Ohlund Possibly Gone for the Year

Kowch · Post by **Kowch** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:54 am

TSN is reporting that Ohlund has bone chips in his left knee and very well could be out for the remainder of the season.

Ugh... another tough loss if true.

mattola · Post by **mattola** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:58 am

sums up the season.

the toucan kid · Post by **the toucan kid** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:58 am

So it's a safe bet that we can no longer rely on Ohlund or Salo to ever stay healthy again. Mitchell has had a hard career too, good thing our D corps is stacked with quality replacements.

And if we can still get anything for either Ohlund or Salo this off-season we have to pull the trigger.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:09 pm

the toucan kid wrote:So it's a safe bet that we can no longer rely on Ohlund or Salo to ever stay healthy again. Mitchell has had a hard career too, good thing our D corps is stacked with quality replacements.

And if we can still get anything for either Ohlund or Salo this off-season we have to pull the trigger.

So who for and where are you going to trade Luongo? Ohlund's been pretty durable his career with Vancouver and is not even 32 years old yet and you want to dump both him and Salo? Expect Luongo to demand a trade if the Canucks are going to resemble the 2003-2004 Panthers next season.
BTW, both Ohlund and Salo have NTCs. So does Mitchell.

the toucan kid · Post by **the toucan kid** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:27 pm

I don't follow that reasoning at all, the team can realistically improve if the moves are well handled and the money is well spent. Is Ohlund right now much better than Edler will be next year? Salo is just starting to shoot again and without the shot he's nothing but a competent defender. Ohlund's durability since the lockout speaks for itself, and Salo has never had any. NTC's are a bitch, but who knows. Ohlund's deal is up next year anyway I guess so that won't be too hard to shallow. The Luongo thing is pure speculation and the Panthers comparison can probably already be made with Ohlund and Salo.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:45 pm

Ohlund played 78 games in 2005-2006 and 77 games in 2006-2007. He also totalled 24 goals for Vancouver during that time. Last November when Salo and Bieksa were injured, Ohlund was the Canucks best defenceman after that and was a leader on the team during their winning streak. It's not his fault he suffered a concussion earlier in the season and this will be the first season since his eye injury he has missed significant time. Read the story, he's to be evaluated in 4-6 days so he's not done yet and has played through injury before. This team the same as the 2003-2004 Panthers? Get real, that Panthers team gave up more SOG than any other team in NHL history. They had problems everywhere except with Luongo in goal, the Canucks have problems with players named Naslund and such not scoring. Ridding the team of Ohlund by you speculating he will never be relied on to be healthy won't make the Canucks a better team. At least piss on someone who deserves it.

Linden Is God · Post by **Linden Is God** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:44 pm

Crap! Just when everyone was starting to get healthy.

Well I guess this explains why Bourdon has been called up.

Grizzly · Post by **Grizzly** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:47 pm

the toucan kid wrote:So it's a safe bet that we can no longer rely on Ohlund or Salo to ever stay healthy again. Mitchell has had a hard career too, good thing our D corps is stacked with quality replacements.

And if we can still get anything for either Ohlund or Salo this off-season we have to pull the trigger.

Doesn't Salo/Ohlund or both have a no trade clause in their contract ??

Grizz

DonCherry4PM · Post by **DonCherry4PM** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:18 pm

Great now we get to listen to Nonis and all his pundits say that the team never had enough healthy time to evaluate. Thus they just need one more season. Can't prove that scoring help is what we need because there was never enough time for a healthy team to gel and get to see what they can really do.

the toucan kid · Post by **the toucan kid** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:40 pm

I'm not really knocking Ohlund (although he looked absolutely pathetic to me the first ten games or so this year) other than the fact that his health is deteriorating, it's just we can't count on these two older players beyond next year in my opnion. Both guys have NTC's, but they're frequently waived and I would be shopping both guys in the off-season, especially because we don't have much to shop in order to improve this team. Anyway I'm no stat junkie, but I'm sure the Canucks since Luongo got here must be in the upper echelon of shots allowed, unless it just seems that way to me.

rockalt · Post by **rockalt** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:00 am

the toucan kid wrote:Anyway I'm no stat junkie, but I'm sure the Canucks since Luongo got here must be in the upper echelon of shots allowed, unless it just seems that way to me.

