Skip to content

Canucks have to ‘stay out of the box’ tonight versus Oilers

Jan 21, 2014, 2:13 PM EDT

Daniel Sedin Getty Images

Based on what Daniel Sedin had to say Monday, it’s a pretty safe bet the Vancouver Canucks will try to control their emotions a bit better when they visit Edmonton tonight to take on the Oilers.

As you are no doubt aware, three of Vancouver’s last four games have been fight-filled affairs, the last one resulting in a six-game suspension for head coach John Tortorella.

“It’s a fine line,” said Sedin, per The Province. “In the L.A. game we did a good job of [sticking up for] each other. The Anaheim game got out of hand, that’s going to happen. In tight games, like [Saturday's game versus Calgary] and the game before, you have to stay out of the box. We can’t have six forwards left to play, that’s impossible. You want to be a hard-nosed team, but you want to stay disciplined.”

Vancouver has been shorthanded a whopping 28 times in its last four games, its previously top-ranked penalty-killing unit, now ranked third in the NHL, surrendering eight goals in the process.

The Canucks need wins, too. They barely beat the Flames in a shootout on Saturday; that was just their second W in 10 tries.

Meanwhile, the Oilers come into tonight’s game having lost four straight, their overall season so disappointing that owner Darryl Katz felt the need to publish an open letter to frustrated fans yesterday.

Related: Henrik Sedin’s ironman streak is over; Canucks back Torts

  1. davebabychreturns - Jan 21, 2014 at 2:29 PM

    We’ll see what the Oilers get up to, I guess. Obviously with guys like Gazic? Is that his name? On the team you can’t discount any possibility, but I doubt they go into the game planning the kind of bush league stunt Hartley pulled on Saturday.

    Anyway even that game wasn’t much of a penalty fest in terms of actual calls coming out of gameplay. The fireworks at the start and a couple of little flare-ups in the first period aside, seven powerplays in total.

    Hopefully the Canucks keep their heads on straight and focus on beating the Oilers on the ice

  2. qauzaq - Jan 21, 2014 at 2:37 PM

    I still don’t know why the Canucks are patting themselves on the backs for “sticking up for each other”. They’ve been embarrassed a lot the last couple of games. To me there is a way you can stand up for selves and still play relatively disciplined hockey. It just seems like they have been gooing it up recently.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:03 PM

      Think of it like a pendulum swing.

      I don’t think there’s anybody anywhere who thinks it would be a good idea for the Canucks to play exactly this way permanently.

      (Then there is the fact that they have been missing key contributors for some time and are now slumping badly, and as is often the case in the NHL if you’re going to get pushed around on the scoreboard you should at least prevent it from happening elsewhere.)

  3. valoisvipers - Jan 21, 2014 at 2:45 PM

    Torts took the bait, hook line and sinker instead of taking advantage of the situation.
    Maybe Hartley was being sincere about his starters that night.Take a look at Calgary’s second goal last night.
    CGY Kevin Westgarth (1) Wrist shot – ASST: Brian McGrattan (2), Kris Russell (13) 2 – 2 Tie
    He could have been trying to make a point to his own players left on the bench to play better.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:06 PM

      Yeah, he wasn’t.

      The league looked into it and decided to fine Hartley for Westgarth’s actions (starting a fight off the draw instead of playing hockey), that seems pretty conclusive to me.

      Those clowns put up a goal last night but McGrattan still played less than five minutes all game – but I guess if you wanted to you could interpret it as he got more than zero minutes so I guess Hartley thinks he’s a good player.

      As for Torts taking the bait – as I said earlier go check out Friedman’s latest article where he mentions he polled actual NHL coaches on that decision and they all said they’d do the same.

    • imleftcoast - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:13 PM

      By ‘took the bait,’ I guess you mean Torts protected his three remaining centers. How many faceoffs had Westgarth taken before Saturday night? Three. How many times had that line started a game. Zero.

