debluvscanucks

Super Moderators
  • Content count

    19,064
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    61

debluvscanucks last won the day on February 11

debluvscanucks had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

16,197 Gaming the system

3 Followers

About debluvscanucks

  • Rank
    Homer Hall Of Famer

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Interests
    Hockey (Canucks, Senators, Giants, Utica, Team Canada); Football (BC Lions, Giants, Dolphins, Patriots); poker; music; mountain biking; photography; animal rescue.

Recent Profile Visitors

86,568 profile views
  1. I'm fine with costs. It's "waste" that concerns me. It's salaries for some in positions that have become redundant, but they're kept on board anyhow. Because they can. I didn't say no investment in transit...but I also don't want to funnel money into a bottomless pit and Translink has a lot of that. My God, just review the history of some of it to see that in action. Some dumb decisions are made and they cost all of us.
  2. I am not overly confident in how transit money is/will be spent. To funnel money into pockets is a thing over there...I'd rather it be mine than some advisor or planner (I know one personally, it's a bit of a joke).
  3. How about fire the idiots who aren't doing their job properly and change things so loopholes are closed and it isn't so easy for tax evaders to slide through? Come on, it isn't rocket appliances...you have multi million dollar homes with luxury cars parked in the driveway yet the homeowner is a student or homemaker getting low income subsidies? Let's make sure the money funnelling in to purchase and maintain the home is somehow brought into the equation and "earnings" coincide with living quarters/situations. Right now, they're out of whack. If you aren't earning anything, how are you paying for all this stuff? Derp. — The public transit tax credit, which allows the cost of transit passes to be deducted, is being eliminated effective July 1. This is also dumb. So we want people to use transit but are going to eliminate the incentive for them to do so? — The budget dedicates $11.2 billion to cities and provinces for affordable housing over 10 years as part of the second wave of the government's infrastructure program, $5 billion of which is to encourage housing providers to pool their resources with private partners to pay for new projects. "Encourage housing providers". How? By giving them money? Sure, that'll do it.
  4. Keep forgetting about this thread. 4-1 Canucks. I want to say 8-1, but won't.
  5. You just did, didn't you?
  6. Thing is, even a vehicle becomes "a weapon", and that is evident here. People on a mission like this are often driven by irrational thoughts and ideas and it's impossible to limit their access to: cars, knives, etc. Good that he didn't have a firearm, but to put the focus there overlooks what he did have, which is likely mental illness or something driving his behaviour that is the real root of the problem. The weapon of choice will vary with whatever is available at the time.
  7. That we have players in the same discussion as Gretzky and Kurri is pretty huge in itself. As the Sedins wind down, it's important to keep in mind what they HAVE accomplished, not just what they haven't. It's been SO special to have seen them do what they do, in the manner that they've done it. Remember, guys like Gretzy and Kurri also had other guys named Semenko helping pave the way for them...the Sedins have not. People who say they aren't "tough" have to keep this stuff in mind. There's suck it up and go to work against the odds every single game despite being targeted tough, not just drop the gloves and fight tough. Thanks for sharing this. It's easy for some to just "slam" the twins at this point....but it's a matter of respect to me, and they have earned mine. This just reinforces it.
  8. They haven't done anything until they've won a cup. The ultimate reward. Not something that pumps the tires and the egos because "we have the best". You have to be the best. Look, it's all great to have a superstar...but that matters little IN a big picture way because the only thing they are really brought in to do is help win a cup. Anything less and they may as well be Joe Schmoe. Sure, having a game changer increases the odds of getting there but, until you do, it's irrelevant how "good" your pick is. What matters is how "good" your team is. And there's only one goal that measures that. How you get there? No one cares in the end. It is advantageous if it pays off. See above. We had two of the best in the league but no one cares until they bring a cup here. The flash, dazzle, Sedinery will not "count" for much beyond that except to fans here. Sadly. Sure....it increases the odds a great deal if you have a gifted player who is a step above others....but if he scores 4 goals and you lose 5-4, it matters little. This. ^ So if, in your own words, it's much MORE than JUST acquiring that sought after superstar pick, then perhaps it isn't a foolproof plan. Seems like a lot of other stuff factors in, which is our point. Sure, you have a potentially better shot at things, but none of this is guaranteed. High picks aren't. Winning a cup because you have them aren't. It's a whole lot of stuff that has to fall into place and you seem to understand that. And this will tie in to one of my next comments... But all that other stuff too? Putting a stamp on a team is but one part of building a successful team. A scorer doesn't defend or goaltend or coach or train (as you've agreed upon) and so it's important NOT to put all the eggs in a basket. It becomes a great deal to do with ego and team identity, as fans grow restless with "losing" and want a winner. But no one knows the winner until the end...which is why every team gives it a go. Would be no point in playing if there were guaranteed results for teams who did "this and that". Sure, there are patterns that show teams have a better chance if they have depth and draft well....but some still struggle and it's not a formula any more than it's an experiment. And some are successes and some failures. Then why are we grumbling? There's a balance in "tanking" and losing that needs to be kept in check. We're dealing with human beings and confidence (or lack thereof) can have a huge impact over time. We want them to be hungry and never say die...even IF it means winning meaningless games. If it costs us and we drop a pick that we may or may not have stayed in position for, that's unavoidable. Apply the first line to your second. So if Matthews or McDavid don't hoist the cup, how close they came or how great they are won't matter much. They have been rewarded but not with the "prize"...which is the cup. The Leafs are barely hanging on to a playoff spot last time I checked. So sure, they have Matthews but I don't give a flying frisbee about that....they can boast only if he is part of a team that wins the cup. Until then, we're all "non winners" and in the same boat. Look, I am ok with losing at this point...even understand that it's "best" in some regards. But is it? So the team hangs their heads...goes out there and gets beat up and slinks off the ice. Frustrated, because they're still expected to PLAY, but losing is ok? From everything I've ever seen, it's not for professional athletes...they are competitive. We want them to be and it's not usually a switch that you can flick on and off. So the repercussions in stringing together losses, even if perfectly timed in a big picture way, are something to consider. I want these guys feeling the adrenaline of beating the Hawks. I want them to try to beat them every time, without fail. LEARN how to beat them. And that's ok too.
  9. So no one on this team's worth keeping around? The bigger picture is that some of this team will be part of the "future" team so it's important to determine who that should be. We want these guys on board with winning and learning how to get that done, not learning that it's best not to. There is post season hockey to cheer for....GO SHARKS!! Bigger picture stuff.
  10. We can handle it. We just aren't "cheering" for it....it's a whatever will be will be deal. We enjoy the game....not sure why I'd watch if I didn't. I probably wouldn't if they just packed it in.
  11. Haha, crack open the bubbly!!
  12. Good one, Keith.
  13. Again...if the team "sucks", why not come back later when they don't? Proving a point is kind of pointless. And, for some of us, we're here because we're cheering for "this" team....not banking on another, some time down the road.