The Canucks lost another game in the shootout on Thursday night, losing the game 4-3 to the Detroit Red Wings. While they didn’t deserve to win the game based on their play in regulation time and overtime, the shootout is a different animal. It usually has very little to do with the run of play. They lost the shootout because Detroit is a much better shootout team than the Canucks.

The Canucks are one of the best teams in the NHL but they are one of the worst in shootouts. One would think that a team that boasts a Vezina trophy finalist and a lineup filled with offensive talent would be good in shootouts. Instead, Vancouver has a 3-5 record, are 19th in shooting percentage and are 5th worst in save percentage. And this is not a new problem for the Canucks, it has gone on a few years. They were 4-5 last season and 4-4 the year before and 3-7 the year before that. So what gives?

No Go-To Guy

The shooters that beat Roberto Luongo on Thursday night were Pavel Datsyuk and Jiri Hudler. That should come as no surprise, as these are the Red Wings’ go-to guys in the shootout. The Wings have played in 6 shootouts and Datsyuk and Hudler have shot in every single one of them. If they needed a 3rd shooter, Todd Bertuzzi would have been called upon.

The Canucks quite simply don’t have a go-to guy in the shootout. Mason Raymond and Alex Edler were given the assignment on Thursday, but they don’t shoot all the time. Alex Burrows and Cody Hodgson have shot most often, but they have only shot in 5 of their 8 shootouts.

Alain Vigneault

Alain Vigneault does not stop pucks or score goals, and if he had a guy like Pavel Datsyuk in his lineup he would get questioned a whole lot less. But with that being said, Vigneault has done a poor job of giving his team the best chance of winning in the shootout.

Vigneault needs to recognize who his best shootout performers are, and stick with them. Too often he has played hunches or given opportunities to players just because they are having a good game. What he ought to be doing is identifying his top guys and turning them into shootout specialists. The Canucks’ shooters were never more consistent than when Kyle Wellwood and Pavol Demitra were trotted out in each game, despite their play in regulation time. Last year AV failed to recognize Jeff Tambellini as his best shootout option, as he didn’t select him every game despite his excellent career shooting percentage.

This year, Vigneault needs to realize that Cody Hodgson and Alex Burrows are his two best shootout specialists. Burrows and Hodgson are each 2/5 in the shootout this year and consistently put forth a great effort. A lot of fans and media have been suggesting that Vigneault give Daniel and Henrik Sedin another chance. Perhaps Daniel should get the odd opportunity (after Hodgson and Burrows), but Henrik has put forth some of the worst shootout attempts I have ever seen (including this one).

Roberto Luongo

Quite simply, Roberto Luongo needs to be better. He is too good of a goalie to perform this poorly in the shootout. Luongo has a respectable career shootout save percentage at .663. Currently this year, Luongo has a .476 SV% in the shootout.

Luongo is 49th out of 57 NHL goalies in save percentage. He appears lost in the net, biting on every fake and getting beaten by any decent shooter. But it didn’t used to be this way.

In Luongo’s first season in Vancouver (2006-07), he was pretty good in the shootout. He had the 25th best shootout save percentage out of 71 goalies. Lu was even better the following two seasons (07-08, 08-09), but has seen his shootout save percentage drop in each of the last three seasons.

It appears that either Luongo’s reactions are starting to slow down with age, or shooters have a book on him.

Luongo might want to consider shifting the way he approaches the shootout. Unlike some other goalies, Luongo treats a shootout attempt the same as a breakaway. He stays reactive to the shooter and doesn’t make the first move or keep the shooter guessing. While this is probably the best way to play a breakaway, it leaves him prone to shootout attempts when players walk-in with pre-planned moves in mind. A lot of the successful shootout goalies keep the shooter guessing by utilizing the poke check or mixing up their positioning.

Shootout Philosophy

As I have already outlined, I believe the Canucks should identify their top shootout players, and run with them. This should be done with at least 2 of their first 3 shooters. Even though the Canucks don’t have a stud in the shootout like Pavel Datsyuk or Jonathan Toews, they can still identify a specialist or two.

Maybe above all, the Canucks need to treat the shootout seriously. That means practicing it and scouting it. The Canucks ought to be scouting goalie and shooter tendencies. It boggles my mind every time I see Alex Burrows walk-in and score with the same old move on opposing teams. I mean, if I know the move he’s going to do, how is it that NHL teams don’t?

