SimplyHockey

Members
  • Content count

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

491 Excellent

About SimplyHockey

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect
  • Birthday March 27

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Nanaimo, British Columbia
  1. It is obvious your little clip is a direct criticism of Bieksa and you are entitled to your opinion. However, I was not commenting on the credibility of your posts, only the credibility of your criticisms of Bieksa in the manner you examplified it. With respect to your other comments, where in my post did I suggest to you that your comment reflected my opinion. I believe you are referring to a post I made to Mr Rhymes. It was not directed to you. Nor did I make reference to players fighting in my post to you. Seems you are a bit confused. Please clarify if you can!
  2. Your example is well noted but I can probably find numerous examples of other players exhibiting mistakes that resulted in goals. How about Ehrhoffs arrant pass across ice that was intercepted by an opposing playter which led to a breakaway and near goal in the Carolina game. Or Edlers faux pas that led to ruining a shutout for Schneider in that same game. We all see many, many others made by other players but because Bieksa has fallen from the graces of many, the errors of others are seldom remembered or referred to. If you are going to cite examples, please make arguement with more recent examples. The example you have provided in your post happend many, many games ago in a past season. IMHO you are really digging from the bottom of the barrel and I suggest you be more current, it will add more credibility to your criticisms of Bieksa.
  3. "we are not seeing any of this recently" You are a might presumptous with the above statement by including "we" in your comment. I see a great difference in Bieksa's play this year. I presume you are so intent to be critical of him you are missing his improved play. If that is the case please change the context of your comment to simply read - "I an not seeing any of this recently." You are entitled to your opinion but not entitled to try to express my personal opinion as to how I have witnessed him play this year.
  4. Sorry about getting your name wrong in my post. Big fingers just cannot type very fast. Regards

