The Lock

Members
  • Content count

    2,737
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,046 Revered

About The Lock

  • Rank
    Canucks Regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,447 profile views
  1. Okay. How about this? I want you to look at EVERY sentence Forsberg said in your reply to him and explain why he's lunacy. EVERY sentence. Not just the selective sentences in order to save grace for yourself. EVERY sentence. It's my challenge to you. Oh, and don't say each sentence is irrelevant either without saying why. I want to see you actually debate rather than spewing just random paragraphs of nothingness.
  2. Can we maybe look and see what he provides rather than coming up with conclusions about him being "hot garbage?" I know it's summer and all and everyone's anxious for the next season, but that's no excuse to think things before even seeing them play. This is hockey, not pin-the-tail-on-the-player-that-we-have-no-clue-about.......
  3. It should be noted that the attacker is Afghan and not Syrian so, if anyone's looking to pin this on Syrian refugees, it's not the case. The unfortunate truth is when you have billions of people on a planet, chances are there are going to be some crazies, no matter the religion or anything.
  4. Hatcher played a different style of game. Keep in mind Hatcher leaned his game before the lockout changes of 2005. Gudbranson's style's more based on today's NHL. There's a big difference there. (Not to mention Dallas won the cup that year and not Buffalo despite Hull's controversial goal) Gudbranson and Tryamkin are also way better skaters than Hatcher ever was. Hatcher was slow like Valabik: another big defender who couldn't even crack the top 4 of a lineup, barely the top 6 even. Gudbranson's already played big minutes for Florida so to call him a 3rd line defender would be just silly. Not saying you have. Just saying that to compare players.
  5. If they want to bully us and draw penalties to give us chances I'm all for that. I don't care about getting their lunch money. I care about winning games. This is hockey, not UFC.
  6. Okay, that's what you intended to say; however, I don't think it's as clear as you think it is. Remember, it's easy to know exactly what you mean but that doesn't mean other people will read it the same way. If you wanted to state he has a shot similar to a beer league player, simply say "he has a shot similar to a beer league player." By using the term "for a beer league player" you are actually calling him a beer league player whether you intended to or not. I'm not trying to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm just trying to state how what you're saying's not necessarily as clear as you think. English is a funny language. I'm just trying to help.
  7. Oh really? No. You said he was a beer league player. Do I need to quote you from before? I've been telling you why you've been getting the hate you've been getting. It's up to you what you do with that information. It would have been gone over much better had you said what you just said in the first post. Yet you didn't. You weren't actually providing constructive criticism. Instead you were just slamming him making you sound like you hated Tanev's guts. Even if that wasn't your intention, that's what your post came across as at least to me.
  8. First of all, I don't believe anyone is a "realist". In this industry, nothing is set in stone; therefore, it's impossible to tell it "like it is". There is no "is" when there are multiple directions one can take with the decision-making process. Objective might be a better term but that's an argument for another day. That aside.... As far as how the season went, I knew last season was going to be hit or miss and could have gone either way. Let's not forget that we experienced a ton of injuries to key players last year. This forced players like Horvat into roles that made them struggle for a while until they found their game. I doubt anyone was truly expecting a cup last season. If you compare this board last season to seasons prior, I hardly saw anyone claiming "this is the year". Even Linden near the end of the season admitted he knew this team wasn't going to play like the year before. It's the process of transitioning from an older player base to a younger player base. The fact that we hardly had any prospects in the cupboard when Benning arrived didn't help either. To answer the question by the op, I don't know if I would have changed anything as I can't really think of anything I wouldn't have done (at least with the things I would actually have knowledge on) that Benning did during the time of each move. Call me crazy if you'd like, but most of it makes logical sense to me. The idea of Prust was good at the time and only hindsight tells me otherwise. Giving Vey a final shot before letting him go made sense as well. Even seeing if Pedan can play forward seemed interesting to me. Hey, if it means Pedan gets to play in the NHL as a result of being moved to forward, why not?
  9. Queue in the people who think the QMJHL is nothing more than a beer league? lol In all seriousness though, I'm curious to see what kind of player he is and how well he plays next year (seems to be the theme that Benning's picks tend to surprise a bit lately).
  10. The thing is, Button said they could contribute offensively. He didn't say they will. Stupid TSN is stupid with their headlines?....
  11. Here's the thing: if you keep using terminology like "beer league player", then you're just going to sound like a troll and no one's really going to take you seriously. You can ignore the fact that he's actually made the NHL if you consider him to be a "beer league player", but it doesn't change one fact: he's made it into the NHL. Using one extreme to prove a point against another extreme only proves that you're just as nonobjective as anyone who thinks the exact opposite of you. While it may seem "cool" and "hip" to try and be some sort of rebel. You have to also keep in mind you're going against more than just the fan base. So are you basically saying you know more than Gillis (who signed him), AV (who gave him a spot on the team), Benning (who signed him to another deal), Tortorella and Willie (who continued to play him)? Clearly, he's a "beer league player"; therefore, all of these experts don't know anything, right? So, even if you're trying to get us thinking with your post, making unrealistic accusations on a player doesn't really help you much. I think that's where your downfall's been more than anything: the extreme statements. While you may have added in a bit of positive in your initial post, I don't really see how your post is all that objective for the most part. It's more words hiding some "extreme hate" for a player more than anything and looking for flaws just like the people looking for flaws with Edler. Sure. Tanev has flaws just like any other player, but don't be a hypocrite if you're going to do the same thing to Tanev and Hutton as others have done to Edler and accuse players of hating on Edler. Either that, or your just crying for attention. If that's all you're trying to do than good job I guess?....
  12. I think between Henrik, Horvat, Suter, and Granlund, we're pretty solid at center at this point. Vey hasn't looked like he'll replace Henrik when the Sedins retire. I think Vey's in an awkward position where he's more of an offensive forward, yet hasn't proven to be good enough for the top 6, at least not in our lineup. This tends to zero him out a bit. It's not that he didn't have a lack of trying. Who knows what he does in Calgary. At least he's being given another chance; however, I think if he's to stick in the NHL he's going to need to either produce more points or find a niche elsewhere with his game.
  13. I think a lot of people are too focused on Benning's plan and what it entails. He obviously does have a plan and he's stated that plan practically each time he's on the radio. Yet, somehow we still have people (especially media) who are "confused" as to what his plan is. It's not rocket science: bring in some youth to the aging lineup through trades and the draft while maintaining a competitive team. Where's the confusion in that? Does this mean we'll make the playoffs next year? It's not guaranteed, but at least it still gives us a team to cheer for next year. If they do many the playoffs, anything can happen. I'm not saying they will make the playoffs, let alone a Stanley Cup. I'm saying anything's possible given our situation.
  14. Perhaps we should just cover the team in alfredo sauce if we trade away Sbisa....
  15. I'm very curious to see what Rodin brings. Clearly, if Benning didn't think he could make it, he wouldn't have resigned him. If Rodin proves he's the real deal, that will be an interesting story about how he made the NHL.