Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 3.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3002 replies to this topic

#991 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:23 PM

1.) If Phaneuf is as good as suggested, then Burke would be overpaying in a major way, no? Most folks would scoff at the idea of Loungo being traded for any other top-2 d-man. Would Burke really trade away a 27 year old guy who is one of the top d-men in the NHL (as is being suggested) in order to plug his net? He would be be gaining a goalie while making his defense that much worse. This just doesn't make much sense to me.


Yes, that would be an overpayment. This is not a rumor with any sort of legs, BTW. This is just someone bringing up Phaneuf as a possibility, which, unsurprisingly, 90% of users on this board think he's not good enough. Oldnews, in fact, said that he'd be the Vancouver Canucks' 5th defenceman. Figure that one out.
  • 0

#992 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,925 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:27 PM

Disagree completely. Phaneuf's better today and is 3 years younger. I like Hamhuis but he's not Dion Phaneuf.

Are you serious? Hamhuis is 5 times better in his own zone than Phaneuf is and can put up just as many points that Phaneuf can.
  • 3

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#993 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:34 PM

Are you serious? Hamhuis is 5 times better in his own zone than Phaneuf is and can put up just as many points that Phaneuf can.


I don't really need to list off the career accomplishment comparison again, do I?

And BTW, if Hamhuis "can" put up just as many points as Phaneuf, howcome he never has? Not even once? Is that just the good Christian in him, that wants others to get the points instead?
  • 1

#994 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,476 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:53 PM

+/- is a team-based statistic. Toronto sucks, so this shouldn't be a surprise. Their leader in that category, Clarke MacArthur, ended up with a whopping +3.


:picard: No it's not.

If it's a team based statistic then explain how Bieksa was a minus player in both 08-09 and 09-10 before Hammer got here, both years our team was good and we won the division.

It's not a team based statistic, sure playing on Toronto doesn't help at all I agree with that, but if he played in Hamhuis's spot on this team he wouldn't be +29 like Hamhuis was, cause as you see with Edler, just because your on an amazing team doesn't guarentee and a good +/-.

They're not similar players. Nobody's thinking twice about going into the corners or cutting into the middle if Alex Edler's on their tail. He hits, just not frequently enough. And he's far more of a gentleman. Phaneuf is the kind of guy that you do not enjoy playing against. Big difference.


You say there not similar, I beg to differ.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K54HtDndEPk

He hit's big (I shouldn't have to show you examples, if your a fan like you say you are should already know, and he hits big in the corner's too, ex. Frolik.)

He has the big blast from the point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP9U9dRS9x8


And an area I think he is better than Phaneuf, is wrist shots from the point and jumping into the play.


Now your right he doesn't hit as much, or even blast as many (as I said he is more of a wrist shot guy it seems) but he has those skills, that's why he is similar. He hits hard, has a heavy shot (Phaneuf's biggest strenghts).

He's basicly the European Phaneuf (for lack of a better term).

So I don't know how you came to the conclusion that he isn't similar when he posses some of the same skills, plus as I said I think he is better at jumping up in the play, has better hands (for dekes/shootout) and has a better wrist shot from the point.

And the reason Edler is this good is consistentcy, that's why people like me argue that Phaneuf isn't as good as he once was, cause he lacks consistentcy.

Disagree completely. Phaneuf's better today and is 3 years younger. I like Hamhuis but he's not Dion Phaneuf. but he's not Dan Hamhuis***


;)

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 12 November 2012 - 03:54 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#995 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,930 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 12 November 2012 - 04:15 PM

Yes, that would be an overpayment. This is not a rumor with any sort of legs, BTW. This is just someone bringing up Phaneuf as a possibility, which, unsurprisingly, 90% of users on this board think he's not good enough. Oldnews, in fact, said that he'd be the Vancouver Canucks' 5th defenceman. Figure that one out.


True, in that it was speculative in nature, as is pretty much anything discussed here. This being said, I don't see Phaneuf fitting here. The addition of his contract would upset the team's cap structure, resulting in significant changes without likely much in the way of positive results.

