Matt Lee

Matt Lee has been a Canucks follower and a prototypical Canadian for years; it started on the streets by playing road hockey before and after Vancouver Canucks games and it's brought him here. After graduating from SFU with a BA in Communications and a minor in History while serving as the student newspaper's sports editor for two years, Matt is now a student at BCIT's Broadcast Journalism program in hopes of becoming a sports broadcaster.

Feb 212012
 

Throughout the week, CHB will host a series of posts highlighting possible trade targets that the Vancouver Canucks could be pursuing at the trade deadline next Monday.

Shane Doan, Phoenix Coyotes

Photo credit: Yahoo!

RW Shane Doan, Phoenix Coyotes, $4.55M, UFA 2012

Long shot? Probably. But let’s put this in perspective. With every day that passes, the chances of the Coyotes staying in Phoenix seem to grow more faint. Seattle is investing city dollars into building a new NHL/NBA arena, and Kansas City and Quebec also seem like logical destinations. All said, the Coyotes will not be staying in Glendale, effectively removing any type of loyalty or allegiance Shane Doan may still tether to the town. So why not trade their most tradable asset who loves that city?

What he brings

Don’t let the aging veteran fool you. Doan can still play a physical game with the best of them, and the leadership intangibles he would bring would be an added bonus in a Canucks dressing room. His 35 career playoff games over a 15-year career also indicate he’s got the hunger to win a Stanley Cup before he rides off in the sunset.

Why he fits

Doan isn’t exactly a young buck anymore, but he’s still a gritty scoring winger who’d look pretty nice on a line with Ryan Kesler and David Booth.

What he’ll cost

The price to acquire Doan wouldn’t be cheap, and given how the Coyotes are still very much in the playoff picture, it might be tough to see them trading him to a team they may possibly meet in the first round of the playoffs. Phoenix would likely want Vancouver’s most tradeable asset (Mason Raymond), a decent prospect (Jordan Schroeder or Anton Rodin come to mind), and a 1st round pick this summer.

Feb 202012
 

Throughout the week, CHB will host a series of posts highlighting possible trade targets that the Vancouver Canucks could be pursuing at the trade deadline next Monday.

Travis Moen, Montreal Canadiens

Photo credit: ESPN

LW/RW Travis Moen, Montreal Canadiens, LW/RW, $1.55M, UFA 2012

Remember when the Canucks played the Ducks in the playoffs of 2007? There was a highlight in that round where Roberto Luongo had the puck wedged in his pads, not completely covered, and Travis Moen barged in front and jammed both Luongo and the puck into the net. The goal counted. Much rage ensued.

What he brings

Moen has always been a gamer when the playoffs come around. He was a key performer in Anaheim’s 2007 run and didn’t look out of place in Montreal’s 2010 run to the Eastern Conference Finals.

Why he fits

His gritty, crash-and-bang style would look good on a third or fourth line with Maxim Lapierre, and you know that he won’t shy away from contact, especially from a certain Eastern team in black and gold if the opportunity presented itself.

What he’ll cost

Still on the mend with an upper-body injury, the impending UFA is probably valued at a third-round pick. But given the recent going rate for players such as Dominic Moore (second round pick), there may be a team willing to pony up a second-round pick as well.

Jan 072012
 
Cody Hodgson, Vancouver Canucks

Photo credit: canucks.nhl.com

It was about as heated as everyone anticipated; the Vancouver Canucks showed their disdain for the Boston Bruins and vice-versa. Neither team was willing to let the other off the hook so easily, but at the end of the day it was Vancouver eking out the 4-3 victory and coming away with the two points, just like they hoped.

But beyond just the brawls and powerplay prowess, it was two of Vancouver’s most tradeable assets who truly shined in this heated affair. Cody Hodgson had an assist and blasted home the eventual game-winning goal in just 11:19 of ice time, while Cory Schneider made 36 saves in the win.

Neither Hodgson or Schneider were given the chance to be difference makers during last year’s Stanley Cup Final. Hodgson played in the San Jose and Nashville series, but didn’t see a shred of the ice in the last round, while Schneider’s only playing time was when the games were well out of hand.

Isn’t it funny that when that brass ring presented itself today in Boston, both young players stepped up and seized it?

