• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

242 Good

About Forsy

  • Rank
    Comets Regular
  • Birthday 06/29/1982

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. Too much speed in the game now, the porn stache might just drag Hutton down! Well, maybe if he shaved it in an aerodynamic shape...
  2. Secondary scoring is attained by having more players who can wake up the second line/third line. Don't knock down the first line trio to get it, it won't work for long. If anything, you temporarily take Eriksson off the first line to get people to forget how to play against the trio, and maybe think up new combinations (once the enemy teams have figured their line out).
  3. Not sure where all this doubt about Malhotra's ability to teach face offs comes from. Before he was with the Canucks, he lead his teams on face offs, and more importantly, his team's centremen saw a sharp rise in fo win percentage (and an inevitable drop after he left). He can definitely teach faceoffs, if not more. His defensive play as a 3rd line shutdown/PK centreman is also underrated, as most people only mention his faceoff skills.
  4. One of the worst articles ever on the internet, even if the trade does go through.
  5. If we are destined to be a bottom feeder team anyway, then we not only get to ice the best team we could have right now, we also have the highest probability of getting the 1st overall draft pick.
  6. I'd say the reverse is true, cardio potential drops earlier than maximal strength/speed. However, you are correct in that someone's 40s do not represent a massive drop in potential or performance. Most players now could play well into their 40s without being left behind (maybe drop down to the next line or two). Retirement is more likely due to a build up of stress-induced injuries and pains over the years of playing professional hockey, and the inability to recover enough to play full seasons (plus not wanting to be a bottom line player when you were once a top line player). Professionaly athletes don't peak into their 40s, and while some are still peaking their minds and bodies as a combined unit into their mid 30s (thus improving performance or winning championships), they have already physically peaked by 28-30. Some even say the true physical peak is by 21, but that seems a bit early to me). 40 year olds are being able to maintain or reduce the decay of ability, avoided the wear and tear over the years, and mastering their recovery, that's how they are able to stay in any professional game. Average people who see improvement into their late 30s and into their 40s are people who never reached their potential beforehand, and are only doing so at that point (even if they had been athletes in their youth, training and nutrition knowledge have just improved so much in the past 15-20 years, much of the information being widespread only the past 5-10 years).
  7. Imo it's never been about Balance or Superstar, it's about how many players/lines you have that can consistently penetrate their defense, close in and score. How many superstars do we see not scoring in the playoffs? A guy can get 50-65pts during the season, but won't be able to penetrate and score against a defense that is tough, fighting 110% because it's the playoffs. Another guy with the same 50-65pts can score a decent amount, regardless of the defense in front of him. 80+pts guys can generally score, even in the playoffs regardless, but some 70-80 pt guys are able to score 0.5-1ppg during the playoffs (considered to be a good or great playoff performance), where as other 80 or even 100pt guys will be stuck at 0.25ppg (not so good, but still contributing). In terms of # of players who can score consistently, you should look for at least 6 scorers, (at least 1-2 of them being defenseman to spread the threat). Lose someone due to injury in the playoffs, and a team who is poised to win the cup can suddenly lose the series. And if you don't have 6 guys scoring 0.5-1ppg in the playoffs, then you'd need a couple 0.25ppg guys to make up for each one you don't have. But it's the ability to penetrate, close and score, not the actual point stats that matter. In terms of # of lines, you traditionally wanted 2 scoring lines (because the tough opponents had a great shutdown defense pair) but defensive play has become well mapped out, and defensive systems becoming even more stifling, so you will most likely need 3 scoring lines (the 3rd can be slightly less effective though), as the opposing team will probably be able to field 3 great defenders split into shutting down two forward lines (2 great defenders can shutdown 2 forward lines too, but with 1 defenseman playing 30mins, partnering up with someone else half the time).
