• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BaerBoBoeser last won the day on March 15 2017

BaerBoBoeser had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

191 Good

About BaerBoBoeser

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect
  1. 2017-18 Season Tickets Thread

    For me, going to a game has always been because I love hockey first and my Canucks second I grew up watching alot of bad teams at the Coliseum but always enjoyed going to cheer on the Nucks even when you knew they would likely lose and to get to see some great stars often on the other side (Gretz, Mario, Bossy, Yzerman, Sakic, etc) If you love hockey there is so much in the game you can enjoy, not just if the Nucks win. You still get to see greats like Sid, Malkin, Ovie, Price, McDavid, Kane, on and on and if you love hockey and can't watch those guys and enjoy their skill, something is wrong with you! lol It will also be fun watching Bo take the next step, Try "grooting" players as he starts to get more comfortable in the league, Stech, maybe Boeser and Juolevi, Granny and Baer take the reins - there's always lots to focus on and be hopeful for and it makes the journey to the cup more exciting. Because, when the fortunes do change, you /me/ all of us who go watch, cheer on our team will have grown more connected to our boys, the same way we were with Burr/Kes/Bieksa/Lou the twins etc To me the best part of that run, was to see guys who you had grown with over time emerge into this great team, to see the Twins who'd been called busts and sisters in their first 2 years here, win the hart, art ross, Kesler emerge to 40 goals, watching Burr go from AHL pest to well...burr....Those are the things that make hockey great, and memorable. It really is the team's "journey" that makes moments like Burr in Game 7 vs Chi, Bieksa in Game 5 off the stantion, so great. Watching a team work to becoming competitive, then a favorite, then ultimately watching them make a run at the cup and growing with them creates the connection that makes you feel part of it. That's what being a fan of a sport and team is about in my mind. Not having that long term connection, and just watching a run, when you haven't been part of the tough years, doesn't make the run as sweet in my view (and very team has its rough patches) or as memorable. The wine is sweeter when you've had to toil the earth. I don't live in Vancouver anymore, but if I did, I'd 100% be out there buying seasons!
  2. 2017-18 Season Tickets Thread