Perhaps the Canucks already do a lot of scouting for the shootout, but it doesn’t appear so.

The good news out of all of this is that there are no shootouts in the playoffs. But the shootout can be the difference between finishing first, second or third in the conference, and that can be the difference in who hoists the Stanley Cup in June.

After the Canucks thrilling 4-3 win yesterday against the Boston Bruins yesterday, I decided to look for a Boston perspective on the game. What I read was downright frightening.

Say what you want about Vancouver’s media, but they don’t openly bend the truth to any degree that they do in Boston. It seems as though the Bruins can do no wrong with the Beantown scribes, much in the same way that the Republican party can do no wrong on Fox News.

Let me offer a few examples:

Joe Haggerty (CSN):

It was an eventful afternoon for Shawn Thornton facing down a Vancouver Canucks team he’s come to hate over the last year.

Six Canucks players ganged up on him in front of the Canucks bench in a chain gang-style attack more appropriate in a prison laundry room rather than an NHL rink. The order of events was pretty simple: Thornton saw somebody slash at Daniel Paille as he exited the ice for a line change, he went to investigate the situation and then got tangled with the biting Burrows.

Burrows waved his stick blade around Thornton’s neck and it was on like Donkey Kong.

“I see myself as a pretty honest player,” said Thornton. “But, I’m not going to let someone spear me in the throat. I’m also a man so I stand up for myself.”

The six Canucks attackers doesn’t even count the two Canucks players sitting on the bench holding Thornton against the boards as six other Vancouver players attempted to work him over. Nathan Horton, Milan Lucic, Zdeno Chara and David Krejci ended up pulling bodies off the pile, but the image of six players attacking one guy was enough to make any NHL traditionalist’s stomach turn.

Poor Thornton. He must have left in a wheelchair after that kind of attack by eight people! Oh wait, he was totally fine? Probably cause he wasn’t Haggerty completely misrepresented the entire altercation. Check out the video below and skip to the 2:00 mark to see how the melee started.

Want a more accurate recap? Burrows taps Paille on the ankle. Thornton slashes Burrows (the euphemism used by Haggerty was that Thornton “investigated the situation”). Burrows poked his stick in Thornton’s chest (as opposed to Burrows spearing Thornton in the neck as was suggested by some in Boston). Thornton drops the gloves and goes after the much smaller Burrows, so his teammates stepped in (even suggesting that 6 players on the ice attacked Thornton is completely false, Hamhuis doesn’t go near him until the rest of the Bruins players pile in, while Henrik looked to join in but decided smartly to go to the bench because there were six skaters on the ice due to the line change). The players that stepped in immediately were Malhotra and Bieksa, who never threw punches followed by Weise and Lapierre. Lapierre was the only player visibly throwing punches.

From Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe:

Playing the Vancouver Canucks is like playing a collection of A-Rods or a full squad of Bill Laimbeers. The defending NHL Western Conference champions are a virtual conga line of Claude Lemieuxes and Ulf Samuelssons.

“B-R-U… I-N-S, WE ALL KNOW WHO’S THE BEST! BRUINS! BRUINS! YAAAAAAAY BRUINS!”.

More from Shaughnessy:

Here’s something from Stephen Harris of the Boston Herald, recapping the Brad Marchand hit on Sami Salo:

On the play, Marchand had the puck along the boards, looked up to see 6-foot-3, 212-pound Vancover defenseman Sami Salo charging at him and ducked down low to avoid the hit. Salo flipped up over Marchand, hit the ice hard and suffered a concussion.

Please. To mention Salo’s height and weight is to suggest that he is some kind of monster that was planning on delivering a bone crushing hit. Watch the replay, Salo is hardly charging at him. He wasn’t going at him with a lot of speed. Furthermore, how often has Salo ever delivered a big hit? Has he ever injured anyone? I can’t recall one and I have been watching him play hockey for ten years. Also, Brad Marchand has a history of this exact type of hit, and in the past it was done maliciously. Sort of like his hit on Daniel Sedin, after the whistle in last year’s Stanley Cup final. Was Marchand afraid of getting nailed by Daniel Sedin on that hit too? Sorry, I meant to say, was he afraid of getting nailed by 6-foot-1, 187 pound Daniel Sedin when he CHARGED at him? There, that’s better.

