The Lock

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


The Lock last won the day on February 13

The Lock had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,852 Revered

About The Lock

  • Rank
    Canucks Second-Line

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Prince George

Recent Profile Visitors

6,707 profile views
  1. Erik Gudbranson | #44 | D

    Assumptions much? Pro tip: whenever you start "guessing" regarding physicals and other insider knowledge that's generally not known by a fan you tend to expose how little you know since apparently it must be too hard to come up with actual reasons why you hate on the guy. It's one thing to hate on a player: I get that and that's your opinion, but please, can you at least come up with something other than things you obviously are not going to know in the first place?
  2. The problem is, each team is going to have an MVP, so that's 31 potential candidates. You have to narrow down that list somehow and team success is one of the more natural ways to do so. As soon as you start having people like Brock and Eichel as candidates, you make the decision process much harder which I doubt is what the league would want.
  3. [Proposal] VAN-CHI; VAN-EDM

    I actually think it is possible for Chicago to say yes to this given how much money they would save on Seabrook's contract. That being said, we're also shooting ourselves in the foot in my opinion. If Boeser continues the way he's been playing and if players like Pettersson and Gaudette live up to expectations, will we be in trouble 3 years down the road due to Seabrook's contract. A 5th overall would be nice, but we have to determine here if long term it's worth it rather than just the short term as this is clearly a long term move.
  4. Nikolay Goldobin | #77 | LW/RW

    I have a hard time thinking that grouping a bunch of players by country and saying we have a hard time developing that group makes sense. I think we've really just been unlucky with Russians as of late more than anything and I doubt it's to do with our own abilities.
  5. Stop the Sedin Hate

    My original post was in response to your comment regarding thinking we should have had someone else other than the Sedins. That's living in the past dude on your part. Not mine. Dude. If your metaphor doesn't work it doesn't work. lol The rest of your comments I'm just going to go through 1 by 1: 1. I already addressed the whole living in the past thing above. Besides, I've also tried to show my neutral stance. 2..Your opinion on them being the "least influential". Yet, it's something that's impossible to even substantiate. I've already addressed this several times stating their actual leadership. 3. Constantly taking penalties? They average like 24 penalties a season each. That's a 2 minute penalty 12 games of 82 games. 4. I've stated over and over in this thread, in this very conversation, how the Sedins were the targets of the other team to limit production. You have not address this once the entire time. 5. I'm one of the "prime purveyors"? Is this because I have a different perspective than you? If you can't handle someone who has different points than you than perhaps you shouldn't be on a forum in the first place. It's not going to matter in the end anyway. What's going to happen is what's going to happen. I've never stated whether or not I want the Sedins here next year. I've already said I'm neutral in that. If you feel the need to bark me like this without even essentially listening, then perhaps you should be looking at your perspective because clearly you are not 100% solid on it, especially since you're not even coming up with true statistics when it comes to penalties, etc. Kind of makes it sound more like you're blowing off steam rather than having an intelligent conversation which is a shame because you seem intelligent otherwise, just perhaps a little swept up in your own opinion?
  6. The thing is though, Marchand's antics were on the ice. Patrick Kane's antics were outside of the game entirely. Evander Kane's antics were actually in the locker room. So it's a little different of a comparison. So, while I agree that using Patrick Kane and Marchand is not really a strong argument, I think EKane's doings are potentially worse as he literally had teammates calling him out, creating an actual divide in the locker room, unlike the other instances. That being said, perhaps there are things I don't know about the other players that directly involve the locker room and not just on the ice at opposing teams or in taxi cabs. Not only that, but we haven't actually seen EKane on a good team, unlike the other 2. At least not until now. San Jose will be interesting to see how he responds to being on an actual good team and how he actually will play in the playoffs along with if he can "jive" with the rest of the Sharks.
  7. The thing is, I'm not convinced that a team with locker room issues could get us the cup. When do we really see a "gong show" going far in the playoffs? When do we see a "gong show" even making the playoff? That being said, if Kane has changed since Winnipeg, then great. Bring him in here. However, it makes me wonder: if people expect EKane to be instrumental in us getting a cup while having locker room issues, isn't that a conflict of interest in terms of the need for a full team on board to go deep into the playoffs?
  8. Stop the Sedin Hate

