maybe it was evident to all of us on this board that changes would be made, including Crawford, IMO Nonis did not have that option as a top priority. Again I will mention the Luongo signing and how that changed his plan.

Arbour wrote: It was pretty evident by the beginning December of 2005 that the Canucks were a festering sore. Short of tattooing "trade me" on his forehead, Bertuzzi's on ice performance, coupled with a team that seemed generally disinterested in making an effort most nights, were pretty strong indications that something had to be done. Nonis elected to do nothing, and then came the wave of injuries which resulted in frantic scrambling to get the team into the playoffs.
At the beginning of Dec the Nux were 6 games above .500. With all the warts that the media were suggesting. Could Nonis pull the trigger on a deal for Bertuzzi at this point? Do you deal one of your best assets at this point in the season ? Again hindsight.

Arbour wrote: Jovanovski's value as an asset diminished as the year progressed and his pending free agency loomed.
While I agree that when he was injured his value certainly was downgraded, however up to his injury Jovo was a valuable asset to the team. The fact that he got injured for as long as he was, handcuffed Nonis if he wanted to trade him.
Arbour wrote: The possibility of injury should also have been a factor for Nonis's consideration. It is not an unforeseen eventuality when dealing with players as business assets, and it can effect the value of the player in any potential trade.
Not sure I can even comment on this statement. If this was the case, every manager in the League would be up 24/7 consulting his crystal ball..
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Post by Arbour »

smalien what i meant by the injury statement is that, once Nonis determined Jovo's intentions vis a vis free agency and the chances of resigning him, which I suggest should have been done at the beginning of the 2005 season, the trade value on Jovo begins to run. Another team which is serious about signing him, one would assume, would rather do so at the beginning of the season. The advantages are that not only do they then have their asset in hand and contributing, with all that engenders, but the chances of a bidding war are possibly minimized by offering the player a contract right then and there as a condition of the trade.

The payback to the Canucks is that they do not lose a player to free agency for no return whatsoever. The problem with not orchestrating a trade at that time is illustrated by what actually happened later in the season, the player gets injured and then he can't be traded, or his trade value drops. It is a matter of risk assessment and asset management, predicated on in this case, the salary cap, the chances of resigning that player, and to a certain extent the possibility of the team making a run for the cup. In this case the history of the team, coupled with no significant personnel changes only favoured another first round playoff exit, however, for whatever reason Nonis didn't see it that way.

Unfortunately as arm chair analysts we can only speculate based on outside observation as to what could have or should have happened. From that perspective, and barring a dramatic offensive turn around, it appears things are not going to get any easier for Nonis.
User avatar
sic puppy
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:37 pm

Post by sic puppy »

Arbour wrote:smalien what i meant by the injury statement is that, once Nonis determined Jovo's intentions vis a vis free agency and the chances of resigning him, which I suggest should have been done at the beginning of the 2005 season, the trade value on Jovo begins to run.
I understand what you are suggesting, but you are assuming (speculation) that Nonis did nothing with respect to Jovo at the start of the season.

Again in hindsight , if Nonis is counting on Jovo in the new look Canuck team and signs him (most were predicting that he would command similar numbers to what he signed in Phoenix) does Nonis have the ability to sign Luongo when that deal comes available?

The timing of the injury was IMO a key factor with Jovo. As I recall Jovo made it known he wanted to sign in Vancouver. And it was predictable that not everyone would stay.

Did Nonis react in time ? We can speculate as you said, but we don't know what the scenarios and options management were looking at. I agree that getting nothing for Jovo is/was a huge disappointment, but given the timing and length of jovo's injury and the Luongo deal it was an unfortunate piece of bad luck IMO as opposed to mis-management on Nonis' part.
Arbour wrote: The problem with not orchestrating a trade at that time is illustrated by what actually happened later in the season, the player gets injured and then he can't be traded, or his trade value drops. It is a matter of risk assessment and asset management, predicated on in this case, the salary cap, the chances of resigning that player, and to a certain extent the possibility of the team making a run for the cup.
Agree. A number of variables that Nonis (again in hidsight) went with having Jovo in the line up in hopes of getting to the playoffs. Sometimes the choices work, sometimes they don't. Jovo was an integral part of the team when he went down. Would it have been prudent to trade your top point getting defenceman at that point of the season ?

Again knowing what we know now, sure. At the time, not so sure if I'm Nonis.
Arbour wrote:Unfortunately as arm chair analysts we can only speculate based on outside observation as to what could have or should have happened. From that perspective, and barring a dramatic offensive turn around, it appears things are not going to get any easier for Nonis.
In this province, that is an understatement. ;)
User avatar
Icebreaka
CC Veteran
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:36 pm
Location: Burnaby
Contact:

Post by Icebreaka »

Great thread and debate. I won't add tons of pixels in my response but I think at this point what we need is something along the lines of an under performer for an under performer. We know we don't have much to dangle in front of other teams but you mention someone like Samsonov who is underperforming in Montreal right now. Trade Morrison and Cooke for him or something along those lines and you at least have shook up the chemistry of the team and showed that you are serious about turning this truck around.

Standing pat is going to see this team slip further and further out of playoff contention. It will be painful to watch us get mathematically eliminated in early April.
Post Reply