Canucks: 3 Takeaways from 3-2 loss to Boston

It’s become the story of the Vancouver Canucks season. They do some decent things, have an opportunity to win, and then watch as the penalty kill implodes. It was no different Sunday in Boston.

The Canucks opened the scoring on a greasy Tanner Pearson goal, only to have Jaroslav Halak give it right back by letting in a softy. Even then, Vancouver reclaimed the lead when a Conor Garland shot found its way through traffic and entered the third period up 2-1.

As time began to tick in the third, there began to be some false sense of optimism that the Canucks could steal one. Enter the penalty kill. Nils Höglander was called for tripping, the Bruins went to the man advantage and who else but Brad Marchand tied the game.

Well, maybe they could eek out a point right? Wrong. Oliver Ekman-Larsson, who spent most of his night being bullied by Marchand threw a dangerous hit on Anton Blidh. Penalty called, puck in net, Canucks lose. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The Canucks are now 1-8-1 in their last 10, are dead last in the Pacific and haven’t won on the road in a month. If this isn’t rock bottom, it’ll probably come tomorrow if the Canucks lose to a Montreal team that just fired it’s entire front office, four months removed from going to the Stanley Cup Finals. Marc Bergevin oversaw more playoff series wins last year than Jim Benning has in eight years. But guess who still has a job?

But anyway, on to the three takeaways from the loss.

1. The defensive personnel is the biggest issue with this team

Don’t get it twisted, there are a million issues with this organization from top to bottom. But the fact that Kyle Burroughs and Luke Schenn were killing a penalty with the game on the line tells you all you need to know. Alas, Burroughs got absolutely dusted by Marchand setting up David Pastrnak for a tap-in that would stand as the game winner.

It wasn’t a personnel decision by Travis Green to do that. With Ekman-Larsson in the box, his only other option was Quinn Hughes. Two weeks ago, in a similar situation against Vegas, Green was forced to use Burroughs and Madison Bowey.

Just for a quick reminder, the Canucks depend highly on Tyler Myers and Tucker Poolman to kill penalties which is hilarious considering how bad both are defensively. But that’s the situation Vancouver is in.

It’s not like last year when Nate Schmidt came in and surprisingly played poorly. These players aren’t playing poorly, they’re playing like who they are. Fringe, bottom pairing players. Poolman didn’t forget how to defend or move the puck, he never knew how. Burroughs didn’t suddenly regress into an AHL defenseman, that’s what he’s always been. But that’s who Vancouver is running out there every night, hoping it’ll change.

The struggles of the forwards have been problematic and worrisome, but it may help just a little bit if anyone besides Quinn Hughes could consistently start a breakout. If only there was a young, borderline elite defenseman who would be tied for second on the Canucks in assists right now. Too bad.

2. Jason Dickinson isn’t a liability but he’s not an asset

The deal to bring in Dickinson wasn’t meant to be flashy or groundbreaking. It was meant to bring in a defensively responsible center who could help solidify the bottom six, kill penalties and chip in some offense.

Dickinson hasn’t really done any of that. The Bruins third goal on Sunday happened partly because of Burroughs and partly because Dickinson failed to tie up Pastrnak. In the Canucks 7-1 drubbing against Colorado a couple weeks, Dickinson completely lost his man twice, leading to the Avs opening goal.

There’s no sign of offense either, with Dickinson now going on 15 games without a goal. Again, he’s not the biggest reason the Canucks are a mess, but he’s one of many guys out there every night that make you ask “what exactly is their purpose?”