Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Do you honestly believe we improved enough?


  • Please log in to reply
248 replies to this topic

#151 samurai

samurai

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 06

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:03 PM

and while the squirrels play the dark clouds of a lock out are looming
  • 0

#152 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:10 PM

As you incorrectly implied,his +/- does not define his defensive capablilites when racking up serious points with an offensively gifted Norris contender.
However,Garrison is said to be a positionally astute defender so he should provide the team with Hamhuis 'B' type play.
He will need to play alongside a Norris capable defender to duplicate his scoring feat so let's hope Edler can mesh with him.


Well, I was working off of your orignal comment, that Campbell was responsible for Garrison having a "skewed" +/-. I was implying nothing other than what you had already suggested. So are you telling me that you got it wrong in the first place, or is it just wrong because I turned it back around on you?

I pointed out that Garrison should have a much better chance to get points in Vancouver because it's a better team. And combined with what you've already said about Garrison as an astute defender, this should result in a higher +/-, no?

So where is your problem?

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#153 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:11 PM

Gump,give it a rest.
  • 0

#154 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:23 PM

Gump,give it a rest.


Yeah, I figured so.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#155 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:31 PM

Gump,give it a rest.

Edler is not Brian Campbell consistent or calibre.

Garrison will not play first line minutes on the Canucks.

Campbell has been awarded a Lady Byng (first d man in 59 years to do so) and earned a Stanley Cup and has captained an NHL club.


"You may hope he doesn't so you can come on these forums and say, "I told you so", but you don't know."
Gump to King of ES.

"If his results of last season were because of his defensive partner, Campbell, then Garrison should be able to do quite well being paired with Edler.."Gump

Edited by nuck nit, 03 September 2012 - 08:30 PM.

  • 1

#156 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:42 PM

Gump,give it a rest.


This is indeed a great irony. You twist what I said in response to your comment, and when I hand it back to you, you act as if you are the injured party.

Indeed nuck, someone here should give it a rest.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#157 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 07:46 PM

The irony is that you have no idea that Campbell is twice the D man that Edler is.

The further irony is in your implying that Edler is comparable to Campbell when 38 year old Salo scored more PP goals on the second unit than Eddy in 13 fewer games while Eddy ate up first line PP time all season long.

I hope that Eddy can up his game playing with Garrison.It may turn out to be a great pairing.

Edited by nuck nit, 03 September 2012 - 08:11 PM.

  • 0

#158 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 09:43 PM

The irony is that you have no idea that Campbell is twice the D man that Edler is.

The further irony is in your implying that Edler is comparable to Campbell when 38 year old Salo scored more PP goals on the second unit than Eddy in 13 fewer games while Eddy ate up first line PP time all season long.

I hope that Eddy can up his game playing with Garrison.It may turn out to be a great pairing.



Once again you are doing selective reading and/or comprehending, nuck. What I wrote, and you mis-interpreted was:

Brian Campbell's Norris calibre offensive prowess < the ability and talent available on the Canucks. Ergo, we should be able to look forward to an even greater skewed +/- for Garrison this season.



Clearly I stated that I was referring to the overall talent on the Canucks team being greater than that of Campbell. In my post to which you were disputing, I never specifically mentioned Edler, nor did I suggest him as being the sole reason that Garrison would do well on offense.

Is Campbell a gifted offensive d-man? Yes. Was Campbell the only guy on the ice with Garrison when he got his 16 goals? No.

Will Garrison be on the ice all by himself while he is with Vancouver? No. There will be other Vancouver players out there. The combined skills and talents of the Sedins, Kelser, Burrows, and Edler etc is greater than that of Campbell (and the rest of the Florida team). Because of this improved talent pool on the Canucks, there is a very good chance that Garrison could have an even better skewed +/-.

What don't you get about that?

regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#159 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 09:54 PM

"If his results of last season were because of his defensive partner, Campbell, then Garrison should be able to do quite well being paired with Edler.."Gump


And how about you actually place the full quote rather than a selective editing on your part.