    All class that guy lol
  3. I think the key is sign them before they enter their 4th year. If they aren't signed by then, there's probably a decent probability they go UFA (assuming they have shown they have real potential to that point).
  4. Worry if he doesn't sign next year- He needs some size and strength this and will be the top center on the team for his 3rd year. If he has a big year next year and show's he's physically ready but still doesn't sign, then may be time to get a bit ansty as we're going into his final year
  5. Really? LOL yet again you are FACTUALLY INCORRECT! LMAO How many feet you got in your mouth buddy? Can't handle being wrong so you pile on more nonsense and TRY to insult but just make yourself look more foolish? Here's your sentence 'reading comprehension boy' If Gudbranson was healthy, he'd be the third DMan in Utica behind Larsen and McNeneny. So let's parse out your grammar 1. "If Gudbranson was healthy" - English grammar says Gubranson is the subject of the sentence 2. "He'd be" is a pronoun referencing the noun/subject of the sentence that being Gubranson 3. "the third dman in Utica behind" 4. You're saying according to THAT sentence Gubranson would be in Utica lol LOL maybe rather than trying to insult people on reading comprehension, you learn to use proper english grammar if the above is not what you mean because yet again, I am factually correct as per english grammatical rules. Not sure what else you mean because no one else is in your head but based on what you wrote, my comprehension is 100% correct little guy. In fact, another person who clearly understands grammar responded in a similar manner Sucks to be wrong again hey ?
  6. Wow you seem angry, again, I guess you can't handle being told you're wrong even when you are Moreover, your insults back add to that proof, lose the argument, resort to childish name calling Thanks for proving me right Here's a tip - its a hockey forum ,if you can't handle being told you're wrong when you can't logically defend an opinion on HOCKEY - you aren't going far in life - this is a minor issue in the grand scheme of things, and if being proven wrong here and being told as such leads you to anger and insults, your performance in the work world will not lead to much success. You're welcome
  7. That's nice - I know it hurts for you to accept being wrong The fact you keep repeating the same points I have already proven as baseless 'opinion' says it all Move on man, you lost the debate its a FACT
  8. you speak for management hey? I let management speak for management boy with the inflated ego Management called him up - they could have called another dman up who is a prospect - Pedan for instance or another but they didnt Just because you want to be right kid doesn't make you right - your argument is 'my opinion is right regardless of facts and I know what Benning is thinking even though what I suggest is contrary to his actions' That type of argument is pure nonsense and shows what your issues are on a personal level You're wrong deal with it - and not because I say so - Benning's actions say so Did you mind meld with Benning and is he the one who told you Guddy would be in Utica too if he was healthy? LMAO - Here's a tip kid, you want credibility and to be taken seriously? don't say stupid things like that - it just makes the rest of your commentary basically worthless (not that it wasn't already).
  9. No because Willie's job is to win First bold - um ya you have to play him to get enough games in to expose him - kind of kills your own argument Second bold - put down the pipe guy, I should stop here just given that Gudbranson comment alone but I will end your nonsense by finishing my points Subban has never played an NHL reg season game Larsen has, Biega is a very good 7/8 fill in and McCeneny got a 'look' and it was too early for him but he's also apparently been Utica's best dman most of the year Yes they just called him up and paid him more money not as a pat on the back and recognition, but because fans on a message board were crying Give your head a shake man- the Canucks DECISION TO CALL HIM UP IS THE ANTITHESIS to your whole argument lol But please do continue on believing your opinion takes precedence over the ACTIONS of the Canucks' GM Now I have heard it all
  10. Players take time to develop and especially those that have to overcome size issues From all reports, Subban has played terrific offensively but his defensive game still needs work, primarly because as strong as the kid is, he is now up against men just as strong and so his game has to be adjusted to account for this - he needs to 'relearn' how to play on the defensive side of the puck in the pro game. In junior his speed and strength offset his size constraints so his defensive game didn't look to need as much development as it does now, in the pros, not so much, so he is 'developing' it to play within that constraint. That does not mean he's not a prospect and does not have a shot - indeed he wouldn't be called up if he wasn't. Larsen had pro experience and the nucks needed someone NOW not a player who is still a work in process - your argument here is absurd. Just because the flyer on Larsen didn't work, isn't somehow an indictment on Subban's ability to eventually make the leap - the Nucks clearly hoped Larsen could show better. You do realize, being called up for a player is kind of like a pat on the back, and a bonus for solid play even if you don't see the ice, because for as long as you're recalled you get paid your NHL salary not AHL salary - its recognition buddy - they could have easily recalled someone else like Pedan to come watch games - so dont say 'he didn't play' - it means nothing - what means more is the call up He is still a long shot because of his size (and the reason I suggested above we should move him up to the wing), but he's a talented player that still has a chance to play in the NHL, especially in a league where size is less important. A better question is, do the Canucks have room for him with the emergence of Stech (undersized) and do you really need 2 of the same type of player on a team. And given he's got play within his size constraint in a pro environment, will he be overtaken by players with out that issue and showing well (Juolevi, Brisbois, Niel and a few others). That's the bigger issue in my view, time is running out for him to make the next step HERE, and do we even have room given stech (and young D in Try,Hutton, Gud, and Tanev to a degree) But your argument is nonsense bud - That being said, why not try him on the wing. We lack offensive players in Utica up front - maybe he is better suited there because he is one hell of a talented hockey player.
  11. I don't understand why they don't try to move him to the wing. He's got speed, can dangle , move the puck, is very strong on his skates, and while he's not a great defensive defenseman, his defensive skills and what he's learned would make him a solid winger. It's really a no brainer, you have a terrific talent and athlete that is impeded by his size - try him somewhere that this deficiency is not as big an issue When I played sports growing up (and competitively into my 20s) coaches regularly moved players who were good athletes into roles that 'fit them better' One buddy was one of the best running backs in high school in our state, but he wasn't 'built' like a college running back so when we go to college he was moved to corner - he was a hell of a player that got a sniff of the pros It would be sad to let his talent go to waste without them even trying it, what if we have Marty St Louis 2.0 on our hands or even a zuccarello?