  8. There was a chance he could have been a reclamation project, for lower than market value, Vancouver boy, big, skilled, could use another chance. But if he continues to prove he will continue his $&!#ty behaviour, then he will just be a cancer, and no reclamation will occur, hence potentially not worth acquiring.
  9. A saavy GM would wait until Kane gets charged and is outed by Buffalo, and get his value really low. Then you can trade/sign him for much cheaper.
  10. Just watched the Prospects Camp video, his skating is fluid, fast, on point, hands too. Head is up also, this guy has either been practicing all summer, or he's got massive skill ceiling. Have to see if he can do it under pressure, and under physical punishment and fatigue.
  11. If this is true, then all the more reason that attempting to tank would achieve nothing, since we would have the best chance for #1 Overall Pick anyway.
  12. I have the same assessment of you, and your reply just confirms it.
  13. The whole point is that none of these UFAs are blocking prospects that we do have from moving up and potentially improving, and none of them are preventing us from picking from the first round so that we get these good or ELITE prospects. The only reason elite prospects aren't gotten is because either: 1) we trade our 1st round picks 2) we choose not to tank horribly and be last every year 3) We trade away potential sleepers for UFAs 4) We refuse to give up our existing ELITE players to get great prospects and/or first round picks. I addressed all of these, here is it in clearer form: 1. We aren't giving away our 1st round picks. 2. This is a nonsense strategy. 3. Trading away our 2nd rounders is not making us lose out on top end talent. The most we are losing are middle 6 FW or top 4 DM potential prospects, and the last one we traded was for a #4D Gudbranson who is in a decent age. Either way, none of these things were prevented by the signings and tradings of/for Gudbranson, Eriksson, Larsen. And this assumes that you want to have ZERO veterans for our prospects, who would help mentor and build their confidence. 4. Can't trade Sedins. No one would take Miller. Trade Sutter (27)? Tanev (26)? Edler (30)? The crux of your argument basically calls for trading those 3 players for prospects, because everyone else is a prospect, or not worthy of trading for a prospect. If we had traded them, we better be getting top end talent or franchise players, the likes of the mcdavid/eichel or matthews/laine/dubois - Patrick is the only one of possibility to be at this level for next season. If you want fully rebuild, I would suggest that only Sutter and Edler are the only real trade possibilities, Tanev being too valuable and still young that he is a great asset himself. Were TOR/WPG/CBJ ready to trade their top picks for Edler and/or Sutter? I doubt it. That is why we are in our position, and JB is doing the best he can.
  14. Firstly, I'm assuming you know that trading the Sedins is not going to happen. Secondly, signing Eriksson does not prevent our young guns from being drafted or picked. So what exactly do you want the Canucks to do? Sign AHL players and/or plugs and just lose for the season for next year's draft? Thirdly, maybe you are complaining that we sent our 2nd round pick for Gudbranson, who is only 24? How is this an issue, if he fills a need in the team, not too old, and we aren't signing 4x 24 year olders to the point where we prevent prospects from getting spots on our D-corps? Fourthly, the Canucks are younger, but not prospects young - how is that stopping our picking high end prospects? Fifthly, all I see is a lot of whining that the Canucks aren't complete sh1t like edmonton was for a few years, and that we are giving up some non-1st round picks in a vain effort to get sleeper picks. Like many have echoed, we need great or very good players, not more of "hope to be 2nd line players that never get past 3rd or 4th line duties". And realistically speaking, you won't get anything but those kinds of players in the 2nd, 3rd and probably the last half of the 1st round of the draft. Unless you are trading 1st round draft picks to trade for players/free agent rights, signing UFAs don't stop your ability to get early 1st round draft picks (unless you believe in the quack idea of tanking to get first pick).
  15. Probably because they are great, and fairly accurate analysts, except when it comes to Toronto and Vancouver, where they are complete TO homers and Anti-Van. So people generally get angry at that kind of injustice. They know it generates hits from Torontonians when they show great optimism for the leafs, and they generate hits from Vancouverites when they show pessimissm for the Canucks. The only way they'd stop is for Vancouver fans to stop replying on their Vancouver Canucks pieces and articles.