I’m not sure how any objective observer could watch the game played yesterday and come to such ridiculous conclusions. I think the rest of the hockey world saw what Canucks fans have known all along. The Bruins are a big, tough team, but they also take cheap shots and complain a whole heck of a lot. When they go after players, it’s honourable, and when players go after them, it’s cowardly. It seems as though they have brainwashed their cheerleaders media members as well.

Something that hasn’t received enough attention until only recently is how poor the Canucks have been at 5-on-5 play. Sure their power play is fantastic at a league best 26.7% and their penalty killing is respectable, ranking 12th in the league at 84.4%. But it is their play at even strength that is concerning. Currently Vancouver ranks 22nd in 5-on-5 play, not good enough for a team that prides itself on its skill level and depth.

This was not the case last regular season, when the Canucks finished the regular season second best in 5-on-5 play, behind those f***ing the Boston Bruins. But in the playoffs, the Canucks struggled at 5-on-5 play, and ran into trouble in the final when the referees whistles went missing.

Poor play at 5-on-5 is an indication to me that the team isn’t working hard enough. Scoring on the power play isn’t easy, but it doesn’t take nearly enough grit to do as scoring 5-on-5.

Looking at their roster, there’s no reason that they ought to be poor at even strength. It’s still early in the season, but there ought to be more production.

When I look at the team’s even strength goal scoring leaders, alarm bells go off for me. Jannik Hansen and Chris Higgins, each with 5 even strength goals, lead the team. Those two players have combined for more even strength goals this year than their top four forwards: Henrik Sedin (3), Daniel Sedin (2), Alex Burrows (3) and Ryan Kesler (0).

The NHL season is still early, but it’s not THAT early. Nineteen games have passed and it’s time for the Canucks’ best players to get going.

Don Cherry did something that he rarely does on Coach’s Corner yesterday, he talked about the Vancouver Canucks. Cherry said the Canucks weren’t paying the price (actually he said ‘playing the price’, but we know what you meant Don). He also said that people were unfairly pointing the finger at Roberto Luongo (actually, he said Lulongo… he said Bieska too in case you’re wondering), that the Canucks need to block more shots and that they need to stop whining. And you know what? He’s right… Mostly.

Skip ahead to the 5:15 mark for Cherry’s Canucks rant:

So are the Canucks ‘paying the price’ enough? No, I don’t think they are. I don’t necessarily think that this is something people should be overly concerned about yet, it’s still early after all, but they’re not playing up to their potential yet. I don’t say this because for statistical reasons, I say this because I watch the games. Their effort could be better, and I expect that to improve.

What Cherry is out to lunch on was using the blocked shots stat as an indicator of a team’s desire to win. Blocked shots can depend on a whole host of factors. A team will have more blocked shots when they give up more shots against, are shorthanded a lot or play a tight defensive system that allows shots from the outside, but not many odd man rushes. It’s also a poor indicator when you consider that the Canucks were ranked 25th in blocked shots last season, and the Stanley Cup champion Bruins were ranked 15th. The New York Islanders led the league in blocked shots last season, and the Maple Leafs were second. Both of those teams missed the playoffs.

And what about Cherry’s assertion that the Canucks are whiners, and that’s one of the reason that everyone hates Vancouver? I’m not sure that the Canucks have a lot more whiners on their team than other teams in the league (Chris Pronger whines all the time, but never gets called a whiner), but that’s definitely the perception. To borrow a phrase from David Pratt, in this case, ‘perception is reality’. It doesn’t matter if the Canucks do a lot of whining, if that’s the perception, it won’t help their case with the referees.

The Canucks have a reputation as being whiners and divers and that needs to stop. Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows and Maxim Lapierre don’t and won’t get the benefit of the doubt on borderline calls. It’s part of the reason they didn’t get calls in the Stanley Cup final. It’s also the same thing that happened to former Canucks Todd Bertuzzi and Jarkko Ruutu. Bertuzzi was perceived as a whiner (probably because he complained about EVERY penalty and offside call against him) and Ruutu was perceived as a diver. I don’t think the current Canucks are as bad as those two, but the perception is as such.

What the Canucks need to do is be squeaky clean in the area of diving and complaining to the refs. Cut out every bit of nonsense, because any shred of diving or whining will get magnified. If the Canucks can shred that reputation, it’ll help them win games come playoff time.