    • elvispocomo - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:48 PM

      As davebabych said: yeah, no. Westgarth’s first point of any kind this year and McGrattan’s first point since Dec 12. Prior to the Canucks/Flames game, Westgarth had 2 faceoffs (1 win, 1 loss).

      There’s no way Hartley put those guys out with good intentions, particularly with Brian “Truculence” Burke having flown in to watch the game in person.

    • joey4id - Jan 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM

      One thing is certain… Hartley lit a fire and Torts saw the smoke. However, Torts did nothing to diffuse the situation. He fired-up the team before the game as soon as he saw the Flames starting line up. He did nothing in LA to diffuse the situation there either. Rather than focusing on winning he decided to fight fire with fire, and that’s fine. He made a decision which cost him 15 days and 6 games. Hopefully it won’t cost the Nucks a playoff spot.

      He could have started his 2nd or 3rd line, and that would have given the Flames a clear message that his team didn’t want to dance. He could have put anyone other than his goons on the ice and instruct them not to drop the gloves. We’re no longer in the 70s. When was the last time you say a player punch the hell out of another player who didn’t want to fight? Wait! It happened twice in the last 10 days. Sestito on Jackman and Sestito (Yep! Him again!) on Nolan. The only “code” that is followed in Van is Torts’ code. He apologized to Lain, but I hope he also apologizes to his boss. A lot of money will be loss if they don’t make the playoffs.

      • davebabychreturns - Jan 21, 2014 at 4:21 PM

        Joey, what was your view like of the altercation outside the Flames dressing room? You must have seen some pretty interesting stuff the cameras couldn’t show the rest of us.

        I mean, I’m assuming you have that kind of access since you can tell us what John Tortorella told his team prior to the start of the game.

        As for “he could have started his 2nd or 3rd line,” NHL coaches disagree with you and agree with Tortorella so here we are. I know you’ve seen my other replies to you today so I won’t waste time giving you the source again.

        As for “rather than focusing on winning” did you happen to see the result of the game? No, you’re just posting because there was fighting? Ironic. As for the Kings game it was a 1-0 game that Sestito’s fight had nothing to do with.

        Earth to Joey..

      • joey4id - Jan 21, 2014 at 4:50 PM

        OMG! Dave…… If you weren’t so intent at dishing on me you could actual learn of few things by asking questions.

        I mean, I’m assuming you have that kind of access since you can tell us what John Tortorella told his team prior to the start of the game.
        1) Sestito was on a radio talk show and told the boys that the Flames were starting their idiots

        As for “he could have started his 2nd or 3rd line,” NHL coaches disagree with you and agree with Tortorella so here we are. I know you’ve seen my other replies to you today so I won’t waste time giving you the source again.
        2) Doug MacLean (ex gm and coach in the NHL) reported on the radio that the Bruins tried this tactic vs TB because they wanted to test their new coach, Guy Boucher. TB started the top line and the B’s were scrambling to prevent a goal.

        As for “rather than focusing on winning” did you happen to see the result of the game? No, you’re just posting because there was fighting? Ironic. As for the Kings game it was a 1-0 game that Sestito’s fight had nothing to do with.
        3) They lost the game in LA 1-0 because of all the penalties they got. They were more concerned about retribution on Brown, and jumping Nolan.

        4) Torts said he would applaud Sestito if he were to do the same thing as he had done to Nolan. Right! Another 7 minutes playing a man short.

        5) If he plays he cards right at the outset of the game vs the Flame he could have played the whole first period on the PP.

        Seriously! Get a life! 💑

      • joey4id - Jan 21, 2014 at 4:52 PM

        I mean, I’m assuming you have that kind of access since you can tell us what John Tortorella told his team prior to the start of the game.
        1) Sestito was on a radio talk show and he said Torts told the boys that the Flames were starting their idiots

  4. thailer35 - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:04 PM

    Can we get a PIM count for the Canucks in the last 4 games? Or some of their PIM/ice time?

