• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,391 Gaming the system

About ForsbergTheGreat

  • Rank
    Canucks First-Line

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,269 profile views
  1. Apparently tanking is more than just intentionally sucking to improve drafting position.... You learn something every day.....But what can you expect from someone who wants the team to purposely lose.....Tanking is what every they want it to be as long as it supports their arguemnt.
  2. iphone doesn't recognized the power of Boeser. The only thing separating the hawks "tank" compared to the canucks is pure luck of the lottery.... That's it.... Hawks 2007 (26th place finish) draft they jumped 5 spots....They got Kane Hawks 2006 (28th place finish) draft they stayed the same.....they got Toews Canucks 2014 (25th place finish) canucks stay the same...IF we jump 5 spots like the hawks, we draft Sam Reinhart. Canucks 2016 (28th place finish) canucks drop 2 spots.....IF we stay the same, like the hawks, we draft Puljujarvi. That's a completely different looking team than what we got...and has nothing to do with strategy, but everything to do with pure luck....There's no arguing with that....
  3. the 29 finish year they drafted barker. In our 8th overall year we drafted bowser. How'd that turn out. The he other two years come down to complete luck of the lottory. In our 3rd worst overall finish we moved back to 5th. They stated the same. In our 6th worst overall finish we stated the same while they jumped to #1. In according to tank have went through the same standings placement. You know tanking the word ppl use to imply losing to finish lower in the standing which has nothing to do with stockpiling picks.
  4. What did you mention that is involved in tanking? Stockpiling picks has zero to do with tanking. Case in point.....Tampa Bay has had totaled 15 picks in the first two rounds over the last 5 years. Last year they had 4 picks in the first 2 rounds, Did Tampa tank last year? No they didn't. Your first post implied that these team won the cups because they tanked, but tanking is a very broad term. It like saying the a team wins because they score goals. Scoring goals isn’t a process, it represents the end result of a plan. The question I’m asking is how? If you’re going to use hawks as your example of tanking, you should understand the a+b (plan) as to how they got there. What is the process involved to tank, what is the process the hawks took to achieve tank status. Is the process the hawks took, that much different than what the canucks have done as of late. I’ll start you off with yearly standings Hawks 2000-01 – 22nd placed finish 2001-02 – 9th placed finish 2002-03 - 17th placed finish 2003-04 - 29th placed finish 2004-05 – lock out year 2005-06 - 28th placed finish 2006-07 - 26th placed finish (tied with 25th) 2007-08 – 20th placed finish 2008-09 – 6th placed finish Canucks 2013-14 - 25th placed finish 2014-15 - 8th placed finish 2015-16 - 28th placed finish How many years did the hawks tank? If you’re going by season standings the had 3 years where they were in the bottom 6 teams in the league. In 2004 hawk finished second last in the league and ended up drafting Cam Barker In 2006 hawk finished as the 28th placed team and ended up drafting Johnathan Toews In 2007 hawk finished as the 26th placed (tied with 25th) and ended up drafting Patrick Kane Seeing any similarities? In 2014 canucks finished as the 25th placed team (2007) In 2016 ha canucks finished as 28th placed team (2006) If tanking is based off standings placement canucks have basically matched the hawks. Is it canucks fault that they haven't had the luck that hawks had when it comes to the draft lottery? No that's due to outside circumstances that have nothing to do with how much planning you make. And that’s just based on standings, that’s just the start, I challenge you to do more digging in what that hawks season moves were between those years and see if they aren’t much different. Did they sign any experienced UFA goalie. Make any trades for 24 year old players involving picks and prospects? Acquire any offensive talent to help there goal scoring? Acquire any veteran experience? I doubt you will put the effort into that type of research as it’s much easier just to throw out an encompassing statement without having any understanding on it. If tanking is the key, and hawks have a proven success model. How did they do it?
  5. I think the years of needing a 80-90 point center are behind us. There's only a handful of players each year that fall into that category. I think an issue people have when they think of a #1 center is that we've been so blessed with Hank that people don't realize centers that produce over a ppg haven't been that common in the last few years. I think you really have to determine what type of centers there are in the league. There's the play making center that puts up points (80-90), Thornton, Backstrom, Sedin, and Giroux could probably fall into that category as well. RNH will also likely fall into this category someday. These players don't seem to have much success in terms of playoffs, There's the all around offensive threat. Crosby, McDavid, Seguin, Tavares. These are the rare breeds, that can score and play make. Not that common though. Then there's the 65-75 point centers that have a strong two way game. Players like Kopitar, Toews, and Bergeron fall into that category. These have become the most successful types of #1 centers. That's where most teams appear to be going in the future as well with Monohan, Barkov, Scheifele and even Matthews. I would say that's where Horvat is heading as well. So in that case, I don't see the dying need to find a Henrik replacement, not if we currently have a player heading in the direction of the most successful centers. The important part is to find a 2nd line center that can also put up 55+ points, Getzlaf has Kesler, Kopitar has Carter, Bergeron has Krejci. One thing people also seem to forget is yes the Sedin's put up the most points on our team, but they also get the most offensive opportunity. When they retire, it's not like all the players we have will remain at the same output when they are getting greater offensive opportunity. Sometimes that opportunity is whats needed for a player to break out.
  6. Russell would also be a ok fit there...and requires no assets to give up.
  7. I have to ask. Consider the hawks rebuild from 2000-2009, what have the hawks done differently (in terms of tanking) from what the canucks have done in the last 3 years?