Earlier this week we took a look at the Canucks goaltenders and defencemen, deciding who is likely to return and who is likely to move on. Today, we look at the Canucks’ forwards.

Mike Gillis doesn’t have a lot of work to do with his forwards, but he does have options. His most important forwards are already under contract for next year, so it’ll be just a matter of tinkering with his depth forwards. Given the lack of production from his second line at even strength, he may want to find a better winger to play with Ryan Kesler.

Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin, Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows

They’re all part of the core of this team and all locked up long term. They’re not going anywhere.

Mikael Samuelsson

Samuelsson had no shortage of critics this season but I wasn’t one of them. He is a smart, versatile player with a good shot and can get on some nice scoring streaks at times. He was playing hurt for a while this year which hurt his production, but I think he can regain his old form. He’s also a Stanley Cup winner and has underrated grit. He stays.

Mason Raymond

The time for Mason Raymond to prove that he is a legitimate second line winger is almost upon us. He turns 26 before next season and in my mind the jury is out on him. He might have been a prime candidate to be trade bait this offseason, but given his current injury, he won’t be. The Canucks will hope that he can show more grit and more finish, especially if he is going to be playing alongside Ryan Kesler for long periods of time. He stays.

Manny Malhotra

He’s a leader, does a lot of the intangibles and assuming his eye recovers 100%, he will be back for another season. He stays.

Chris Higgins

Chris Higgins is an unrestricted free agent and had a very impressive playoffs. There’s probably not enough money for him here and he will sign elsewhere. He goes.

Maxim Lapierre

Lapierre probably exceeded everyone’s expectations in the playoffs this year and that should earn the restricted free agent a raise. He’s earned probably $1.3-1.5 million. The question is if the Canucks can afford to pay him and play him on the fourth line. The other question is if they need to make space for Cody Hodgson. I think Lapierre is trade bait. He goes.

Cody Hodgson

Cody Hodgson didn’t get a lot of playing time with the big club this season, but that may change next year. The organization’s top prospect is now 21 years old and needs to play. Is more AHL time in his future or do the Canucks play him out of position on their 2nd or 3rd line? In the end I think the Canucks play him on the wing. He stays.

Jannik Hansen

Hansen had a breakout year, and will return to the team, but at what price? He’s a restricted free agent and could get more than $1.5 million. They’ll find a way to do it though. He stays.

Raffi Torres

Torres signed a bargain basement $1 million deal last summer, and I don’t think he intends to be a bargain this time around. I think he brought an important element to the Canucks this year but I think he will sign elsewhere for more money. He goes.

Tanner Glass

I think Tanner Glass’ time with the Canucks is over. He seems to be well liked in the dressing room but he’s kind of a “tweener”. He can do a little of everything, but doesn’t do any one thing particularly well. I think they will replace him with a bigger, more physical player. He goes.

Jeff Tambellini

I thought Tambellini was a nice insurance policy this season, a speedy player that can fill-in at times, but I don’t think the Canucks will want to give him another chance given younger players like Cody Hodgson and Sergei Shirokov should be able to do that as well. He goes.

Victor Oreskovich

Oreskovich had a real nice finish to the season. His combination of size, speed and youth are perfect for the fourth line. He stays.

I’m not sure if Alex Burrows has a widely used nickname yet, but I think we should call him “Big Goal Burrows”. Other players score more goals, but no other Canuck has as much flare for the dramatic, scoring big goals when his team needs it the most. His biggest goals are some of the biggest in franchise history!

Here’s a look at his five biggest goals:

5. 2009: Overtime series clincher vs St Louis

4. 2009: The slump buster

3. 2011: 1-0 goal vs Chicago in game 7

2. 2011: Overtime winner vs Boston in game 2

1. 2011: ‘The goal’

Head coach Alain Vigneault tipped his hand on a few key adjustments at practice designed to improve the Canucks chances for a victory in game 3. Scoring two goals in 8 periods of hockey will tend to lend itself to that.

Forward Lines:

Alex Burrows is back with the Sedins on the first line. Presumably the idea here is for Burrows to jump start the twins. I think it’s a great idea. Despite the fact that Burrows was playing well with Ryan Kesler, they weren’t filling the net at an overly high rate 5-on-5. The Canucks will need the Sedins to get rolling at some point, and Burrows is the guy to do it.