What I wrote was:

I see Garrison having the potential to get the same number of points as he did in Florida. If his results of last season were because of his defensive partner, Campbell, then Garrison should be able to do quite well being paired with Edler and playing with the Sedins.


Do you not see the significant difference between what I actually wrote and what you say I wrote?

If you want to argue a point, nuck, you should be able to argue it on its own merits.

regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#160 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 September 2012 - 11:30 PM

Campbell is a number one NHL elite d man.Edler is not.

Doing 'quite well' offers little to nothing up for substance or debate,Gump.

In time,Edler may become an elite d man such as Campbell,but there is a long way to go.

Last year,Garrison's d partner had three penalties all year long,so Garrison was gifted with a cerebral partner of immense talent that was never left his side-he was always there to support Garrison on every shift of every game.

This year,Edler will be racking up his usual 30-50 minutes of penalties and Garrison will not be paired with a gifted Norris candidate at any point in time,especially when he goes out with a number five and six d man.

Garrison has four years of pro experience and Edler has six.

Campbell has 18 years of pro hockey experience.

Does Garrison stand a chance at elevating his stats with the Sedins on the PP? Of course,if he even finds a permanent role with them there.That is certainly debatable at this point in time.

He is a defensive d man.I think Garrison would stand a lot better chance of elevating his game-and stats-alongside Keith Ballard.
  • 0

#161 Onions

Onions

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 11

Posted 03 September 2012 - 11:55 PM

what is enough? please state your parameters first.

but I think we didn't need to make massive changes.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#162 Mack Attack

Mack Attack

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 471 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 02:02 AM

Campbell is a number one NHL elite d man.Edler is not.


Being paid like one doesn't make him one. Brian Campbell is not an elite number one. He only had 4 more points than Edler last year, and the two years before that Edler surpassed him in points.


Last year,Garrison's d partner had three penalties all year long,so Garrison was gifted with a cerebral partner of immense talent that was never left his side-he was always there to support Garrison on every shift of every game.

This year,Edler will be racking up his usual 30-50 minutes of penalties and Garrison will not be paired with a gifted Norris candidate at any point in time,especially when he goes out with a number five and six d man


So taking penalties makes you a bad player? I guess Zdeno Chara and Shea Weber are inferior to Brian Campell then...

Garrison has four years of pro experience and Edler has six.

Campbell has 18 years of pro hockey experience.


Wrong. Campbell has 13 years of pro.
  • 2

#163 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 02:28 AM

Yeah,sure.Lidstrom had less points,as well.
Pro hockey is not restricted to the National Hockey League.
It's a big world out there.
  • 0

#164 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:18 AM

Campbell is a number one NHL elite d man.Edler is not.

Doing 'quite well' offers little to nothing up for substance or debate,Gump.

In time,Edler may become an elite d man such as Campbell,but there is a long way to go.

Last year,Garrison's d partner had three penalties all year long,so Garrison was gifted with a cerebral partner of immense talent that was never left his side-he was always there to support Garrison on every shift of every game.

This year,Edler will be racking up his usual 30-50 minutes of penalties and Garrison will not be paired with a gifted Norris candidate at any point in time,especially when he goes out with a number five and six d man.

Garrison has four years of pro experience and Edler has six.

Campbell has 18 years of pro hockey experience.

Does Garrison stand a chance at elevating his stats with the Sedins on the PP? Of course,if he even finds a permanent role with them there.That is certainly debatable at this point in time.