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:07 PM

      Lain is at 450 PIMs per minute played for his ENTIRE CAREER right now.

      • thailer35 - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:14 PM

        That is porbably the most incredible stat I’ve heard in a while.

      • elvispocomo - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:57 PM

        And the fastest ever fight to start an NHL career after 2 seconds of playing time. Previously held by John Ferguson in 1963 who fought 12 seconds into his NHL career.

      • imleftcoast - Jan 22, 2014 at 6:06 PM

        Lain got his first goal last night.

    • joey4id - Jan 21, 2014 at 4:11 PM

      PIM
      vs LA 69
      vs ANA 73
      vs PHX 20
      vs CAL 101

      Yes! Some of you will thumb me down. This is for you…. 💋

  5. muckleflugga - Jan 21, 2014 at 3:13 PM

    just when canucks were reaching toward some semblance of respectability…?

    a remarkable naiveté showcased in wake of the vancouver spectacle is dtill evident…by the more gullible among toe rags supporting canucks who should know better given their team’s history at trying to impersonate hockey in the mans’ game…

    and by canadian sports media caught in its own avarice…need for interest where little exists…

    need for outrage

    from fans too long the willing and eager consumer in support of bloodsport…suddenly informed and aware…from calgary and vancouver teams going backward in need of press and exposure going forward…suddenly headliners…from an nhl posturing in advance of court dates…suddenly a concerned and responsible corporate citizen…give me money that’s…

    all i want

    first clue found in bad work by good actors…summer stock…winter feed

    hartley’s delivery…normally smug and deadpan in character…betrayed by suppressed mirth…mocking…unbelievable…the tony goes to…

    tortorella going off…then going off the reservation…what…he was going to slash and rip his way into the flames’ room…how…mcgrattan’s head weighs more than tortorella himself…unbelievable…the golden globe goes to…

    burke and gillis…haggard and worried and careful and neutral…scripted and predictable…in character but forced without managing to offend anyone…a first for both…unbelievable

    method without practice or skill…betraying lies…intention…probable

    second clue found in a bland and predictable script…hockey meet theatre…slap shot meet goon…keystone kanucks meet laurel and hartley…gorilla warfare…how original

    what…no chainsaws

    third clue found in timing…why hockey day on saturday night…big audience and lousy weather and january blues and cabin fever…trapped by the cbc with no tommy hunter or juliet…we’re left with

    nhl the huckster…coaches and management the shill…players the dupe…fans the suckers…nothing new here…bring on the clowns…

    and the fines

    the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about

    cost of league sanction to canucks and flames couldn’t buy the coverage and exposure this farce bought them…crooks and

    sheep

  6. Wineshard - Jan 21, 2014 at 8:22 PM

    I will take the rallying cry the Canucks have right now with a few losses sprinkled in, rather than the tampon-wearing wins they had in recent years. They have a more battle-tested team than I can recall. Better chance in the playoffs now than 10 days ago IMO.

    Joey’s opinion is absurd – how did the lack of discipline cost them the California games exactly? A lucky bounce in LA on even strength and a few own goals before the game got out of hand with a 3rd string goalie were due to lack of discipline? You still lost at 3-1 or 9-1. You have an opinion looking for facts. Not even worth my time.

    • joey4id - Jan 22, 2014 at 6:36 AM

      69 minutes of penalties. They played nearly half the first period on the PK.

  7. canada2014gold - Jan 21, 2014 at 9:26 PM

    Joey hates the canucks, he comes on here to bash them lol. He Hates tortorella so much he thinks he here’s torts talking to him. Hahaha prob has a man crush on him, maybe a poster in his room

Featured video

Chances Blue Jackets bounce back?
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. D. Backes (3074)
  2. T. Oshie (2483)
  3. M. Duchene (2413)
  4. B. Bishop (2185)
  5. S. Mason (2150)