Over the course of this season, Hodgson has shown more and more improvement and you might even be able to make the argument he’s been Vancouver’s most consistent player from start to finish. That’s what the organization hoped he could be; the young spark that could rejuvenate a team still recovering from a mentally and physically-draining playoff. Ditto for Schneider, whose increased workload and sensational performances this year has turned him into one of the NHL’s most coveted goalies on the trade market.

There’s been a lot of talk about trading both players for talent that can help Vancouver win now, but with all due respect to them (I also find myself in this crowd of people at times), Hodgson and Schneider both played big roles in a victory over the defending Stanley Cup champions.

Who’s to say that Hodgson and Schneider can’t help this team win now? The Canucks’ epic 4-3 victory over the Bruins just showed that you’re never too young to make a difference, and you’re not too inexperienced to shine on a big stage.

Jan 062012
 
Roberto Luongo and Tim Thomas

Photo credit: Vancouver Province

Respect is a life and death struggle on that 85 x 200 sheet of ice. Most players are tight-lipped with the word in the locker room, but beyond just salaries and winning or losing games, respect is the richest prize in hockey.

If you know anything about the Vancouver Canucks, you know they’ll be looking to reclaim some respect on Saturday when they meet the Boston Bruins for the very first time since the B’s won Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals and flew out of a rioting city with hockey’s most cherished prize in tow.

Ever since that warm June evening the Canucks have, in one word, been haunted. Haunted with questions about their team personnel and character; haunted about whether or not they were good enough or tough enough to get back to and win in the Stanley Cup Final.

Tomorrow’s game may just be another ordinary regular season match on the calendar, but it goes beyond just any ordinary game. For the Canucks, it’ll be their first shot at redemption. The playoffs won’t begin again for another four months, but defeating the NHL’s most vaunted team in what should be an emotionally-charged affair would go a long way to re-assuring Vancouver and their fans that they can get the job done.

Anyone who’s anyone knows just how good the Bruins are. They’re frighteningly good, winning 23 of their last 27 games dating back to the beginning of November. Their goal differential is a league-best +69. Looking at their roster from top to bottom, they’ve got the pieces to compete for the Stanley Cup for the foreseeable future, so you can see why they can call themselves the absolute best in the league.

That said, the Canucks aren’t all that dissimilar from the Bruins. Down the middle, the club is just as deep and their blue line is just as potent. Goaltending, as chastised as it’s been in this city, is capable of much more than it’s been labeled. Really when it comes down to it, all that separates the two clubs is that one team won the Stanley Cup and the other team lost.

Tomorrow morning’s epic tilt will go a long way in earning some of that respect again. In the regular season and going into the playoffs, that’s the prize the Canucks covet the most.

Jan 052012
 
Vancouver Canucks

Photo credit: canucks.nhl.com

41 games in the books, meaning we’re just 41 games away from the playoffs. The road back to the postseason is a slow and arduous one, but it’s vital the Vancouver Canucks machine is a finely-tuned one for when the games start to matter.

In the meantime, here’s the CHB assessment on how the Canucks stack up at the first half pole. We’d love your feedback and marks, so make sure you hit us with a comment!

Forwards

Daniel Sedin (A): He’d have to go on a goal-scoring run to get close to the career-high 41 he put up last year, but how many Canucks in history can lay claim to having back-to-back 40-goal seasons, anyway? The beat goes on for Daniel, on pace for 92 points. Perhaps the bigger injustice is that the Sedins are 17th and 21st in All-Star voting, behind the likes of Joffrey Lupul and Sidney Crosby and his 8 games played this year.

Henrik Sedin (A-): Ho hum… Another 100-point season may be in the cards for Henrik, who has once again led the offensive charge for Vancouver. His passing has once again been superb, but he’s on pace for his lowest shot count (122) since the first post-lockout year. You can’t argue with the results, but would it kill the guy to be a little more trigger happy?

Jannik Hansen (B+): He had just three points in October, but had seven in November and then exploded for 12 in December. The point progression has mostly to do with Hansen’s ability to seize an opportunity on a scoring line, but there’s no arguing the Great Dane has been physical and buried a lot more scoring chances then in years prior.