  12. Absolutely, and its not Megna's fault willie play's him on the PP - That is a fair critcism of Willie but he also has a very high standard he seems to hold with players (in terms of effort) - work hard and you get ice. We don't see every single thing that happens in a game or practice yes we'd like to see Sedin Sedin Granny PP1 Sutter Edler Baer Bo (maybe Boucher instead of Megna) Hutton Stech PP2 But maybe Willie is sending a message to Boucher - you're out of shape, ya you're playing bc we have injuries but you're not earning ice and Megna as you said hustles every shift - I seldom see him make an error and he just has stone hands it would seem. So what No Megna is not a top 2 line player, he's not a PP player, but Willie has a standard he expects in effort and if you don't give it, you don't get premium ice (PP) etc - this is what setting the tone is for players - teaching them you don't just 'get ice' because you have skill - because skill alone in Junior boys, doesn't make you a great pro. THAT is what Willie is doing - he's setting a standard and an example If Megna was our 4th line C or a winger or depth guy, who slotted in that role for injuries, got PK time, etc, no one would be whining about him People really need to think about things a bit - We also have had alot of injuries and gaps in our lineup. Megna is a filler and on the top line (when he was there) he was used for his speed and backcheking skills to offset the twins lack of both. As you said, Nucks fans like their whipping boys Willie, Edler, Burrows at a time, the "Sisters" who became 1000 pt players, Megna, Sbisa, on and on....smh
  13. I don't think that's the case at all. Willie's job and sole job is to win games that's the role of an NHL coach unless told otherwise I think people really need to lay off the Willie bashing - I said this in another thread but people in vancouver always seem to need to have their 'whipping boys', and not look at things objectively and in totality/holistically but rather parse out things they don't like about players, coaches, mgmt, and then blow those issues out of proportion 1. Willie has never had a very good team to work with. What have fans said for 3-4 years? Trade the vets and tear it down right? Why? because the game has gotten faster and our team for a while much older and slower - so lets start with that reality. Torts said it, he was right and we all knew it. 2. Then you add the facts our 2 best players who have carried the team for a decade are just not the same players anymore and we moved out some core players (Kesler, Hammer, Bieksa) but had no one young and talented enough to backfill with -just alot of inexperience and AHL plugs - that's not a 'talented team' where you can really evaluate your coaches fairly. If a poker player has 2 / 7 offsuit in his hands, you can't judge him for not winning hands in poker, and also after you ask for new cards (and not getting them) complain that the player didn't win the hand even though he never got good cards (see the hypocrisy there?) 3. For the last 2 seasons Willie has had a mishmash of aging vets, some young inexperienced players, and AHL scrubs as his group to attempt to win with. The fact he's even kept this team competitive is a miracle in itself. People say we need to move out vets bc they are old and slow but then complain that we lose? So you acknowledge we don't have a good team, nothing to replace players with but complain that Willie sucks in coaching? A bit of a paradoxical argument 4. Add to that, that while Willie has managed to keep this mishmash of a team competitive despite its lack of depth, aging players, and alot of injuries the following has occurred with our young players under his watch (and please don't suggest that where we are in the standings means were aren't competitive - i watch most games and there's only been a handful in 2 years where we're not in it and capable of winning- none of the players have ever quit or quit on the coach (a la edmonton) A. Bo - rookie to NHL All Star and now clearly taking over the reigns at both ends of the rink and as a leader in the room B. Granlund went from a cast off and player with zero confidence to player we now see is a top 6 winger who's going to score 25 goals in his real first season in the NHL C. Stecher, Hutton, Try all developing incredibly well D. Baerschi went from no confidence and teetering on becoming a AHL player for life to top 6 winger who IS now a young leader of the new core and is going to be a great player for this team E. Gaunce has developed nicely F. Chaput went from CBJ castoff, to AHL to now what appears a potential long term staple as a 3/4c in the next group G. Sbisa went from fan whipping boy to a potential 3/4 long term, that most fans are sad to likely lose to vegas 5. So when you look at all of the above Willie complainers, talking about 'he doesn't play the young guys and let them develop' and he's an awful coach, and he's garbage this and some objective thinking and look at THE RESULTS HE'S HAD WITH OUR NEXT YOUNG CORE, ALL THE WHILE HAVING TO TRY TO WIN AND TELL ME HE HASN'T DONE A TERRIFIC JOB DEVELOPING PLAYERS. You can't say Willie is an awful coach, ignore all of the above, and suggest these players have developed under him in spite of him, that is complete nonsense. You can complain about certain line combos, ice time allocation etc, but Willie is doing alot right, and is trying to bring players along the 'right' way, to let them earn it, to let them not face too much pressure, to incrementally help them learn to play a full PRO game. You want to complain about his systems, strategy (areas where for sure he needs to improve) go ahead, but if you're going to say he can't develop young players - well look above, and look at reality and his results, they speak for themselves. Willie may not be a great tactical coach, but facts prove he is one HELL of a development coach - and that kind of makes sense given he was so very good in the AHL and had no NHL experience. He's had to learn the strategy and tactics at the pro level on the fly with a weak team People can rag on him as they please, but they don't look to have much knowledge of development if so - because I look at facts and as much as we have all been saying we need a coach to get our next group ready, well if you look at the facts and results, that's EXACTLY WHAT WILLIE HAS ACHIEVED FOR US When Bo raises that cup and passes it to Baer, then to Try, then Stech, then Hutton etc, Willie is going to have been a big part of it, whether he is still here in some capacity or not. He's taught that next core group of leaders how to play the 'right way' - people dont quite seem to understand that. Willie may not coach of the year candidate, and he may not be the right coach for the 'next step of this team's progression' - but suggesting he's crap or hasn't done a stellar job getting our young core ready is ignoring everything you see with your own eyes on the ice.
  14. Benning - Potential to be one of our Best GM's ever?

    The point was since I made it (and no one really gets your smoking metaphor - doesn't really make sense but whatever) Juolevi is an excellent player and needs to play with a pro game with pro players, junior is actually holding him back Concern over him as a defensemen is obviously strength, is he strong enough yet to handle the NHL and 82 games as he needs to play If not, not we have the same issue we had with Virtanen, junior isn't the right place but we can't send him to the AHL So the alternative, could be have him go play against men in Europe. Play's a pro game, with players a notch above Junior and perhaps slightly below the AHL because its less physical but at least he's playing against men and alot of ex NHL'ers = better for his development The comment on Matthews from our friend makes sense, clearly (even though Matthews is a much better player (generational) compared to Olli, playing against men is better preparation to play against men in the future than continuing to play against adolescents. Make sense?