Canucks News N Notes 25-26

[UWSaint]

Enough of the smurfs. Who cares if he gets whatever it was he lost, he's still a weenie little dude who won't move any needles even if he gets back to full power.

I've seen enough weenie little dudes darting about thank you

Hoglander doesn’t get knocked around (strong guy, lower body solid), is good in board battles, etc. And while he doesn’t impose physically he’s a pest that gets under the skin of the opposition, and you need that guy.

But I am no fan of the player and am happy to move on from him. But the reason is he is a play killer because he is a terrible passer (almost never tape to tape) and not all that great at receiving passes. You can forgive the poor shot and be happy with just greasy goals, you can offset the mediocre defensive play with the irritating bug quality, but you can’t kill plays nearly every shift because you break to flow with passes in the feet or out of reach or on the backhand instead of the forehand.

(Pet peeve, Canucks are among the worst passing teams in the league, it means they play slow event when their foot speed is adequate….)

[Tciso]

.

(Pet peeve, Canucks are among the worst passing teams in the league, it means they play slow event when their foot speed is adequate….)

Yeah. The eye test confirms. Foote needs to either practice passing, or practice kicking pucks up from skate to stick, and reaching 3 feet further to receive bad passes.

[Lancer]

Enough of the smurfs. Who cares if he gets whatever it was he lost, he's still a weenie little dude who won't move any needles even if he gets back to full power.

I've seen enough weenie little dudes darting about thank you

Hoglander doesn’t get knocked around (strong guy, lower body solid), is good in board battles, etc. And while he doesn’t impose physically he’s a pest that gets under the skin of the opposition, and you need that guy.

But I am no fan of the player and am happy to move on from him. But the reason is he is a play killer because he is a terrible passer (almost never tape to tape) and not all that great at receiving passes. You can forgive the poor shot and be happy with just greasy goals, you can offset the mediocre defensive play with the irritating bug quality, but you can’t kill plays nearly every shift because you break to flow with passes in the feet or out of reach or on the backhand instead of the forehand.

(Pet peeve, Canucks are among the worst passing teams in the league, it means they play slow event when their foot speed is adequate….)

The stats don’t lie, and I wouldn’t disagree with your take on the late version of Höglander. I don’t know if it’s the hands or the head, but Höglander flashed high-end playmaking in his first year or two but that has largely disappeared.

[Meds]

Enough of the smurfs. Who cares if he gets whatever it was he lost, he's still a weenie little dude who won't move any needles even if he gets back to full power.

I've seen enough weenie little dudes darting about thank you

Hoglander doesn’t get knocked around (strong guy, lower body solid), is good in board battles, etc. And while he doesn’t impose physically he’s a pest that gets under the skin of the opposition, and you need that guy.

But I am no fan of the player and am happy to move on from him. But the reason is he is a play killer because he is a terrible passer (almost never tape to tape) and not all that great at receiving passes. You can forgive the poor shot and be happy with just greasy goals, you can offset the mediocre defensive play with the irritating bug quality, but you can’t kill plays nearly every shift because you break to flow with passes in the feet or out of reach or on the backhand instead of the forehand.

(Pet peeve, Canucks are among the worst passing teams in the league, it means they play slow event when their foot speed is adequate….)

The stats don’t lie, and I wouldn’t disagree with your take on the late version of Höglander. I don’t know if it’s the hands or the head, but Höglander flashed high-end playmaking in his first year or two but that has largely disappeared.

I don't recall any high end playmaking. I recall some flashes of high end stick handling and slick moves to the net with moments of scrappy finish too. But I don't recall him being a good passer/playmaker.

[donlever]

Ricky Rypien once tip toed around a defender and top shelfed a beauty early in his career.

The league is full of guys who do flash in the pan shit but once the game figures them out they're done.

I think I've mentioned before I played with some Canucks as a kid up at Hollyburn.

Everyone one of them was Guy Lafleur (Dennis Kearns for instance...Monahan).

But really they were not....

[Carl Yagro]

He is the wider version of MaseyRay... who had one talent that enthralled fans but in reality, couldn't use it to stay in the NHL... unless they realize that they weren't top 6 offensive players.

Same goes for CoHog. I'm sure you could dig up Topper's old scouting reports. Peeps got enthralled by his Euro Michigan and early attempts here, but both EP and him have been exposed as fraudulent without much better players protecting them or doing the grunt work.

They simply don't make enough plays at ES against even average matchups.

Hoglander may fancy himself a top 6 player, but his career would be much better as a bottom 6... something a Mason Raymond or Malhotra recognized and altered their games to extend their careers.

Playing more like Ted Blueger would make him a better player for the Canucks. His offensive IQ and hands simply should not be relied on in a top role. His penchant for dumb, retaliatory penalties makes it worse as a piece you are relying on.

Debrusk/EP/Hogs would have trouble getting Abby out of the basement. Honestly, many here would love to move on from all three along with TFGs. Even if you bring back garbage, it's still fresh garbage.