    The thing is, they are literally still number 2 and 3 in terms of scoring. They are still 50+ point players. That's 100 points you are giving up. So I would actually argue that the lineup you providing would have a rather difficult time in filling in that gap. Not only that, but then there are also injuries. For one, we have less depth with that lineup (obviously that will depend on who we sign and trade between now and next year mind you). Two, the Sedins are among our most durable players. Compared to most of our players, they hardly get injured (which is ironic given your consistent statements regarding "pushback" from them). Don't forget too that the Sedins were on an ironman streak for the longest time. So, not only would not having the Sedins hurt our point totals but, given our injuries as of late, one could arguably say that we would actually be less durable. So, I just can't agree with you on this. There is an actual risk involved. In fact, your post has kind of made me sway the opposite a bit, worrying a bit about what if we don't have the Sedins next year. That being said, I'll still be on the fence, but I really don't think you're making a strong case in this if I'm being perfectly honest.
  9. Stop the Sedin Hate

    If the past is the past and we're trying to move up, then why bring the stuff up in the first place? Why the Sedin hate to begin with if it's about the past, especially since, if they do stay for another year, will it really hurt us that much if at all? 20 posts covering their decline, sure, but that still isn't addressing my points about them providing distractions to the oppositions in the playoffs among other things. If that German Shepard still has stuff left in the tank you don't prison him in front of a fire either. You allow the dog to still be able to go out and do things just perhaps on more of a leash. Are the Sedins going to have bad games? Yes, but that can be said about anyone. I think the difference between a combination of Granny and Sutter and the Sedins is simple: leadership. This is the biggest reason I think as to why they would stay another year. Granny and Sutter I find hard to see them having the influence the Sedins have had. Shouldn't we be thinking more longterm and actually having a good team that can contest for a cup in a few years time? Maintaining leadership now will build us leaders in the future through sharing experiences. If leadership from the Sedins helps that then it makes sense at that point to keep them. The biggest concern would obviously be roster spots, but that then goes in line with what I said earlier about how we shouldn't be rushing our prospects either. EDIT: edited to reflect a slight sway of opinion on my part
  10. Stop the Sedin Hate

    To me, I think it's more the "urgency" some people have with getting rid of the Sedins that I can't really agree with. People want it "now" and want it covered in chocolate. It's easy to think that by giving a young player more minutes it solves everything. It's simple minded and doesn't require extra thinking about certain players and how else they might react. Unfortunately, this isn't always going to be the case. We need to be responsible still with our players. Due dilegence is important. If we choose to let them go, just because they are gone, it doesn't mean it's going to fix our problems. it doesn't mean our young players will be able to step up right away. It could mean they have less leadership. Therefore, there's a time and place for them leaving. Maybe it's now. Maybe it's in another year or so. But we aren't in that locker room. We, as fans, aren't experts on that. Therefore, I think it's up to the insiders to decide rather than our impatient selves.
  11. Stop the Sedin Hate

    Not really.... lol
  12. [Signing] Canucks sign Kole Lind

    I too take jokes too seriously. *gives you a serious face*
  13. Stop the Sedin Hate

    That was because Brock told Green he needed a couple of games to recoup, not because the team didn't want to play him.
  14. Jussi Jokinen | #36 | LW/RW

    I agree that I think it was just a money thing with the trade; a bit of a favour for Columbus in order to get Motte that doesn't really affect our team too much. I'd be surprised if he's back next year though unless if he really makes some kind of statement in the last part of this season.
  15. 1. If your definition of age of where a player should have established what he is is 21, you're going to be perpetually disappointed in most teams. That's a really really young age to expect that and I don't think it's fair at all. At minimum, I would actually say 24 or 25 is more reasonable because there are often late risers and not everyone's a prodigy, even with 1st rounders. Not only that, but a team's systems can make a HUGE difference on a player, even later in their career. For example, you have players like MDZ who was offensive in New York, defensive in Philly, and now is more overall here. 3 different systems gave us 3 different results in 1 player. Another example could be Kesler, who wasn't known for scoring until he actually focused less on being a pest and more on scoring. 2. With the age group situation, so by accusing people of "jumping on the train", is it wrong to agree with Benning on that? Gillis kind of left us with very little to work with but I guess that's convenient enough for some people to use that to bash Benning on trying to fix things and not become like Edmonton with all youth and no experience. Would just getting all players 21 and younger without leadership have been better to you? I'm curious. 3. To answer your last question I'm just going to be blunt: nothing. We are 1 of 31 teams. If special means who we cheer for then sure, we're special, but outside of that, we're not. Let me ask you this: why even ask this question? Whether we're "special" or not, as far as I can tell doesn't prove much of anything. Is Toronto special? No. Is Pittsburgh special? No. Is Edmonton special? Great. We've established that. Now what? What does this prove?