The need for Burrows to get back on the top line is accented by the struggles of Mikael Samuelsson. Samuelsson couldn’t get anything going with the twins and I think they need the gritty Burrows to dig out a few extra pucks for the Sedins.

Samuelsson for his part is now on the fourth line, with Tanner Glass and Cody Hodgson. Hodgson’s insertion into the lineup means that Victor Oreskovich will come out of the lineup. This is a line that should be able to play a regular shift for Alain Vigneault, and I bet they’ll get more ice time than Torres-Glass-Oreskovich in game 1 and 2.

The second line will now feature Chris Higgins and Mason Raymond on the wing with Ryan Kesler in the middle. If there’s a time to try it, it’s right now. All three players are playing outstanding right now, and all three have a lot of speed.

Raffi Torres will return to the third line for the first time in a few games, playing with Max Lapierre and Jannik Hansen. I really like this idea. Raffi Torres has been playing very well of late, and is the best Canuck forward at punishing the opposition’s defense.

Defense:

Sami Salo is practicing again, but probably won’t be ready for game 3. Will Andrew Alberts return to the lineup? Your guess is as good as mine. Keith Ballard was a minus 1 for the first time in the playoffs and Vigneault loves any chance to sit him, so maybe he’s found an excuse to.

Power Play:

Alain Vigneault has finally decided to return Alex Edler to the first unit power play, sending Mikael Samuelsson to the second unit. My only question concerning this is: what took so long? The Canucks are in clear need of another big shot on their power play. Apart from improved point shots, Edler on the point will also open up a lot for the Sedins down low.

Conclusion:

I like a lot of these adjustments the Canucks seem to be planning but none of it will matter if they don’t come to play in game 3. Their effort in game 2 simply wasn’t good enough and that will need to change. They will also need to work at going to the net more and getting in Pekka Rinne’s way. Rinne looks all world right now, but all goalies can be beat if they can’t see the puck.

The biggest game the Canucks franchise has played since game 7 of the 1994 Stanley Cup finals did not disappoint on Tuesday night. It wasn’t easy, but the Canucks finally got their revenge over their arch rivals, the Chicago Blackhawks. It took good goaltending from Roberto Luongo, a smart defensive corps and a gritty effort by their forwards to edge the Blackhawks, 2-1 in overtime.

While the victory was a great team victory for the Canucks, in many ways game 7 was the Alex Burrows show. Burrows, who up until game 6 had many wondering if he simply didn’t have an extra gear for the speed of the Stanley Cup playoffs (due to his lack of production in the playoffs in his career), was all over the ice. He scored the first goal after a great power move by Ryan Kesler. He took a penalty shot in the 3rd period (which I think if he used his patented forehand-backhand deke, he would have scored). He was the one who gave the puck away at centre ice which lead to Jonathan Toews’ improbable game tying shorthanded goal. He was the one who took the ill-timed penalty in overtime. And of course he was the one that scored the clutch goal in overtime to send the Canucks to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Adjustments

Head coach Alain Vigneault kept his new look lines from game 6 in tact for game 7 and it paid off. The Kesler-Burows-Raymond unit was their best line. While the Sedins struggled with Mikael Samuelsson, the 3rd line (Lapierre-Higgins-Hansen) was a pleasant surprise. The fourth line was a rough and tumble line, and looked capable despite limited minutes. Of course, he also started the right goaltender in game 7: Roberto Luongo.

I noticed a different style of play from the Canucks in game 7. There was a clear direction from the coaching staff to not get too spread out through the neutral zone. Even early in the game, the Canucks were loathed to chase the Blackhawks when one of their defencemen brought the puck up the ice.

Home Ice Advantage

I was a little worried that the pressure of the home crowd might work against the Canucks in game 7 but clearly it didn’t. I was impressed with the constant noise from the home crowd. More importantly, I was impressed that the crowd didn’t sound nervous at all.

