• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

216 Good

About coolboarder

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    North America

Recent Profile Visitors

3,232 profile views
  1. Looking back, 2012 summer where we just won President Trophy and lost in 1st round of the playoffs to the eventual champion. One year after was not a massive decline and we just think that if we had beaten LA, we might get some run of our own and might won the cup had we overcame Quick's goaltending. I doubt that we would have foreseen the massive decline that we just saw 5 years later at end of 2012 season. Lockout season did not help things as well because we had a mediocre 48 game schedule, not full 82 games schedule and did not fully evaluate our roster until the Torts year. It ruined our opportunity to make a full evaluation and make some change due to shorten season that time and did not know what type of team we had if lockout didn't happen. I truly believe that if we went through that full season, we might have been able to make that change way earlier. The result out of this: just a coaching change and retain a full roster from 2011 which was a mistake. The team was fully exposed the season after. If 2012-13 season were an 82-game schedule, we might be exposed as well and Gillis would not retain the full roster in summer of 2013 and come out with different roster with a new coach. Again, looking back to summer of 2012 or 2013, the Canucks were at the cap team and could not sign any type of players we wanted and had to make a choice whether to resign Sedin, Edler, Burrows, Kesler, Hansen, Schnider (coming out of ELC if I remember correctly), and had to hand out NMC/NTC for those guys like Garrison and above that I mentioned except for Schnider. All while at the same time, the Canucks have been searching for a PP QB replacement since Salo retired by signing Garrison hoping that he would bring some success from his Florida years. It just didn't happen for us. We could not even foreseen the supporting players like Bieksa, Raymond, Ballard, Booth, Garrison, Hodgson flopped so bad when they had some success with other teams or played with us for a brief time with a massive decline all at the same time at the same year which made things harder for all of the roster and it affected top guys on our team, struggling at times and truly exposed the team on the road during final season with AV/Torts year. Rental players supposedly had a good season with their old club flopped so badly once they became a Canuck after the trade deadline did not help as well. I think that we are the only team that had a massive decline all at the same time from the top to bottom at the same year in history of the NHL compared to other teams. The 2013 lockout has to do something with it just like 1994 and 2004 lockout seasons. Just when the Canucks became good or a championship caliber team, lockout came just at a wrong time, imo. It is similar with 2013 without an opportunity to fully evaluate what type of team we had after a lockout. We finished 3rd that season but without the benefit of playing against Eastern Conference teams, we don't know what type of team we had until 2013/14 season. Sedin, Edler, Burrows, Kesler, Hansen, and Schnider at that time deserved a new contract that summer after the run to the Cup and back to back President Trophy seasons. There were nothing we could do but to resign them to a NMC/NTC contract otherwise fans would still complaining that we didn't sign them and our 2011 team would be gone too quickly and why we would have to go through rebuilding too early. This was all before their decline that happened shortly afterward. No way to avoid this but to actually go through those years of decline before fans start to accept for a change. Now, it's 2017 season, 4-5 years after the glory years, we are looking ahead to better days and who knows that we might be rewarded sooner rather than later.
  2. Would be nice. Short flights in Eastern Conference helps to have more energy. However, Minnesota will be a huge test because it's not that short flight but at least it's on their way home with a stopover.
  3. Well, I have made many comments about DD but my opinion still stand. I'll change my mind after 20-25 games if he keeps it up. Like I said, I am not a fan of his game style has nothing to do with toughness that he played in last few season before that neck surgery. Plus other flaws that I mentioned as well. It's understandable when he just got back from that surgery and neck has no protection unlike other hockey equipment. I do not want to see that affects the team in many negative ways if he didn't pan out after his so-so preseason games.
  4. I've seen a few camera shots at the new arena in Detroit, no wonder, fans are hanging out at concourses.
  5. Take away soft goals, you'd have about a few extra wins or extra points and be higher in the standing already. I do not mind soft goals allowed once in a while but not that frequent since season opener game against Oilers.
  6. I'm saying that if Demko just allows 1 goal for a stretch of 2 months of about 1.50 GAA/ 950 save percent then we should call him up asap if the 2 month stretch has about 30-40 shots allowed in the average in 2 months stretch. There is no reason why he couldn't be called up if they are in playoff position and the Canucks forwards are able to score more goals than last year.
