Canucks quarter-pole report card.........
foamy
are playing relative to what is expected offensively and defensively
from them, to their role on the team. A grade of C would indicate the
player is returning about what they expected and want.
H Sedin B+ [ exceeded expectations without Daniel ]
Burrows C [ a return to grittier would have raised his score ]
Bernier D [ good games lately doesn't erase bad wussy early half ]
Sammy B+ [ more than expected especially with the loss of Demitra ]
Wellie C- [ everything they expect defensively, but more O is needed ]
Kesler B+ [ playing great..developed into a leader on and off the ice ]
Raymond B [ injuries had him shuffled, but he's responded and more ]
Glass C+ [ hasn't hurt them, played physical, added a couple goals ]
Hordie D [ he's sucked, shouldn't be in the lineup ]
Johnson C [ everything as expected, PK, faceoffs-more pts to up grade ]
Ripper C+ [ as expected, a couple goals a bonus ]
Salo D [ invisible, 0 goals, 2 a, minus player, no PP pts ]
Ehrhoff B+ [ great pickup by Gillis. Great PP, leads team in +/- +11 ]
Beiskasas C- [ looking better lately, but ugh earlier ]
Mitchell C+ [ stumped on Mitchell. gave him a + cause he hasn't sucked ]
Edler D [ regressed ]
O'Brien C [ what they saw is what they got ]
Lou C- [ higher grade if the season started a month later ]
Raycroft A [ couldn't have given them more or played better ]
The following haven't played enough to be graded:
D Sedin-- looked good
Hansen-- looks good
Grabner-- looked like he really was coming into his own. Can't wait 4 return ]
Schneid-- hasn't looked too good, nneds more work ]
Rome----- not terribly impressed
tagboy
uhhh..... go leaves go ????
Grand Mal
"foamy" <bomb...@sulet.net> wrote in message
news:kT_Nm.53080$Db2.32416@edtnps83...
Looks about right. I'd change those 'B+'s to 'A's, just cause I'd feel bad
asking those guys to do more. I'd give Lou a higher mark, too, but I realize
he's gotta come and make you breakfast and do the laundry first.
Kesler's sure turning into sumpin'. Makes me think of Linden with a bit of
an edge.
Gary
How would you rate the entertainment value of the games
thus far?
Overall, I think I would give them a C+.
- Gary
foamy
> How would you rate the entertainment value of the games
>thus far?
> Overall, I think I would give them a C+.
>- Gary
That's a tough question for me to answer. I don't find them particularly
exciting or entertaining so far. When the twins are doing their thing, it's
more of a cerebral exercise where you sit back and think, oh that was
a smart play. Other scoring is often a product of hard work.
I guess what I'm saying is I don't see many explosive plays which get me
out of my seat.
Of course for a great number of the games, the reason doesn't matter,
they've played a defensive game.
I expected better anticipating Demitra, Grabner and Shorokoffkoff in
the lineup, and hopefully when/if Demitra returns, and Grabner comes
back and continues where he left off, I'll get more of the oomph I'm
hopin' for.
So for me I'd give them a C overall I guess.
Jim
Fearsome Orange
I'd have to agree. I don't recall the last time I was excited by a
Vancouver game, even on they won.
Grade C: Good improve marks if more effort was applied. (Sounds like
most of my high school report cards!)
Fearsome.
Fearsome Orange
Urgh, that should read:
Grade: C *Could* improve marks etc.
Gary
wrote:
Your report cards had a point. : )
- Gary