The Overtime Power Play

Thank goodness Roberto Luongo was able to stop Patrick Sharp while shorthanded in overtime because otherwise the Canucks would be left to answer a lot of uncomfortable questions. The Canucks played a great game in game 7, but their lack of finish almost allowed the Blackhawks to pull off the upset. Had Sharp scored, Alain Vigneault likely would have been fired and Roberto Luongo’s reputation as a big game choke artist would be solidified. The Sedins (no points in game 7) and Ryan Kesler (no goals in the playoffs) would also be called into question. Every aspect of this franchise would have been unglued, had one more shot gone wrong. But Luongo made the save, the team killed the penalty and Burrows made Chris Campoli pay for a poor clearing attempt and the rest is history.

Where was Gillis?

Were you wondering where Mike Gillis was during the overtime winning goal? Well, he was in the washroom!

History Books

Luckily the Canucks avoided being added to the list of teams to blow a 3-0 series lead, because that would have lived on forever. Instead, for the first time in team history, the Canucks won a game 7 in overtime at home. Of course, the only time they’ve won a game 7 overtime came in Calgary on a breakaway goal by Pavel Bure (kind of ironic that one of the lyrics to Kyprios’ song is “Burrows, looking like Bure”). As far as where this goal will sit compared to the other great goals in team history, well that will all depend on how far this team goes. Congratulations boys, the job is 25% done. And the job only gets tougher.

The Canucks announced on Monday that they have re-signed Mason Raymond. The restricted free agent re-signed just minutes before his arbitration case was to be heard. But that’s not the surprising part, the surprising part is that Mike Gillis was able to get Raymond to sign a two year deal, worth $2.55 per season. There’s no doubt in my mind that Raymond would have been awarded more in arbitration, perhaps well more. In fact, most pundits (including myself)were predicting $3 million or more.

This begs the question: why did Raymond settle for less? Was he worried that he would get awarded too much and have the Canucks walk away from the award? Does he just really want to win and knew that a lower cap number would help keep the team together? Or did he just run-in to Mike “the negotiator” Gillis?

Mike Gillis has done a superb job on a number of contracts in his two plus years as Canucks GM. His style seems to lay low, keep quiet and then at the last possible minute offers up his best offer. It’s like playing hard to get. Remember when he re-signed Alex Burrows? Rumours were swirling that Burrows would be traded if he didn’t sign before the deadline, and what do you know, he signs a dirt cheap contract. You could almost just see him starting to sweat, wondering what Gillis was going to do.

The fact that Gillis is a former player agent plays a big part in this also. He knows how players think, what offends them, what impresses them, etc. It’s something that we didn’t see with the last few GMs in this town.

So just how good was this deal? Consider Raymond, a 25 goal scorer is getting $2.55 million and compare that to Clarke MacArthur’s arbitration award ($2.4 million for a 16 goal scorer) or Nikolai Kulemin’s new contract ($2.35 million for a 16 goal scorer). Both of those players are of similar age and clearly not as good as Raymond.

Well, we’ve all had a chance to take a deep breath, sit back and really think about the year that was for our beloved Vancouver Canucks. Gone is the emotion/heartbreak/disappointment/anger from their second straight second round loss to the Chicago Blackhawks. What’s left is a better chance for impartial analysis as to what they did, what they have and what they should do.

Was it as Bad as we Thought?

It’s been over a month since the Canucks were ousted by the Blackhawks. At the time we knew the Blackhawks were good, but we also thought the Canucks could have and should have been better. Perhaps they should have, but consider this. The Canucks lost to the eventual Stanley Cup champions, which suggests they’re a pretty good team. The Blackhawks beat a hard working bunch with a strong defense (Nashville), a high scoring team (Vancouver), an all around talented team (San Jose) and a gritty team (Philadelphia). Basically, they beat different teams and it didn’t faze them one bit. The Canucks stretched the Hawks to 6 games, as far as any of their other three opponents.

I’m not arguing that the Canucks couldn’t have played better or that they don’t have problems they need to fix, but I’m starting to think that they weren’t as bad as we thought they were. We need to give the Blackhawks a bit of credit.

Your Best Players Need to be Your Best Players

So what just happened? Why did the Canucks look so terrible at times against the Blackhawks? For me, it starts with the old adage that your best players need to be your best players. I believe that Daniel and Henrik Sedin were good enough in the playoffs, each notching better than a point per game in the post season. It was the Canucks most important player, Roberto Luongo, who did not play up to par. True, the Chicago Blackhawks can make a lot of goalies look silly, but Luongo ended the playoffs with a save percentage below .900, not good enough for a goalie of his ability. Quite simply, the Canucks as they were constructed this year can’t and won’t win a Stanley Cup with average or below average goaltending.