As to Phaneuf as a player, yes he is ranked highly in some circles, yet I question the reliability of such lists. On this "NHL.com's top 50 Defensemen", is this for some kind of fantasy league rather than real life? If they stress offensive stats more than the quality of the defensive play then the rankings would be skewed in favor of the more offensive d-man (like Phaneuf).

I suppose Ehrhoff is also a better d-man than Hamhuis according to that list. :)


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

#996 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 11

Posted 12 November 2012 - 05:42 PM

Schenn getting skewered is a whole other issue. While you make a fair point about ES points, don't forget that of Schenn's 22 total points, only 2 were goals; 1/6 of Phaneuf's total of 12.

Phaneuf has also been a leader ever since he came into the league; correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there was even a Norris nomination in his rookie year? I will concede that his career hasn't developed to the extent that most thought it would after his unbelievable rookie season, but he is still very, very good, a top-2 defenceman on any team in the NHL and there aren't many D-men that I'd rather have to build my team around, today. Certainly, not even discussion-worthy, a better player than Kevin Bieksa, IMO. Calgary trading him was incredibly stupid, and Sutter instantaneously turned a legitimate Cup contender into a 9th seed in one fell swoop.

BTW, the whole notion of "stat-padding" is laughable. That's really difficult to do in hockey, unlike basketball. You still have to generate goals/points. Just like the Vancouver Canucks didn't "stat-pad" Cody Hodgson before trading him, Toronto hasn't artificially created an offensive defenceman in Phaneuf. Phaneuf gets the PP ice-time that he does because he's proven himself to be productive in that state of the game repeatedly. His huge shot also doesn't hurt.

BTW as well, Franson is already done with the Leafs.

Phaneuf's "leadership skills" have been more of a detriment than a asset. I remember hearing something where his first day as a Maple Leaf he walked into the room and told them to turn off whatever they were listening to because they are going to listen to his music or something to that effect. Phaneuf being named captain he been critiqued constantly. I would not say leadership is one of his strengths, in fact IMO he would likely perform better in Toronto not being captain. Rumour has it he constantly butted heads with Regehr and that's why he got traded in the first place.

As far as trading Phaneuf being a mistake for the Flames, I don't agree. It would seem that he wasn't shopped that hard so the Flames could have possibly got a better return but it's not like he improved the Leafs that much if at all.

And I agree that there is no sure fire way to improve a players stats but coaches can give players the best possible opportunities to succeed. Look at all the offensive zone starts the Sedins get. The Sedins start in the offensive zone close to 80% of the time. Compare that to a player like Backes who starts there only 40% of the time. I would infer that Backes would have a lot more points and the Sedins a lot less if they traded their offensive zone starts.
  • 1

#997 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:16 PM

Phaneuf's "leadership skills" have been more of a detriment than a asset. I remember hearing something where his first day as a Maple Leaf he walked into the room and told them to turn off whatever they were listening to because they are going to listen to his music or something to that effect. Phaneuf being named captain he been critiqued constantly. I would not say leadership is one of his strengths, in fact IMO he would likely perform better in Toronto not being captain. Rumour has it he constantly butted heads with Regehr and that's why he got traded in the first place.


Don't think so. I was living in Calgary up to about 2 - 3 months prior to him being traded. Obviously, he's not the friendliest guy out there, but there weren't any attitude issues. The trade was a complete shock when it happened.

As far as trading Phaneuf being a mistake for the Flames, I don't agree. It would seem that he wasn't shopped that hard so the Flames could have possibly got a better return but it's not like he improved the Leafs that much if at all.


You say that he didn't improve the Leafs that much; maybe, but maybe they would've been even a lot worse had that trade not been made.

And as for Calgary, they had finished with 98 points in 2008-09 (2 points behind your Vancouver Canucks), lost a hard-fought 1st round series to Chicago, and then added Jay Bouwmeester in the summer. Things were justifiably looking up. I believe they were tops in the NHL in November, then went on a slump in December, traded Phaneuf, then totally unraveled.

That trade was a franchise-killer. You just don't trade a 24 year-old cornerstone defenceman.
  • 0

#998 Mike Versace ESQ

Mike Versace ESQ

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,668 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 07:02 PM

Mobile bump
  • 0

Posted ImagePosted Image


FOLLOW @MikeVersace1

#shapcrew #membersonly

credit to CanucksHD for the avatar


#999 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:08 PM

I don't really need to list off the career accomplishment comparison again, do I?