Alex Burrows (B): Burrows is on the right track again, looking to pot another 30-goal year in his pocket. There has been a steady change in Burrows’ game over the years, however; he rarely gets himself into altercations anymore, and in fact he has fewer penalty minutes (26) than both Sedins (34 and 28). His five game-winners are also a team-high.

Ryan Kesler (B): The offseason hip surgery was well-documented, and Kesler’s slow start corroborated with that. But since a five-game point streak to cap off November, putting up 14 points in 15 December games. We’ve seen glimpses of “Kesler Beast Mode”; we just want to see more of it.

Chris Higgins (B): Injury woes aside, a full year of having Higgins in tow has been a godsend. He hits, he scores, and he’s a decent skater, and at $1.9-million this year and next, the Canucks get great value. His 29 takeaways are also best on the team, which shows just how committed Higgins is to not being a defensive liability.

Mason Raymond (B): Considering the circumstances, Raymond’s earned a good grade. While he’s currently mired in a patented Raymond point slump, the speedster came back looking as though he hadn’t missed a beat, fearlessly going back into the corners to dig out loose pucks. Raymond has also shown less hesitancy to jump into the slot for a scoring chance.

David Booth (B-): The potential is there, and we saw flashes of it just before Booth went down with a sprained right knee. His three-point effort against the Flames in his 18th game as Canuck whet fans’ appetites, but when he returns to full health, fans are banking on a shorter adjustment period this time.

Cody Hodgson (B-): Hodgson averages about 12 and a half minutes of ice-time a night, which is about what you’d expect for a team that has Henrik Sedin and Ryan Kesler up the middle. But he’s utilized that time effectively on most occasions and he regularly plays on the second powerplay unit. With every game he gets a little more confident with the puck and isn’t that what you hope for?

Maxim Lapierre (C+): Lapierre has the team’s third-best faceoff win percentage. And while he anchors the fourth line, he plays 11 solid minutes a night, which is generally more then most fourth-line centres in the league. More notably, his 121 hits are 41 more then the next closest Canuck.

Manny Malhotra (C): There’s one statistic you care about most with Malhotra: his faceoff percentage. It’s a shade down (58.2%) from last year (61.7%), but it’s still among the NHL elite. On a team oozing with offense, Malhotra will never be counted on to score, but he’s on pace for his worst offensive output in nine years.

Andrew Ebbett (C): What’s needed to be said? Despite his limited opportunities, Ebbett has made the most of them, even scoring a couple big goals against Edmonton a couple weeks ago. He’s a depth guy who relishes any chance he gets to play for a good team, and that kind of hunger is appreciated.

Dale Weise (C): When it comes down to it, is Weise an upgrade over Tanner Glass? Virtually the same player, Weise brings the same physicality that Glass did and occasionally scores the out-of-the-blue goal. The Canucks are obviously hoping Weise can bring the same type of fire that Raffi Torres brought in last year’s playoffs.

Defense

Alex Edler (B+): On track for 58 points, Edler stemmed the summer belief that Christian Ehrhoff’s powerplay presence would be missed. Doug Lidster’s single-season record of 63 points by a defenceman would require a Herculean effort on Edler’s part, but on a team this good, he may still do it.

Kevin Bieksa (B+): For many of the Canucks, none were happier to see October in their rearview mirror than Bieksa, who had just three points and was a team-worst minus-7. Since finishing off November on a three-game point streak, Juice had 13 points and was plus-11 in December and is on track to for his first 40+ point campaign since 2009.

Dan Hamhuis (B+): Ditto for Hamhuis, who had a pretty woeful October of his own but has since picked up his play. Hamhuis has been steady defensively as usual, and has since become the face of the team’s special teams units, playing the most shorthanded minutes and the sixth-most powerplay minutes.

Sami Salo (C+): He may be the greybeard on the team, but Salo has been a rock on the blueline, still playing quality top-four minutes and still being a fixture on special teams. If Salo can somehow make it through the regular season healthy, there’s an outside chance he can reach his career-best of 37 points.

Andrew Alberts (C): Simply put, the Canucks literally need more bang for Alberts’ buck. For a bottom-pairing blueliner, Vancouver should expect a ‘take no prisoners’ approach from Alberts, who needs to provide more of a physical presence in order to stay in the lineup. He’s one of the biggest bodies on the backend, is that expecting too much?