He is a defensive d man.I think Garrison would stand a lot better chance of elevating his game-and stats-alongside Keith Ballard.


nuck, you are once again arguing against yourself, and you have still not addressed the fact that you ,mis-represented my position.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#165 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:46 AM

You are losing me,Gump.
Your position is my position or your position has changed or will change depending upon your recent current position.
Best to keep future answers regarding your position relating to my position a bit shorter for clarification purposes.
  • 0

#166 hockeywoot

hockeywoot

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 486 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 09

Posted 04 September 2012 - 12:31 PM

The best UFA available, perhaps, not necessarily the best fit. I am not convinced on Jason Garrison, at all, as you all know. The money is very high, and the resume is just not there. It's a roll of the dice. And quite honestly, it just magnifies the mistake that was letting Christian Ehrhoff walk, who could've been had at a cap hit of $600K per annum less. And he's not much older than Garrison.



I don't agree with this. He's had plenty of shots to secure that spot. My theory on Lapierre is that he's just such a jerk, such an annoying guy to play against, that he actually makes his opponents better, because they hate him so much that he fires them up and in effect brings out their best.

I used to live in Calgary, and there were a lot of times where Iginla would be floating through the game, not really having much of an impact at all, and the atmosphere would be fairly quiet. Then, someone would do something stupid, take some cheap shot at him, or a teammate, and it'd wake him up. He'd then pop a goal or two, add 5 shots on net, etc. I honestly feel that Lapierre has that effect. He's so annoying that it fires up the opposition, and they play better. The spot's been there for his taking - think about it, his competition has been Sami Pahlsson and Cyclops Malhotra, ever since the CH deal - but he hasn't taken it. My theory would also explain why an otherwise talented guy would be dumped by both Montreal & Anaheim before entering what should be his prime years. There are issues with the guy. Not unlike Kyle Wellwood, really, though he may have finally found a home in Winnipeg.



Disagree with Erhoff. At least not for that size(length) of contract. Gillis learned his mistake from the Luongo albatross.
  • 0

#167 Mack Attack

Mack Attack

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 471 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 01:33 PM

Yeah,sure.Lidstrom had less points,as well.
Pro hockey is not restricted to the National Hockey League.
It's a big world out there.


All Brian Campbell is good for is offence, that's my point. You seem to value it so much, so clearly Edler's not that much below Campbell.

He's not big or physical, not a shutdown guy, and doesn't have a great shot. He's just very good at moving the puck. Doesn't make him an elite defenceman.
  • 0

#168 Hockey Fever

Hockey Fever

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,784 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 09

Posted 04 September 2012 - 03:58 PM

Do you honestly believe we improved enough?


......................NO
  • 2

Posted Image

NHL Wikipedia : Operates Major Ice Hockey League known for predetermining Stanley Cup winners and rampant corrupt officiating

"I would love for (the Canucks) to win the Stanley Cup because that would put to bed all the talk about 1994", he says facetiously".
Nathan Lafayette on hitting the post in game seven of the Stanley Cup.


#169 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 05:43 PM

All Brian Campbell is good for is offence, that's my point. You seem to value it so much, so clearly Edler's not that much below Campbell.
He's not big or physical, not a shutdown guy, and doesn't have a great shot. He's just very good at moving the puck. Doesn't make him an elite defenceman.


OHL First Team All Star
CHL Player of the Year
World Junior Championship First Team All Star
Stanley Cup Champion
Lady Byng Memorial winner
Four time NHL All Star
Buffalo Sabres Captain


On July 1, 2008, Campbell signed an 8 year contract with the Chicago Blackhawks for roughly 7.1 million dollars a year. Fox Chicago reported that Campbell chose to sign with the Blackhawks despite allegedly receiving better contract offers from other organizations.

‘‘Sometimes you don’t really think how big of a loss he really is,’’ said Patrick Kane, who was selected right after Campbell. ‘‘He’s a great puck-moving defenseman who can get you the puck in a lot of good areas to get shots off or get speed coming up the ice. You see his stats this year — he has a lot of assists. He’s helping that team tremendously.
He was awesome. Sometimes you play on such a good team with a lot of great players that every player could get overlooked. Maybe that happened to him a little bit, but all of us in here knew what he did, what kind of plays he would make, helping the power play, making good passes out of the zone.
"He's probably one of the few defenseman that I've seen control a game. He's special in his own right.''