And BTW, if Hamhuis "can" put up just as many points as Phaneuf, howcome he never has? Not even once? Is that just the good Christian in him, that wants others to get the points instead?

Were you not the guy who said career accomplishments did not matter when you were comparing Luongo and Dubnyk? Or am I mistaken?

Edited by SonGoku23, 12 November 2012 - 08:09 PM.

  • 2

Posted Image


#1000 ConnorFutureGM

ConnorFutureGM

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 11

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:17 PM

Don't think so. I was living in Calgary up to about 2 - 3 months prior to him being traded. Obviously, he's not the friendliest guy out there, but there weren't any attitude issues. The trade was a complete shock when it happened.

It was a surprise but the issues about Phaneuf in the locker room came out after. I don't want to look for links so I'll leave it as a difference of memory.

You say that he didn't improve the Leafs that much; maybe, but maybe they would've been even a lot worse had that trade not been made.

I disagree. This again will come down to opinion but you are comparing Phaneuf to an elite #1 defenceman. I would go far as to say if the Leafs had Pronger, Lidstrom, Weber or Chara instead of Phaneuf they would have done better these past few seasons.

And as for Calgary, they had finished with 98 points in 2008-09 (2 points behind your Vancouver Canucks), lost a hard-fought 1st round series to Chicago, and then added Jay Bouwmeester in the summer. Things were justifiably looking up. I believe they were tops in the NHL in November, then went on a slump in December, traded Phaneuf, then totally unraveled.

Maybe the Flames sucked because they picked up Jay "Got to get in on the early golf season" Bouwmeester. Who knows why they imploded though.

That trade was a franchise-killer. You just don't trade a 24 year-old cornerstone defenceman.

They should have gotten more but I think it was a good time to trade him. He is probably valued less now than he was back then. I completely disagree with calling him a cornerstone. He just isn't a defenceman that carrys a team. He'd be a great 3rd defenceman playing in the low 20s and should get paid less than 5 mil per.
  • 0

#1001 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,073 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:42 PM

Don't think so. I was living in Calgary up to about 2 - 3 months prior to him being traded. Obviously, he's not the friendliest guy out there, but there weren't any attitude issues. The trade was a complete shock when it happened.



You say that he didn't improve the Leafs that much; maybe, but maybe they would've been even a lot worse had that trade not been made.

And as for Calgary, they had finished with 98 points in 2008-09 (2 points behind your Vancouver Canucks), lost a hard-fought 1st round series to Chicago, and then added Jay Bouwmeester in the summer. Things were justifiably looking up. I believe they were tops in the NHL in November, then went on a slump in December, traded Phaneuf, then totally unraveled.

That trade was a franchise-killer. You just don't trade a 24 year-old cornerstone defenceman.

Wrong. I had a friend bounce between the AHL and Flames team a couple years when Phaneuf played there and said Phaneuf was a huge distraction. They also used to call him 'Alligator Arms' because he was so cheap with his teammates.
Like you said, why would Sutter trade a young promising dman with so much potential for a bunch of spare parts?? Is Sutter an idiot? No, and his cup ring this year and the way he turned the kings around proves this. It's because he has a huge ego and is a cancer. The Flames were playing terrible up until his trade and played a bit better after.
He is no where close to cracking team Canada's roster let alone being top in the league. Hahaha, what a joke. And yes Hamhuis and Edler are better all round players.
No thanks to Phaneuf.

Edited by sampy, 12 November 2012 - 08:46 PM.

  • 0

#1002 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:37 PM

Bieksa (31 years old): 425 GP, 42 G, 191 P, +24 Phaneuf (27 years old): 552 GP, 97 G, 312 P, +5 Phaneuf: 3X NHL All-star, WJC Gold, WC Gold Bieksa: .... I could tell you that Ryan Kesler's "no better than" Tyler Bozak, and that assertion would be about as valid as yours.

Phaneuf has been put in a position to acquire those stats since he came in to the league, but Bieksa has had to start in the bottom pairing with no special teams TOI.

Instead of career stats, let's look at the last two years.



In the last two years Phaneuf's point total is 74, where Bieksa is 88.