I'm pretty sure we were second in the league to Detroit in fewest shots allowed last year. I have no idea about this year though. I imagine many of our stats are down.

jchockey · Post by **jchockey** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:34 am

rockalt wrote:
the toucan kid wrote:Anyway I'm no stat junkie, but I'm sure the Canucks since Luongo got here must be in the upper echelon of shots allowed, unless it just seems that way to me.
I'm pretty sure we were second in the league to Detroit in fewest shots allowed last year. I have no idea about this year though. I imagine many of our stats are down.

That's strange. I was under the impression that Luongo was always in the top 10 in shots against.

Upon a quick stat look-up...
07-08 Luongo 6th in shots against, 06-07 2nd in shots against. I think our shots allowed per game are up there as well.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:46 am

the toucan kid wrote:I'm not really knocking Ohlund (although he looked absolutely pathetic to me the first ten games or so this year) other than the fact that his health is deteriorating, it's just we can't count on these two older players beyond next year in my opnion. Both guys have NTC's, but they're frequently waived and I would be shopping both guys in the off-season, especially because we don't have much to shop in order to improve this team. Anyway I'm no stat junkie, but I'm sure the Canucks since Luongo got here must be in the upper echelon of shots allowed, unless it just seems that way to me.

So if you're a Red Wings fan you would shop Lidstrom because you can't count on him next year. He's 37, older and has been injured this season so he is going to be injured again next season. Do you see what you're saying? Ohlund isn't Lidstrom but he's to the Canucks what Lidstrom is to the Wings, and he's 5 years younger than the Detroit player. Trade away Ohlund and I'll bet you will see him end up in a Red Wings uniform for the next 5 years. Detroit will get him from whomever the Canucks trade him to and we will all end up wondering why the Canucks let him go.
The Canucks have 6 D-men under contract next season and Bourdon in the minors. The jury's still out on him and Krajicek. Even with Edler around, do you think Lucas can play to Ohlund's level when injuries hit the Canucks' D? Ohlund is like Morrison, he likes it in Vancouver, he wants to live here when he retires and finish his career as a Vancouver Canuck. Players like that are far more valuable to the team than the average fan knows. They are the glue that holds teams together and leaders on a team that everyone suspects lacks enough of them. I've seen Ohlund drop the gloves and fight Phaneuf and a very tough Shane O'Brien this season and more than hold his own. Not bad for a "Chicken Swede." Sure, the Canucks need more offence but Nonis has cap room at the end of the season and needs to do a better job of signing free agents. If he needs to move a defenceman, fine but not Ohlund.

Fred · Post by **Fred** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:56 am

I think it's dangerous to compate one player age wise with another. Heck if we compared them all to Chelios they all play well in to their forties. But we all know that's not the way it is. Just like evry one else in life we all eage differently. Ohlund is deffinitley the same player he was 5-6 years ago but there again he's not washed up either. Seems to me there has to be a good mix of young and Veteran "D". With Edler, Krajicek, Bourdon and yes even Bieska we have the youth and the likes of Ohlund & Salo providing the veteran presence. I'm not a fan of Mitchell. He's OK along the wall but in open Ice he's subject to the pylon syndrom. He's be better if he played the role of a tough guy but he isn't that either.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:19 pm

Mitchell is more sound defensively that Ohlund but his outlet passes from his own zone are slower and more tentative. If the Canucks had a roster with big wingers then Mitchell could chip the puck along the boards to those wingers to grind out of the Canucks zone but they don't and Nonis is drafting smaller, fast wingers. So the Canucks defence need to make quick, outlet passes and spend less time in their own zone. This is where the transition game comes into play and offence starts. Ohlund is a much better passer than Mitchell. Ohlund has one year less on his contract than Mitchell and is a year older but isn't old for an NHL D-man. Both of them bring different things to the table but there's not much difference between them.