Panthers coach Kevin Dineen is far more impressed with Campbell's presence than with his 35 points.
"His acceptance of taking a leadership role here, of being the face of the franchise, of taking his responsibility as a guy who's going to log more ice than anybody else on the team, very highly, and maybe more so than what he's done as an individual, taking the success-fail of our team as a personal reflection.
"He rates his success more on where we are in the standings than where he's sitting in the point race.''


Lidstrom-seven Norris trophies.Nidermayer,Karlsson,Coffey,Leetch,Blake,Bourque, Potvin and Mac Innis-all Norris winners.

Three defense men have won the Lady Byng in NHL history.Quakenbush and Kelly are Hall of famers.Campbell is the third winner and first in almost 60 years.
  • 0

#170 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:15 PM

Right,so how do you screw this up so bad?
Gillis repeatedly corrected AV. Is that so hard to figure out?
Do you get paid to protect Gillis from himself?

Vancouver Canuck general manager Mike Gillis said Friday that head coach Alain Vigneault "misspoke" when he told a French-language TV show that goalie Roberto Luongo wanted a trade out of Vancouver.

Gillis said he and Vigneault talked Thursday night and the coach explained that he "didn't mean what he said" about Luongo.

According to Gillis, Vigneault later corrected that statement with his interviewers.

" ... you know, [he] didn't mean what he said." Gillis


You've missed the point.

GIllis said what happened which was that AV corrected his statement. If that wasn't the truth don't you think at the very least the people doing the interview would have said otherwise.

I know it hurts your "hate on" but it really isn't outside the realm of possibility or probability that AV was incorrect. Ball is in your court here but you haven't really shown anything to say Gillis lied other than you saying Gillis lied. Nobody has come forward to say otherwise and I'm not sure if you know anything about the media in Canada when it comes to hockey but they're generally pretty ruthless.

AV said something and then corrected himself. GIllis then in an interview explained that AV had corrected his original comment which was incorrect. You're grasping for straws that aren't there...or to go back to the discussion you jumped into you're adding dots to help your "point".
  • 2
Posted Image
Posted Image

#171 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:17 PM

Yeah, all this assumption is based on is the player in question saying that it's time to move on, his own coach saying that he wants to move on, the backup goaltender being signed to a new, multi-year, big-money contract, and the hockey world at-large discussing Luongo destination scenarios because 99.999999% think that it's a given that he's on way out.

Totally baseless assumption, you're right.


You're right it isn't a baseless assumption. Much like you admitted that Luongo never publicly asked for a trade I'll also cop to this being a mistake. If it was an opinion it would be baseless but as an assumption it's actually quite reasonable.

By bad on that KoES, my comment was incorrect.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#172 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:20 PM

http://blogs.thescor...efense-pairing/

Even as a relatively dedicated hockey fan, you could be forgiven if you had very little idea of who Jason Garrison and Mike Weaver are.
The duo, who spent three-quarters of their ice-time together last season, played a thankless and pivotal role for an overmatched and largely anonymous Florida Panthers defense corps, and while the team may have struggled their efforts helped to limit the bleeding.