  5. I appreciate your posts very much. Great dialogue but most of all, they are respectful. Thanks Y2K.

  6. Why is there a tendency to knock prospects before they even have a chance to prove what they are capable of. I presume Jordan Schroeder was drafted because someone saw and liked what he could do as a young hockey player. Half of you critics haven't even seen him play, let alone know what he might develop into as a player. If he can skate well, has heart like Burrows, loyalty, ability and can score goals, who cares what his size is. Give the kid a chance before you kick him under the bus.
  7. You just do not know your limitations as a hockey player critic do you? You are simply too impatient to let yourself pause for a few games to watch and learn. Young players are not brand new cars and trucks. When you first get them, they are not instant and high performance by any stretch of the imagination. Too many believe that once a young player is called to the NHL, he must perform at his maximum potential and meet the high expectations and standards of impatient fans and, if he does not attain those expectations at the snap of a finger, he is branded with the label of "dud" or "plug" as some of your less informative collegues might call or describe them. It is obvious you possess limited knowledge of the game and young player development or, you have simply not grasped the realisms of the adjustments that all young players need to make during their transition from the minors to the NHL. Try doing different jobs tasks you are not familiar with at your own personal job and experience how well and how long it takes you to familiarize yourself with each of the job processes you are trying to learn to get to optimum job performance. Then mix in the fact that others are competing against you and they are trying to prevent you from doing your job, something similiar to a more experienced and talented hockey player competing against a young rookie player. I doubt you would feel confident or become instantly successful so why do you feel it must be different with young hockey players making the difficult transition from the minors to the NHL. The learning experience takes time and it is a burden they all must bare. I believe the problem of impatience and intolerance to be yours. In my opinion it is certainly not the problem of all those young players who are all trying to develop into a quality NHL asset. Like Grabner, Raymond, Hansen, Shirokov, Hodgson, Schroeder, Rodin, the list goes on; they simply need time to learn to make the adjustment into the big league and for some it takes longer than others. Maybe you should take the time to learn and understand the development process before you commit yourself to critiquing the playing abilities of young hockey players in a blog.
  8. Wiser words cannot be said Old Busy Body. Our prospects and young players are the successful future of the Canucks. Patience is required by all fans. It is not far off.
  9. As I watch Grabner play, I recount what Kesler and Raymond were like in their first year with the Canucks. Falling down, skating madly around etc. Grabner needs ice time and he needs to play with talented players to hone his skills. He is definitely NHL talent. When I watch him wheel and cut to the net, I know it is just a matter of time for him to start to score. That line will be awesome in the playoffs and will provide secondary scoring to take some heat off the Sedins and Burrows. Welly, Sammy and Demo will give us another scoring threat and the opposition will have three great lines to focus on rather than on just one like in previous years. I like what I see coming up. Now if the D can stay on top of it, we will do very well. Oh how badly we miss the Port McNeil kid. What an added bonus if Willie could get healthy and make it back. What a team and next year even better IMO
  10. I don't quite understand your point - "Burrows was signed as a 2mil CHECKER." Hasn't that been what is so unique about his story or journey in hockey. Burrows flew under the radar and was not even drafted. No one thought enough about him to even take the time to see what his potential really was while he played junior. Even when elevated to the ECHL and AHL, he had to blow his own horn to get the attention of those who would make the decisions about his future. He may have been signed as a checker, that is true but isn't that really the role most players go through when they eventually get into the NHL. They learn the defensive aspect of the game first. From there, the coach then determines what position that player is best suited at on the team. Even then, through trial and error, it may be only through line juggling, the value of a player can really be established. I really hope that all our prospects and young players serve time in that defensive learning role so they are given the opportunity of becoming a more rounded and defensively sound player in the NHL. I believe that should happen to Hodgson, Schroeder, Rodin etc. Using Taveras as an example only, I don't intend to debate his ability: He can score goals but look at his +- rating. I contend he has not properly learned the defensive part of the game. He was shoved into a top six NHL position because he is a natural goal scorer and probably because he was picked first over all in the draft had a lot to do with it as well. One must question if that is the common sense approach to take with a young player, to elevated them right to the NHL from junior. Without learning his defensive game properly, what now are the probabilities of him (Taveras) ever being a better + player over the course of his career unless defense is not instilled in his play at some juncture in his career? Will it always be questioned - "how many goals has he caused to be scored against his team because of his lack of defensive ability?" Look at Stamkos for example, when he was shipped back to the minors by the Bolts he was a -13. Right now Tavares is a -15. I am certainly not questioning their raw talent or potential to play in the NHL, I question whether or not they are a better player by being immediately inserted in the NHL in the same capacities as they may have played in junior ie. simply being a goals scorer and forget about whatever else is important in their development to be a good all around hockey player. What would happen if his goal production suddenly lessened and his +- rating soared; would he be sent back to the minors like Stamkos, undoubtedly a further crushing blow to a young players esteem and confidence? In doing just that, what type of unnecessary burden do we place on a talented young player and how will it eventually affect his playing confidence when he knows he is inadequate in some aspects of his game? With respect to Burrows, being signed as a checker has only served him favorably; it has undoubtedly made him a more tenacious and talented hockey player who could with ease find a job on any hockey team in the NHL. But on top of that you must add the heart of a lion as well.
  11. Totally agree. He is totally hockey and his loyalty to the Canucks is infettered. A young player, never drafted who simply wanted a chance to play in the NHL. The Canucks are very fortunate that someone made the decision to take a chance on him to play in Winnipeg and subsequently in Vancouver. He simply never gives up playing and that is what has to be loved about him. He is definitely a "keeper."
  12. Fin Dawg: You are a wizard with words. It was really great to read something like this for a change. I cannot say more. Great post and deserving of +. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
  13. Each one of them can afford to buy each other lunch for the next five years. IMO Burrows will only be happy for Kesler and vice-versa when Burr signs his next contract. Why are we on CDC worrying about these things. Gillis and Gilman are paid to look after all this stuff and they haven't done a bad job to date.
  14. When Danny gets back and Burr can be with his old mates, we will all see a difference in him. He played a great game against the Avs and will have a great game against the Hawks on Sunday.
  15. <br / Just answered my own question. Some dummies just can't deal with change or new things