Aaron Rome (C): A hand injury and nagging thumb injury has hampered Rome, who quite honestly has been one of the steadiest blueliners. His game is about as ugly as it gets, but his safe defensive game wins the praise of Alain Vigneault.

Keith Ballard (C-): Is it now safe to say that Ballard has been given every opportunity to shine? Ballard’s lack of success can no longer be pinned on injuries, and his hefty salary only makes his troubles harder to bear. Ballard may be third on the team in blocked shots, but that’s not enough. He needs to turn things around fast.

Goaltenders

Cory Schneider (B+): You get the sense that Schneider’s early success could pave the way for Vigneault turning to him on a more regular basis. Statistically, he’s been superior to Luongo, but the Canucks may also be doing a good job of showcasing the most coveted backup in the NHL.

Roberto Luongo (B): “Good, bad, and sometimes great” might be the best way to describe Luongo’s performance thus far. We’ve seen the best and worst of Luongo, so Canucks fans are hoping there’ll be more consistently good nights when it matters most. But the leash isn’t as long as it once was.

Dec 142011
 

Well someone’s going to get a lump of coal for Christmas.

In case you’ve missed it, Chicago Blackhawks third-line centre Dave Bolland didn’t mince words in a WGN interview on Monday, chastising the Vancouver Canucks and calling out the Sedin twins:

“I hate all of them [the Canucks]… I don’t think we’d let [the Sedins] on our team. And yeah, they probably would still be sisters. I think they might sleep in bunk beds. The older one has the bottom one, the younger one got the top.”

Slow clap, Dave Bolland. Slow clap.

Maybe Dave Bolland played up to the laughter of the crowd during the interview. Maybe he himself embraces being public enemy number one in Vancouver, or maybe he wanted to see if he could get a rise out of some of the Canucks. Either way, Bolland succeeded in ruffling at least a few feathers.

For every fan who has come to appreciate the Sedins, there’s the troll who have followed the “Sedin sister” label, and Bolland’s latest comments allowed those trolls to come out of the woodwork in droves today. Some Canuck “fans” even suggested on the TEAM1040 that they’d rather have Bolland in their lineup than the twins. Bolland’s comments forced both Alain Vigneault and Mike Gillis to jump to the defense of their top players:

“Dave Bolland has an IQ the size of a bird seed and a face only a mother can love.”  – Vigneault

“If someone wants to take a shot at them after all they’ve accomplished, especially over the last three years, it rings hollow in my ears.” – Gillis

Dave Bolland can jab at the Sedins with his Stanley Cup ring all day, but it absolutely astounds me that anyone can actually hate the Sedins.

They’re twin brothers who were drafted into the NHL with the highest of expectations. They were burned at the stake in Vancouver when they didn’t produce in the early days of their careers, to the point where they were this close to going back to Sweden. Not only did they manage to train hard and prove those naysayers wrong, they exceeded our wildest expectations, becoming the first two Canucks to ever win Art Ross trophies (Henrik also won the Hart trophy). Their charitable work in the Vancouver area is also unrivaled; they donated $1.5-million of their own money to the B.C. Children’s Hospital.

If Dave Bolland or any of the Canucks chief rivals can’t (or don’t want to) see just how good the Sedins are on the ice or how genuine they are off of it, it’s probably best to turn the other cheek and ignore it.

The Sedins and the Canucks have never cared about what the media or other teams say about them, and they’re not about to start. They’ve got other, more important things to worry about, like winning the Stanley Cup. That’s the only thing that will shut up every last one of those critics.

Dec 072011
 

The NHL officially approved a new four-conference realignment format. The changes made, however, don’t put the term “realignment” to justice; a “colossal shakeup” seems much more fitting.