But now, a little perspective. A lot of uneducated hockey fans are suggesting that the Canucks trade Luongo and “give Schneider a shot”. Lets not lose our minds here folks. Luongo may have had an off-season, but he can certain bounce back and giving the reigns to an unproven good AHL goalie is probably not a prudent move. For those of you in favour of letting Louie go, consider that his cap number will be going down next season, from $6.75 million to $5.33 million. That cap number puts him in 9th place among the other goalies in the league.

Who Would You Rather Have?

For those Luongo haters I also ask you this: how many goalies in this year’s playoffs would you want ahead of Luongo? Certainly not either of the Stanley Cup Final goaltenders. Would it be Evgeni Nabokov, he the man who plays behind all that talent in San Jose and year after year can’t get it done when it matters? How about Ilya Bryzgalov, who after a terrific regular season posted similar numbers to Luongo and lost in the first round. It’s getting harder and harder to make the case for Martin Brodeur now, with his best days behind him he looks like he’s beginning to lose a step and has had a few playoff flops in recent years. The Marc-Andre Fleury argument has always been “he’s got a Stanley Cup ring” but look at this year’s playoffs and I defy you to say that you’d be more comfortable with him in net. Steve Mason proved that having one amazing year doesn’t necessarily mean that it can be sustained, so lets forget about Tuukka Rask, Craig Anderson, Jimmy Howard, Brian Elliott and Jaroslav Halak. That leaves Ryan Miller, who was the best goalie in the league this year, and I would take him ahead of Luongo, but his teams (Team USA and Buffalo) didn’t do as well as Luongo’s this year.

The point? The best option for the Canucks remains to keep faith with Luongo and hope that he has a bounce-back season. Perhaps he needs to play less, and perhaps they’ve learned their lesson in that respect. Maybe he doesn’t need to play every game to be a great goalie, maybe he just needs to get used to resting more.

Where was the Grit?

Against the Chicago Blackhawks it seemed to be non-existent. While the Canucks defensemen were getting pounded, the Blackhawks defensemen cruised around with ease. A little more grit that can play in their top 9 or even in their top 6 should be a high priority for GM Mike Gillis, but once again, a little perspective is needed. Yesterday, Alex Burrows underwent shoulder surgery, while Ryan Kesler revealed he also played through a shoulder injury in the playoffs. It should come as no surprise that grit would be an issue when the two grittiest players in the Canucks top 6 forwards have shoulder injuries. So maybe it’s not quite as bad as we thought.

Defense

What was once the Canucks greatest strength not long ago is now their greatest need. Losing Willie Mitchell hurt greatly, and I contend that he is their most important defenseman. Christian Ehrhoff had a great season, but is not great defensively. Sami Salo actually stayed healthy for longer than anyone predicted, and had a solid season. Kevin Bieksa is now another year removed from his great breakout season, and I’m among those who think that he won’t regain the form that rewarded him with a big contract. Alex Edler stepped his game up more than anyone in the playoffs, which was a pleasant surprise. The Canucks D is missing a bit of nastiness though, something Kevin Bieksa is supposed to provide. It’s also missing a stud on the blueline that can eat up big minutes against the other team’s best players while contributing offensively.

The Recap

The Canucks had a nice regular season, not a great one. They won their division, but finished fourth in points in the Western Conference. They were a clear notch below the Sharks and Blackhawks in the regular season and failed to make it past the second round. That is not the mark of an elite team ready to knock on the door. There were a lot of positive things that happened this year though (the emergence of the Sedins as elite players, Kesler and Burrows proving they can score consistently, Edler and Ehrhoff taking steps forward in their development). Mike Gillis has some things to tweak, no doubt. But how bad was it? It wasn’t so bad, and it can sure get a lot better.

Ten Days Away

The NHL entry draft is ten days away, which not only marks the day that teams pick future NHL stars, but also the start of the NHL trade frenzy! Speaking of frenzies, the free agency frenzy begins in just over two weeks.Check back before the draft and July 1st to get in-depth analysis of just what Mike Gillis’ options are.

Before I buy a domain name online, I always search the web for Godaddy coupon codes. It’s so quick and easy to save a few bucks.