As I alluded to above, neither of these two players is particularly famous. Garrison was never drafted; the Panthers acquired him as a free agent after he posted strong offensive totals in his third season with the University of Minnesota-Duluth; he played his first game in the NHL in 2008-09 after spending most of the season as a key player for the Rochester Americans. this year, at the age of 26, he played his first season that was spent entirely in the NHL.
Like Garrison, Mike Weaver was never drafted, although he’s probably a little more famous because he’s been around longer. Florida is his fifth NHL organization; he broke in with the miserable Thrashers and has served as a depth defenseman all over the NHL. At 5’9”, he’s probably the smallest defensive defenseman playing in the world’s best league.
Yet, despite their humble origins, this pairing really did a superb job last season. They finished first and second in minutes played on the Florida blue-line, combined playing a little over 2,700 minutes at even-strength. Despite playing heavy minutes on an awful team, they finished a combined minus-1.
There’s more to those heavy minutes than simple ice-time. Of the Panthers’ six regular defenders, four broke just about even in terms of starting in the offensive versus the defensive zone – the exceptions were Weaver and Garrison, who started in their own end 60.0% of the time. Not only did they take on a ton of defensive minutes, but they did it against the best players – Garrison and Weaver finished first in both Quality of Competition and Relative Corsi Quality of Competition.
Despite that, no pairing in Florida was less likely to be scored on than Weaver and Garrison – they averaged around 2.00 goals against per 60 minutes of even-strength ice-time. They were outshot by a slight margin, but given the minutes they were playing that’s an accomplishment, not a criticism.
The best thing about the pairing? They did it all for a combined cost of less than $1.6 million. It’s hard to imagine there was a better example of budget spending in the NHL last season.



More interesting articles for those questioning Garrison or those who legitimately would like to actually learn a little more about him.

http://www.theglobea.../article576301/

http://canucksarmy.c...-and-regression

http://panthers.nhl....s.htm?id=634206

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 04 September 2012 - 06:27 PM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#173 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,711 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:01 PM

I've been a Canucks fan since 1975 - I will always cheer for them.

That said - looking at how they ended the season last year...how they kept improving year after year before last season, and ending in a disappointing SCF...I am also a realist...this team is on the downward trend I'm sorry to say...I expected a cup in 2011...now I just expect them to make the playoffs...I will be very surprised if they win the cup in the next 5 years....
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#174 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:36 PM

You've missed the point.

GIllis said what happened which was that AV corrected his statement. If that wasn't the truth don't you think at the very least the people doing the interview would have said otherwise.

I know it hurts your "hate on" but it really isn't outside the realm of possibility or probability that AV was incorrect. Ball is in your court here but you haven't really shown anything to say Gillis lied other than you saying Gillis lied. Nobody has come forward to say otherwise and I'm not sure if you know anything about the media in Canada when it comes to hockey but they're generally pretty ruthless.

AV said something and then corrected himself. GIllis then in an interview explained that AV had corrected his original comment which was incorrect. You're grasping for straws that aren't there...or to go back to the discussion you jumped into you're adding dots to help your "point".


Sorry,bud.Gillis corrected AV and then Gillis repeatedly corrected AV.
The discussion is open as this is an open,public forum.
English may not be your strongest point,I gather.Maybe switch to French and then tell me what AV said,not what Gillis would like everyone to believe AV said.
You are on the Gillis payroll.
  • 0

#175 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:40 PM

Oh,look.Roberto is in Florida today telling the world he would like to be a Panther.
Good thing Luo knows english so he can explicitely articulate he is going to be traded.
Even AV was clear.Everybody figured it out but Gillis and his employee of the month.
  • 1

#176 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:43 PM

Sorry,bud.Gillis corrected AV and then Gillis repeatedly corrected AV.
The discussion is open as this is an open,public forum.
English may not be your strongest point,I gather.Maybe switch to French and then tell me what AV said,not what Gillis would like everyone to believe AV said.
You are on the Gillis payroll.


Actually Pal Gillis said that AV corrected himself.

You're right this is a public forum...point?

Did anybody counter that AV corrected himself? Simple simple question. You should have no problem answering it.

I wish I was but that's simply not the case. I know that for you you seem to need to get personal when you have no real point to make and that's fine. It's your shtick and you're open to it. It is however a sure sign that even you know your argument is pretty weak. Carry on though if you must. It's posted for everyone to read so you coming in right after and side stepping the reality to insert your own agenda is kind of obvious.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#177 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 07:52 PM

Oh,look.Roberto is in Florida today telling the world he would like to be a Panther.
Good thing Luo knows english so he can explicitely articulate he is going to be traded.
Even AV was clear.Everybody figured it out but Gillis and his employee of the month.