Here are the proposed four-conferences and their teams:

NHL Realignment

Photo credit: CBC

In case you haven’t heard yet, let me get you caught up to speed. The major points:

  • Divisions are eliminated and instead are replaced with four conferences. The two “Western Conferences” (for lack of a better name) each have eight teams; the two “Eastern Conferences” each have seven.
  • The new conferences are designed to accommodate “geographic proximity” and “established rivalries”.
  • The 7-team conferences will play each other six times (3 home, 3 away). The 8-team conferences will play each other either five or six times on a rotating basis. The NHL has also mandated that every team in the 30-team league will play each other at least once every season.
  • Winnipeg, as expected, will play Western opponents the majority of the time; Detroit, on the other hand, will continue to play traditional Western rivals as opposed to moving to the East, as originally anticipated.
  • The top four teams in each conference will qualify for the playoffs. Yes, this means that a Western team effectively has a 4 out of 8 chance of making the playoffs, while an Eastern team has a 4 out of 7 chance.
  • The top four teams in each conference will play each other in a 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 format; the winners of the first round will then play each other in the second round. The four “conference champions” would then be re-seeded and also play in a 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 format.
  • Therefore, it’s conceivable that two “Eastern” or two “Western” teams could meet in the Stanley Cup Final.

There you have it. Clear as mud, right?

Strictly speaking about travel, this new re-alignment is fair, because:

  • Vancouver, for example, will avoid needing to travel to Detroit, St. Louis, Minnesota, Nashville, Dallas, and Columbus twice a year. Similarly, Vancouver’s increased trips to Los Angeles, San Jose, Anaheim, and Phoenix means less mileage.
  • The old adage that Eastern Conference teams “have it easier” will no longer be able to be said. Now that all 30 teams will travel to play each other at least once, those Eastern seaboard teams (I’m looking at you, New York, Buffalo, Philadelphia, etc.) will have to make a trek to the West more often that normal.
  • The two teams which seem to get the short end of the stick are Florida and Tampa Bay, who’d have to travel northeast a hell of a lot more than they normally would.

The real issue is how the re-alignment affects teams competitively. The major points:

  • Yes, the “Western” teams have less chance to earn a playoff berth than the “Eastern” teams. That will only fuel the fire that there’s an Eastern bias in the NHL.
  • Some conferences are an absolute joke; Detroit, Chicago, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, and St. Louis could all fight tooth and nail for one of the four playoff spots, while the Boston and Tampa Bay seem to be the only real playoff threat in their own conference. It’s hard to stomach two of Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo and Florida making the playoffs while a team like Nashville (who is on par with, if not better than all of the preceding teams) could miss out.
Nov 262011
 
Roberto Luongo and Cory Schneider, Vancouver Canucks

Photo credit: canucks.nhl.com

In just about any other hockey market, it’d be an easy choice. But this is Vancouver, so of course every decision has to be deliberated and scrutinized.

Who would you start? Roberto Luongo or Cory Schneider?

At first look, it’s Cory Schneider and it’s not even close. He’s got the hot hand, pocketing consecutive shutouts and surrendering just a single goal in the last three games. Based on those feats alone, Schneider should be rewarded for his stellar play. The old saying is that you go with the goalie that gives you the best chance to win, and Schneider is that goalie right now.

To enhance that point, Alain Vigneault has always been the type of coach who will tell his players that hard work and good play doesn’t go unrewarded. If you’re playing well on any given night, you could find yourself with increased ice time and a chance to shine. By that logic, why should the goalies be any exception? What kind of message would Vigneault be sending the rest of his team if he doesn’t start Schneider against San Jose?

If Roberto Luongo is indeed a team player, he’ll let Schneider between the pipes.

And now let’s go to the pro-Luongo side of the spectrum. First, let’s look at Schneider’s last three outings; in his 2-1 victory over the Senators and shutout victories against the Avalanche and Coyotes, the back-up wasn’t nearly tested as often as his counterparts in those games. In all honestly, if the plan all along was for the Canucks to showcase Schneider to the rest of the NHL, they’re doing a damn good job of it.

I’m not trying to take anything away from Schneider’s three victories. But they were easy wins against teams that are 13th in the Eastern Conference (Ottawa), and 12th and 9th in the West (Colorado and Phoenix). None are good bets to crack the postseason.

At the end of the day, I’m just thankful I’m not Alain Vigneault making these decisions. It’s almost a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation; he can’t win with the fans no matter who he decides to go with.

Like I said, it’s an easy choice. But in Vancouver, nothing ever comes easy.

