Comments on: Canucks’ Report Card: 1st Quarter

By: jensenium

jensenium — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:15:07 +0000

I cringe at the mere thought of talking about report cards, but it has to be done.

Right at the outset, I think one has to choose a strictly statistical report based on real numbers put up by the players, or an opinion-based report outlining potential and hidden gems.

If the grades are not statistical, they’re anecdotal. Most sports anchors can talk for hours about anecdotal performance, but in the end, it’s the big, bad numbers that speak for themselves – especially when sitting in front of a team’s management for contract signing.

The only corrections I could propose would be a C- for Burrows, and a C for ‘Planet of the Apes’ Mitchell. Other than those two, I think you’re pretty spot on.

By: Larenzo

Larenzo — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:40:58 +0000

After reading over what you wrote, and also Nicole, I should have gone with my gut instinct and graded Burrows lower than I did. I guess part of what factored in was that, just as I curved the grade for Henrik in light of Daniel’s absence, so too did I throw the curve onto Burr. Also, Luongo was very close to receiving a ‘B’, but after watching highlights of some of the saves he’s made recently, and particularly against Colorado, so close to his return from a cracked rib, I perhaps was a little generous. Finally, one note I will make here about Kesler, is that I originally projected to put him with the A+ at the head of the class. Not that I like to skew my journalism with personal bias, but Ryan Kesler is my favorite Canuck, and that’s mostly because of his intensity and compete level. Can you believe the guy actually pondered having his broken finger REMOVED in the playoffs to facilitate playing? Now that, I would argue, is dedication and desire.

By: NewsNHL

NewsNHL — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:01:02 +0000

I would have to disagree with your rating for Henrik Sedin.

Although his numbers have been good, there have been large stretches where he hasn’t played very well at all since his brother got injured.

He’s even admitted it himself. I’d give Henrik a B.

And I’d agree about Burrows getting a C, he’s been a disappointment do far. But hopefully things will pickup now that Daniel is back.

Luongo should not get an A, a B at best.

And finally, a separate category needs to be created for Kesler. Not even an A+++ would do his play justice. He’s been the heart and soul of the team, and without him I don’t even want to think where the Canucks would be right now.