Warhippy

JUst gonna ask because I know it has been thought but unsure if voiced. How much of the last decade + can be attributed to bad medical teams/advice and care for our players vs the coaching staff needing to win, the GM needing to appear to want to win or an owner that won't keep their nose out of the affairs of the team? I mean let's be honest. This goes all the way back to 2010/2011. The hernias, the hip and back issues, the constant bumps and bruises that keep cropping up with the same players before they get shut down. How can a medical team be that inept for that long and still keep their jobs? This kinda screams interference though above and beyond the medical team as it was.

Hjalmarsson was a great rover for sure!!!

Their careers are not quite done yet. Hedman would be the one I put side by side with Seabrook though, but Seabrook was never a "star" he was just the perfect 1b or 2a complimentary 2 way defenceman. Never did anything super flashy never did anything really wrong just did everything right. Toews? Ya he might end up in the same breath honestly. Doughty? Mmmm......maybe more of a productive roamer than a true 2 way. Pietrangelo? Maybe.... But I'd argue Seabrook is the reason and a huge part of the reason Chicago won those cups because he was just so middle of the road and dependable. I see a lot of similar style in Sanderson. That's all.

A lot of people don't understand this. They keep leaning on point production alone from the blue line. But point producing defencemen are not actual defencemen. Seabrook might be one of the last truly great 2 way defencemen and he was worth almost every penny of his contract.

Brought to you by the team that chose Redden over Chara I kid I kid. but they did. This doesn't look terrible over time but for right now it's a bit of an overpayment for sure. Deal will average out over the next few years I believe because this kid is a great 2 way defenseman

Trying to get back in to scotch style whiskey. So let's see how this pours

It really doesn't. it's a thought exercise. The issue is, to many people are overthinking it

Lol only if ya didn't read it i guess, I could see how it makes little sense. This should be fun exercise in hypotheticals Vancouver doesn't have Hughes or Pettersson but is lining up an offer for them What are they worth? Using Vancouvers current assets line up your best offer for Petey or Hughes. No they do not belong to any one certain team. No there is no cap issues. Yes you are offering whatever you can that Vancouver has to OBTAIN Hughes or Pettersson from a hypothetical team that might hold their rights This is NOT an offer to trade them to another team in the league. This is an exercise to bring them TO VANCOUVER utilizing whatever assets Vancouver has in the organization right now.

If this guy had the mean streak to put fist to face. Could skate or use his size. I could look past any of the other issues but damn...... he reminds me of this kid working in the kitchen of the music venue I bartend at. HUGE kid. Absolute monster. But dumb as a gd post. Sitting holding the clamato button over my ice well wondering why the cranberry looked and tasted funny. No no, don't stiop holding the button. It says C, the one that you want says cranberry. Just keep holding the button down until it clicks bud. Thats Ritchie.

Thanks to those who read and understood the assignment.

OK but this isn't a trade them to Winnipeg exercise. Read the instructions. OFFER YOUR BEST PITCH FROM VANCOUVER FOR THEM!

You absolutely positively missed the assignment. Offer YOUR BEST for them. Not crap on the exercise.

This should be fun exercise in hypotheticals Vancouver doesn't have Hughes or Pettersson but is lining up an offer for them What are they worth? Using Vancouvers current assets line up your best offer for Petey or Hughes. No they do not belong to any one certain team. No there is no cap issues. Yes you are offering whatever you can that Vancouver has to OBTAIN Hughes or Pettersson from a hypothetical team that might hold their rights This is NOT an offer to trade them to another team in the league. This is an exercise to bring them TO VANCOUVER utilizing whatever assets Vancouver has in the organization right now. Pettersson: Willander, Lekkerimaki, Woo, 2024 top 3 protected 1st round pick, 2025 2nd round pick Hughes: Miller 35% retained, Lekkerimaki, Rathbone 2024 unprotected 1st Let's see your best hypothetical trade here for one of these superstars

It has absolutely everything to do with the situation if there has been discussion regarding use of public funds towards a semi private facility. As for virtue signalling, stow that nonsense. We have vastly greater issues than potentially funding corporate welfare and before you chomp on your tooth in trying to respond understand that the last few major arena issues in the league have ALL had major issues with public funding from Seattle to Vegas, Arizona and Calgary. With the cost of land and development in Vancouver as well as the issues regarding housing there is 100% no question that any arena will have some aspect of public funding which should absolutely be a non starter and on the random occurrence that it magically doesn't and some how a billionaire owner of a major series of companies does not ask for corporate welfare, the land use issues will be another major hurdle based on the need for housing. I personally see no reason in which any other number of suggestions brought up here are not feasible or viable for millionaire players with literally dozens of rinks or opportunities within a few short hours drive or flight from GM place

See above comment

You absolutely positively know that any discussions about a new arena have had aspects of public funding involved. Without question.