Nov 132011
 

In hockey, there are two types of intimidation.

There’s the kind of mental intimidation a team imposes before a game — where a team knows it will win games before the puck is even dropped (The great Soviet Union teams of the 1970s and 1980s will attest). And then there’s the other, more obvious kind: physical intimidation.

The Boston Bruins are the poster boys of physical intimidation.

Lost in the Bruins’ steamrolling over the Sabres on Saturday night was when Ryan Miller came out of his crease to play the puck and saw Milan Lucic — all 220 pounds of him — barreling down on him and hitting him at full speed. Miller got up quickly and had some choice words for Lucic after the game, but for the most part, the Sabres didn’t really respond and fight back.

Now I could give you the ol’ Don Cherry spiel about how players should be policing themselves and how if you do something that violates the hockey player code, you’re going to pay the price. But that issue’s been beaten to death, so I’ll spare you that.

The Lucic fiasco last night harshly reminded me of Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Finals, when Brad Marchand used Daniel Sedin’s head as a human speed bag, clocking him with six jabs before a referee stepped in. Daniel Sedin, like the Sabres last night, didn’t fight back. The Canucks, on that night, with the game already out of hand, didn’t fight back.

And looking back, that incident might’ve been the final nail in the coffin for the Canucks. With their blueline already depleted, the Canucks’ inability to fight back gave the Bruins the kind of mental advantage they’d need to win Game 7. For so much of this series, the Bruins bulldozed and bullied their way en route to winning the Stanley Cup. Hindsight may be 20/20, but it leaves me curious as to what the end result would have been if the Canucks not absorbed all the bullying the Bruins laid down on them.

That kind of intimidation is a big part of how the Bruins operate. Physically, they’re a daunting team; Lucic, Nathan Horton, Shawn Thornton and Johnny Boychuk are all over 215 pounds, while Zdeno Chara at 6-foot-9 and 255 pounds is the undisputed king of intimidation.

It’ll be important to keep this x-factor in the back of your mind when the playoffs roll around again in April. You get the sense Mike Gillis keyed in on that intimidation when he brought in Byron Bitz (6-foot-5, 215) and Dale Weise (6-foot-2, 210 pounds) into the fold. You can also bet the team is hoping Aaron Volpatti will keep up his physical play for long stretches, too.

Nov 042011
 
Kevin Bieksa, Vancouver Canucks

Let’s get one thing out in the open: Kevin Bieksa is not Christian Ehrhoff, and that’s as much of a good thing as it is a bad thing.

When Mike Gillis made the decision to let Ehrhoff go so that he could retain Bieksa over the offseason, few Canucks fans even batted an eye, let alone flinched. And few would, given Bieksa’s heroics during the playoffs (Ehrhoff, conversely, was hit-or-miss throughout the postseason).

The price tag wasn’t cheap — $23-million over five years ($4.6-million for those crunching the numbers). On July 1 when Bieksa inked the extension, other blueliners were signing contracts for far more extravagant prices (James Wisniewski at 6 years, $33M and Ed Jovanovski at 4 years, $16.5M).

But the honeymoon between the fans and Bieksa’s play has long worn off since then. Defensively, he’s been a nightmare, caught swimming in his own end, making out-of-character passes up the middle, and finding himself making unnecessary pinches in order to generate offensive plays. A lot of these traits could be expected out of Ehrhoff, who again isn’t exactly a defensive stud, but not Bieksa, who was arguably the Canucks’ steadiest defenceman outside of Dan Hamhuis.

Simply put, Kevin Bieksa is trying to do too much. Maybe he’s trying to replace some of the offensive void left by Ehrhoff, who put up a 50 spot last season, but by trying to do too much, he’s making mistakes he doesn’t normally make. Bieksa was at his best last season when he kept his game simple, strong first passes out of the zone and a constant snarl around the Canucks crease.

This isn’t the first time Bieksa has been in a funk. We saw this version a lot two years ago. During last spring’s playoffs, Alain Vigneault attributed Bieksa’s improved play to the fact the blueliner “stopped chasing the game”. Somewhere in that hard exterior of KB3, that simplified game is just dying to re-emerge.

Bieksa, stop chasing the game. Let the game come to you.