  7. Demko will be here this season if Markstrom/Nilsson keep on allowing soft goals every games.
  8. Boarding call can be subjective because interpretation what is boarding is not consensus in NHL circles. The referee would look at one play and says that it is boarding major while the other referee looks at the same play would say that it is minor. Some fans would say that it is not worthy of a suspension while other fans would say, yes, it's one gamer. I would say that boarding is minor and not worthy of a suspension while others will say that the call is justified. I factored the size difference and not much strides made to the board and is only a glide toward the board while other would say that he thruster into him. He wanted to separate the puck from the man, rather than stopping on the track and not hit on purpose and he would continue to have the puck. Who knows what his intention would be, stick-handling the puck or making a pass when he is receiving the puck until it's a last minute. You don't want him to him to continue freewheeling around the board with the puck and stop him on his track. So thus is the reason I factored that it's just a minor. To me, a boarding is when he stopped completely with the puck for a few second and hit from the behind. In this case, he was just colluding while both of them were on motion along the board and him stopping his track. I have laid my reasons why it is not a disciplinary offense or even a major penalty offense.
  9. I would rather to see consistency than one-side calls across the board. The NHL has a history of favoritism and I don't want to see that happen even it favors us for one night. Through the years, I feel like it's a ratio of 100 bad call against us vs just one for us. Even though that it will continue to have favoritism and biased call against us. Even if it helps us for one night, I want to stick to the principle by calling out NHL to stay consistency with their ruling because too many disallow calls goal against us when there's nothing to warrant a disallow goal, example, Sedin goal that was disallowed but there were no evidence of distinct kick of the puck in the goal in the 2012 playoffs series against LA. I believe that it was Murphy that made the call and keeps on insisting that it was a distinct kick in an interview with Ron MacLean while majority of hockey expert disagreed with him.. Like I said, favoritism exists in the league and I'm asking them to be fair even it helped us for one night in hope for more consistency calls that favors neither teams and shows who is the best team for that night, rather than a help from ref. Also perfect example, a missed instigator call against Boston after Gudbransen boarding major. Even if the Virtanen offside calls be correct after learning that you can skate the puck backward as long as you have control and Jake seemed to show a control of puck after knocking the puck down and still maintain the control without any flinch of the movement even if the second touch didn't happen until the puck was completely past the blue line. This is rarely enforced that allowed for goal to stand with the puck knocked down and the bounces and still maintain control. Reason I say that because most of time in other situations from different games where offside is not called after 4th touch or 5th touch with control but this is just 2nd touch after a multi bounces. I believe that this is first one with just 1st touch and puck was still bouncing up in the air and 2nd touch was not until the puck went past the blue line. Had Jake flinched or hesitated, then he did not have any control and offside should be called.
  10. He has one more year of contract after this season in 2019.
  11. I was speaking of opportunities to do that last two years. He did good this season so far but he was equally bad last 2 years. Maybe neck injury has do something with it but we were all unaware of this until this announcement. I watch majority of Canucks game. Until he proves that he can continue doing this then my criticism of him will stop. Like I said, I am not a fan of his gameplay style, that has nothing to do with fights or being tough.
  12. Let's wait and see if they can muster a 40-50 points season then I might resign them to a year to year deal like Doan but as long as it is not over 3 million dollars for what they bring. Truthfully, if Benning feels that 4 lines are more than ready and is better than Sedin then it's time to move on. I would prefer that this will be their final year unless they decided to sign for less than 2 million dollars. If that is the amount, then the cap would be freed up for up to 10 million dollars and could fetch us first liner or a top D, depending on who is available. If there is no available top scorer or D then it's best to leave that cap open for a future trade.
  13. I'm really pleased on the way the team played, overcoming deficits with and eventually GWG from the error on offside call. It should have been overturned. I would like to see fair call throughout the league, including us without any bias. If that game winning goal happened the same way against us, I'd be fuming. I hate to see other fans fuming over a wrong call like this one. I am seeking consistency from you, NHL. Now, I missed the third period due to getting picking up dinner but I'm really happy on the way they played tonight.