Not a dime of public money towards any private corporations facilities. I said the same about replacing the Saddledome. These are billionaire owners of teams worth billions of dollars. They don't need help building facilities they just know they can get help paying for them. We have families on the street, working professionals on the street, whole communities of people living in vans/cars while working multiple jobs, endless hordes of the addicted and mentally troubled roaming around but "some" suggest that it is viable to spend public money building a private facility for a person that could literally solve these issues for tens of thousands without harming his own untouchable net worth let's maybe not do that

Find out how many home sales are sold for cash. Not mortgaged. Not leased. Not leveraged. Sold for outright cash up front. between 2014 and 2021 1 in every 5 homes in Canada sold or just over 20.4% were sold to Investors. Since 2021 it has been noted that a significant portion of home sales, over 40% are being sold for cash. CMHC charts sales of certain degrees but still lags behind on home sales for cash. It also lags behind on reporting ownership of corporation/company. Data shows that in the largest cities in the nation that homes/condos are being sold for cash at higher rates but are carry some of the most inflated costs of housing in the G20. With 1/5 homes being sold going to investors, as noted people with the intent of renting, and an additional 40%+ of homes being sold for cash in single time sales (people don't have the money to do that, who does though? (REITs/Property development/management ompanies/investors) as well as the exacerbated number of rental units over the past 3-4 years the data extrapolated suggests/shows that more than 2 out of every 5 home/condo sales in canada are being sold to investors/corporations/companies. This data is to be found in the links added. Admittedly by the authors own assertion extrapolation is needed but all data points to an overwhelming number of purchases being made to investors/companies/corporations Because CMHC and Stats can does not yet chart direct data on ownership by corporation/company or investor this extrapolation is all that there is to go on but all evidence as such points to this being the case since it started being tracked in passing since 2014 and more so over the past 3 years or so. Now that being said, I am sick; I am in the midst of an ugly home reno in which I have my wife and 2 daughters squeezing our arses in to about 500 sq feet and our fridge died so we are all here on edge. My answers are beyond short and quite strong and I should apologize but I don't have the enrgy to apologize or justify why I am such a grumpy butthole right now The math is there, the data exists in part but it is a bit of adding to achieve it but the numbers do not lie and they point to what is being called the financialization of our real estate and housing secotr.

Maybe you should try taking this seriously and understand my irritation If you can't or don't that's fine but being dismissed by someone who refuses to read the data that is rpesented is beyond insulting and quite frankly I don't give a randy shart if you think my response is childish. I'll call anyone out for their behaviour as much as people will mine and for the same damned reasons.

They all lead back to the same series of studies. Maybe try reading them instead of being a dismissive and smarmy douche Just saying Business/Company/Corporation/Investor. This includes investor ownership of a home in which income is derived from short term rentals or air bnb style rental occurences in which income is derived. The fastest growing demographic in Canadian housing is the renter demographic. This directly suggests that investor properties are being built and purchased in far greater numbers than before in Canada outside of the 1960s boom. As the owner of an investor property owns the property solely to derive income or profit. With the recent growth in apartments, dwellings built since 2016 are more likely to be occupied by renters compared with the older housing stock. Just over two in five dwellings built from 2016 to 2021 (40.4%) were occupied by renters in 2021, a higher proportion than any other era of housing stock, except for dwellings built in the 1960s post-war apartment boom. The decline in homeownership is a reflection of the trends in new construction connected to the densification of large urban centres. Apartments in high-rise buildings with five or more storeys made up the fastest growing building type from 2016 to 2021, rising over twice as fast as the overall stock of private dwellings (+14.7% vs. +6.4%) and accounting for 34.4% of dwellings in Canada. Condominiums that are tenant-occupied are most often owned by individuals (as opposed to corporations or other entities), likely as an investment property. According to the Canadian Housing Statistics Program, over three-quarters (77.1%) of the condos in British Columbia and over two-thirds (69.1%) of those in Ontario that were not being lived in by the homeowner were owned by individual Canadian investors. Condominiums are typically less expensive than houses and offer owners an opportunity to invest in the real estate market with an asset that generates both rental income and wealth. Specifically, the following owners are considered to be investors: A business or government that owns at least one residential property, excluding Canadian non-profit organizations.Note Given the predominance of businesses in this category, they will simply be referred to as “business” in what follows. An individual owner who is not resident in Canada, referred to as a “non-resident investor” below. An individual owner who lives outside the province where they own residential property, referred to as an “out-of-province investor” in the province of the non-principal residence. An individual owner who lives in the province and owns two or more residential properties, or owns a property with multiple residential units who does not occupy that property. These individuals will be referred to as “in-province investors”. Maybe try reading them instead of being a dismissive and well. You know

End of fire season (ish) here in Penticton

Here's some ideas for LHD that I was speaking of Tyler Kleven- Ottawa Daemon Hunt-Minnesota Valtteri Pulli-San Jose Evan Nause-Florida John Ludvig-Florida Griffin Mendel-Carolina All of these are options I'd consider for sure as they fit the mold of larger/heavier LHD that can skate that fit the 23 and under age group and could be had for a smaller price due to being buried under the depth charts of not being spoken of in circles as they are not point producers.

the 1% student or home maker incidents here in canada, those were great for BC

It's not JUST corporations, it's companies. Companies from those papers are also designated as being people holding multiple homes (more than 2) for the sole purpose of investment/financialization and income return.

This came from a column I posted a few pages back regarding the financialization of canada's housing sector Edit*. Added links https://www.homelesshub.ca/resource/financialization-housing-canada-1 https://sicanada.org/program/financialization-and-housing/ https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/nhs/nhs-project-profiles/2019-nhs-projects/financialization-housing https://socialinnovation.org/offering/financialization-of-housing/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-financialization-of-housing-is-not-the-problem-in-fact-we-need-more-of/ https://housingrights.ca/national-housing-councils-first-review-panel-on-financialization-to-move-forward/