How does that mean he publicly asked for a trade?

You've clearly either not been able to comprehend or just flat out didn't actually read any of the debate?

I think we've all assumed since the day he said he would waive his NTC if asked and all knew shortly after when his "list" was reported and Florida was at the top of the list.

C'mon Nit...it doesn't always have to become personal for you does it? Can't it ever just be a civil(ish) debate with you? Does it always need to come to you telling people to "give it up" or making convoluted quotes and circling around direct questions?

If Luongo really wants out; enough to ask to be traded, do you think he'd be declaring out loud that he only wants to go to one team? Think about this logically for a second. Don't you think that would hurt his request? I have to think it would but I'd be more than happy to hear reasons as to how that plays into his plan.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#178 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,161 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 08:20 PM

Come on,publicly asking for a trade? Like the public is going to grant him his request? Where did you concoct such a theory as it has no basis in reality?
I read the posts,english is my first language.Just because I don't answer as you would like does not diminish this fact.
Firstoff,get yourself clear with whom trades Roberto and as a starting point of open discussion it is not the general public.
Secondly,I could care less what you think of me and what opinions you have of me so suck it up.You continually denigrate most every poster so I care less about what your position with me is or is not.
Thirdly,Roberto dictates where he goes and as a no-trade, multi millionaire with many personal reasons to go back to Florida I would say he has every right to hold out until Gillis moves him there.The only thing he hurts is Gillis' bargaining position and it is doubtful Lou cares about Gillis' position so it does not matter what he publicly states or not.Gillis has to satisfy Luo's request or Gillis will be forced to move Schneider.
  • 0

#179 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 04 September 2012 - 08:27 PM

Come on,publicly asking for a trade? Like the public is going to grant him his request? Where did you concoct such a theory as it has no basis in reality?

Did you purposely confirm that you didn't understand or read the argument you jumped into? Why or how would the public granting his request have any baring or make any sense to the discussion. The assertion was that Luongo publicly asked for a trade, the reality is that that never happened. The theory was concocted by your buddy KofES. If you have a problem with it you should take it up with him.

I read the posts,english is my first language.Just because I don't answer as you would like does not diminish this fact.
Firstoff,get yourself clear with whom trades Roberto and as a starting point of open discussion it is not the general public.
Secondly,I could care less what you think of me and what opinions you have of me so suck it up.You continually denigrate most every poster so I care less about what your position with me is or is not.

This doesn't make much sense given anything I said to you. You absolutely understand English and I've never said otherwise but once again you just side stepped having to actually say anything. Which as I said before is totally fine but is also totally obvious.

Thirdly,Roberto dictates where he goes and as a no-trade, multi millionaire with many personal reasons to go back to Florida I would say he has every right to hold out until Gillis moves him there.The only thing he hurts is Gillis' bargaining position and it is doubtful Lou cares about Gillis' position so it does not matter what he publicly states or not.Gillis has to satisfy Luo's request or Gillis will be forced to move Schneider.

Sure but the point was that the original discussion you jumped into was with KoES regarding his assertion that Luongo publicly asked for a trade which as it turns out there is absolutely no record of.

Honestly...this is much more simple than you are making it out to be Nit.

Who enters next? KofES or Tired?

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 04 September 2012 - 08:30 PM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#180 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,513 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 04 September 2012 - 08:33 PM

You are losing me,Gump.
Your position is my position or your position has changed or will change depending upon your recent current position.
Best to keep future answers regarding your position relating to my position a bit shorter for clarification purposes.


Your last chance, nuck, and then I'm writing you off as a lost cause.

I wrote: Edler and the Sedins.

You "quote" me: Edler.

Do you not see that you mis-represented my position? And besides that, you're just wrong.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.