CanucksCorner.com Forums

Tciso wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 7:33 pm

theman wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 6:10 pm TBH, I am still a bit surprised Labate is still around.

I hear ya. What's that Spinal Tap quote? "He fills a much needed void"

“He was the patron saint of quality footwear.”

No complaints about this one.

Quite impressive actually…

They looked fast! Just need a little depth. Hopefully Sidney Crosby was watching and did the pointing at the tv thing while calling Pat Brisson to go ahead and make the call

The defense were really zippin' some passes up ice last night - not just Hughes, but most of them.

Calgary's reaction to it was late, and pretty feeble. Though when the Flames got into the offensive zone, it made for some long shifts by our guys. A bit concerning, how weak the clears were, and how tough a time the wingers were having getting the puck out.

Looking forward the rematch on opening night. Might be why Labate is still around

Missed the game, saw the highlights.

Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

I think Dustin Wolf probably keeps the game closer. Raty's marker, Sasson's first goal, and possibly Hughes, were quite stoppable. But even good goaltenders have whiffs, when the D is bad. I'd say the 8-1 score is misleading, but 6-1 would still have been realistic.....which is delicious to watch against any team from Alberta.

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Cornuck wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:00 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Yes. That too.....except that it probably wouldn't have been called back by the officials or the league because it's the Canucks.

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:02 am

Cornuck wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:00 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Yes. That too.....except that it probably wouldn't have been called back by the officials or the league because it's the Canucks.

Coulda been challenged in regular season..

rats19 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:14 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:02 am

Cornuck wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:00 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Yes. That too.....except that it probably wouldn't have been called back by the officials or the league because it's the Canucks.

Coulda been challenged in regular season..

So you're saying we would also have gotten a 2-minute bench minor out of it for delay of game? I thought you were supposed to be the optimistic one around here rats.....

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:18 am

rats19 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:14 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:02 am

Cornuck wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:00 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Yes. That too.....except that it probably wouldn't have been called back by the officials or the league because it's the Canucks.

Coulda been challenged in regular season..

So you're saying we would also have gotten a 2-minute bench minor out of it for delay of game? I thought you were supposed to be the optimistic one around here rats.....

We would have won that challenge by a country mile…

rats19 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:20 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:18 am

rats19 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:14 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:02 am

Cornuck wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:00 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

(...and it was offside - would have been called back in the regular season)

Yes. That too.....except that it probably wouldn't have been called back by the officials or the league because it's the Canucks.

Coulda been challenged in regular season..

So you're saying we would also have gotten a 2-minute bench minor out of it for delay of game? I thought you were supposed to be the optimistic one around here rats.....

We would have won that challenge by a country mile…

Legally, yes. Judicially, not in Bettman's NHL.

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Missed the game, saw the highlights.

Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

I think Dustin Wolf probably keeps the game closer. Raty's marker, Sasson's first goal, and possibly Hughes, were quite stoppable. But even good goaltenders have whiffs, when the D is bad. I'd say the 8-1 score is misleading, but 6-1 would still have been realistic.....which is delicious to watch against any team from Alberta.

As bad as Calgary may be this season, the boys came out on a mission last night and the energy/execution level was significantly higher than Calgary's. Even Calgary's prospects were tepid compared to the Abby boys.

If Calgary took last night's game seriously at all (and there were enough prospects who would have an interest in taking it seriously), Vancouver appeared to take it that much more seriously. The Canucks are looking more ready to hit the ground running next week.

We'll see how things go this Friday, but my other take-away from last night is that when Foote's system is working - like it evidently was last night - it will be a frustrating system to counter. If teams have the talent and tactics to beat the pressure, though, Demko and Lankinen are going to be busy with higher-danger chances. Good as they are, I'm not sure this will work long-term. We'll see how often Edmonton can beat it on Friday's last test-run.

Lancer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 10:25 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Thu Oct 02, 2025 9:53 am Missed the game, saw the highlights.

Calgary is not going to be a good team this year. They managed one goal on our backup, and it was only because Lankinen blew an edge and fell over after making an initial save.

I think Dustin Wolf probably keeps the game closer. Raty's marker, Sasson's first goal, and possibly Hughes, were quite stoppable. But even good goaltenders have whiffs, when the D is bad. I'd say the 8-1 score is misleading, but 6-1 would still have been realistic.....which is delicious to watch against any team from Alberta.

... my other take-away from last night is that when Foote's system is working - like it evidently was last night - it will be a frustrating system to counter. If teams have the talent and tactics to beat the pressure, though, Demko and Lankinen are going to be busy with higher-danger chances. Good as they are, I'm not sure this will work long-term. We'll see how often Edmonton can beat it on Friday's last test-run.

I'd love to read more board analysis about Foote's system. When he spoke at the press conference, he emphasized adaptability. But what is his base case ?

System talk is overblown imho RG.

Forecheck, backcheck, paycheque is what it generally comes down to.

Like I used to say at the old CC.

Give a shit.

Every shift.

It's not like anyone is surprising opponents in this day and age of 7 coaches (sic) per team, high end computer and video analysis, mega advanced scouting, AI availabilty and an adherence and ability towards immediate adaptation to nuance.

Footes "base" system of which you speak is denoted out there on the webz for review.

In a nutshell:

Foote has reportedly maintained the base defensive structure, (the old cliche, good defense negates good offense), from the previous regime, of which he was obviously part, but wants the Canucks to generate additional scoring chances by transitioning more rapidly following a D zone shut down. He is coaching to create odd-man rushes by mandating back end support at pace and volume with an eye on instantaneous transition.

I think we saw a fair amount of this on display last night which has been commented upon on the board this AM already.

Hughes to Boeser for goal 1 as an example.

Whether we have the intelligence of mind or skating ability to do this remains to be seen.

Rapid puck movement does create transitional speed so maybe.