  8. In other words you got nothing. But you can try to pretend that it all hinges on the hawks statement and ignore the rest. How did islander do when JT was out after olympic break? How did MTL do when price went out last year? How did stars do in 2014-15 season when Seguin went out? Very few teams can withstand a long term injury to their best player, and the few teams that can, would be considered a cup contending team, no one considers canucks a cup team, we are a middle of the pack team. Any middle of the pack team that loses their best player for 2-3 month and is not likely making playoffs (as pointed out above). That's not a JB thing, that's an NHL thing.
  9. Well considering his salary was zero at the time it wouldn't have mattered. No one expected a 24th overall pick to make a roster 2+ years after the draft, and considering at the time of the trade JB didn't even know who was going to be available at 24 it would be an invalid argument to use that salary as "cap coming back"
  10. Logic suggests that. Will Eriksson be better than Vbrata was last year? Is that not a reasonable assumption? What about replacing weber with a year older Hutton. Do was not expect an increase in Huttons production. What about canucks offensive scoring depth this year compared to last year? Have we not reduced that amount of slow, grinding forwards and replaced that with young skilled forwards? If you say yes to any of the above you can then assume Sedins will produce at a higher rate than they did last year. That's all your opinion, I disagree with all you said. You take out a 70+ player or a #1 goalie off your roster for a significant amount of time and your team struggles. Some team can subdue it for a period but eventually it catches up. Take Kane out and is Panarin as lethal, is that second line as dangerous? Take Holtby out and caps lose their best line of defense. Yes the caps are good, i watch them as much as I watch canucks but, night in and night out Holtby is the best player on that team. With Holtby the caps were 48-9-5 with Grubauer last year they were 8-9-1. But even still you only picked the teams in the NHL, can you say the same about the middle 10 teams. Take Quick or Doughty off the kings Take Varlamov or Duchene of the Av's Tavares off the Islanders Price off the canadians Bergeron off the Bruins OEK off the Yotes again Keys players are just that, keys. You can't plan for replacing their depth for long term, salary cap won't allow it.
  11. He should, but at this point we don't really know what he'll add, could be a weber 2.0 or could turn out to be a missing link, either way you're right it is more depth to help improve our PP. The team this year compared to last year has far more scoring depth. Last year we ran with Higgins, Vey, Prust, two rookies in McCann, a unmotivated Vbrata and even Cracknell. When Sutter went down we didn't have much in scoring ability. This year Horvat and Baertschi are a year older, we've added Eriksson, we've added Rodin, we've added granlund. All players with offensive strengths, all are there to help take off pressure on hank and danny.
  12. Wrong they gave back 4.075. Sbisa was 2.175 cap Bonino was a 1.9 cap Math is hard.... Whats the need for this cap space that we need more than 3.5 million? Is there another UFA we're trying to sign? Next year Miller and Burrows come off the books which opens up another 10.5 million in cap. You're argument surrounding cap holds no water.
  13. Sedins will be better because our PP will be better. Eriksson is an improvement over last year vbrata, Hutton is a year older, and no more relying on Weber. We have more depth, which will take some focus on them. Will they be 100 point player, likely not, but last year they put up 60, so an improvement of say 10 points seems reasonable. Key injuries happen to every team, they are possibly, but not something that can be planned out to preventing. Would capitals struggle if Holtby got injuried. MTL sure struggled when Price went down. Their's a difference between depth and depth for key players. Key players are just that, key's, you need them to win. Sure if a player goes down for a short while you might be able to make do, but long term it will affect your roster. GM can't just go out and get depth to replace those key players, not in a cap world.
  14. Luck.. That's how you get them.. Canucks finish with the 3rd worst record and we drop to draft 5th overall. Hawks finish with the 5th worst record (tied with the 6th worst) and they rise to draft 1st overall.. I don't know how someone can look at that and say hawks rebuild go off of their high draft picks and say it was a planned success, while the canucks rebuild is a failure. the only difference between the two is the luck of the draft. That plus all the other important players that everyone seems to forget about when looking at the success of teams like hawks and kings. Players like Kopitar (11), Quick (72), Seabrook (14), Keith (54).
  15. D will be the most available pieces. After playing around with the Vegas roster, I’ve noticed a few things with regards to the expansion draft. The Vegas team is going to have a really good back end. There will plenty of top D and quality D prospects available, the NMC clause will really hurt a few teams and they will be forced to expose a young prospect or a quality top 4 D. Teams will likely try to combat losing this type of piece but it will only effect the supply and greatly hurt the returns. The same thing with goalies. Teams will have to make the choice between the young, cheap high potential goalie vs the experience. A team like PITS will have to consider either moving the NMC in Fleury or risk losing a young Stanley cup winner. After hearing Rutherford on the radio yesterday it appears he has no plans to move either goalie yet, and thinks it important to have two quality guys. The forwards it where it becomes tricky. There really won’t be many top 6 forwards available outside of the overpriced or aged players (Hemksy, Gaborik, Vanek types). If I’m McPhee, I’m really putting an emphasis on teams young players and which ones are showing promise. The top prospects will be locked up, but pro scouting on the late bloomers should be a focus. An example would be players like Granlund, Rodin, Etem and Gaunce. Since all the quality top 6 and top prospects will be locked up, he will need to try and find the players he thinks could develop into top 6 forwards. It’s not the most exciting way to build a fan base but if the Vegas team wants to be successful, they need to focus on what’s available and play a defensive style of hockey. Being in the draft lottery then next few years will definitely help, and their main focus should be on top line skilled forwards, the ones that put seats in the stands and bring excitement to the people that don’t quite understand the sport as good.