Phaneuf's +/- is -12, and Bieksa is +44



Advanced stats tell more of the story:

As described by arcticicehockey.com, a Corsi Number is “the shot differential while a player was on the ice. This includes not just goals and shots on goal, but also shots that miss the net, and in some formulations, blocked shots. In other words, it’s the differential in the total number of shots directed at the net.”

Phaneuf's Corsi averaged over the last 2 years is .9, and Bieksa's is 5.45

Phaneuf's On-Ice team save percentage is .912, and Bieksa's is .9275

In 5 on 4 situations (last year was the first year this stat was collected) when Phaneuf is on the ice the team shooting percentage is 13.55, and Kevin Bieksa's is 15.04

In 4 on 5 (also only collected last year) Phaneuf's Team On-Ice Save percentage was .866, and Bieksa's was .949




To sum up, my feeling is that Phaneuf's world junior performance and All Star nominations mean nothing to what he could bring to our team. I think he has been put in more situations to collect high-end stats, because his ceiling was initially projected higher than Bieksa's. In his early years he looked as though he could breakout in to a true #1 D-man, but never managed to achieve that status. I think what he brings to the team is no more than Bieksa brings for us already at a much better price. I haven't seen Garrison play, but I would assume that Phaneuf would land ahead of him on the depth charts were he here. All of the stats I posted could theoretically be brushed off by saying that Phaneuf was on the non playoff Leafs and Bieksa was on the President's Trophy Canucks, and I realize that, but I think it is more fair to compare their last two years, because in those two years their peaks have likely both been realized. Career accumulation isn't quite as telling, because like I said Phaneuf's early career was much different than Bieksa's.
  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1003 SEAN HARNETT

SEAN HARNETT

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 05

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:15 PM

Phaneuf has been put in a position to acquire those stats since he came in to the league, but Bieksa has had to start in the bottom pairing with no special teams TOI.

Instead of career stats, let's look at the last two years.



In the last two years Phaneuf's point total is 74, where Bieksa is 88.

Phaneuf's +/- is -12, and Bieksa is +44



Advanced stats tell more of the story:

As described by arcticicehockey.com, a Corsi Number is “the shot differential while a player was on the ice. This includes not just goals and shots on goal, but also shots that miss the net, and in some formulations, blocked shots. In other words, it’s the differential in the total number of shots directed at the net.”

Phaneuf's Corsi averaged over the last 2 years is .9, and Bieksa's is 5.45

Phaneuf's On-Ice team save percentage is .912, and Bieksa's is .9275

In 5 on 4 situations (last year was the first year this stat was collected) when Phaneuf is on the ice the team shooting percentage is 13.55, and Kevin Bieksa's is 15.04

In 4 on 5 (also only collected last year) Phaneuf's Team On-Ice Save percentage was .866, and Bieksa's was .949




To sum up, my feeling is that Phaneuf's world junior performance and All Star nominations mean nothing to what he could bring to our team. I think he has been put in more situations to collect high-end stats, because his ceiling was initially projected higher than Bieksa's. In his early years he looked as though he could breakout in to a true #1 D-man, but never managed to achieve that status. I think what he brings to the team is no more than Bieksa brings for us already at a much better price. I haven't seen Garrison play, but I would assume that Phaneuf would land ahead of him on the depth charts were he here. All of the stats I posted could theoretically be brushed off by saying that Phaneuf was on the non playoff Leafs and Bieksa was on the President's Trophy Canucks, and I realize that, but I think it is more fair to compare their last two years, because in those two years their peaks have likely both been realized. Career accumulation isn't quite as telling, because like I said Phaneuf's early career was much different than Bieksa's.


I think alot of Bieksa's stats can be atributed to the type of team he plays on. Almost every forward back checks or plays a responsible two way game. I remember the last time Toronto came into Vancouver and it was obvious that the Leafs have nothing in team systems structure compared to the Canucks. It seemed like the Canucks were playing against a team from the BCHL rather then the NHL. That being said, I still really like BIeksa and wouldn't trade him away for anything less then a home run return.

Phaneuf may thrive under the Canucks system if given the chance, but I don't really like the idea of bringing him in and risking it either.
  • 0
:towel:

#1004 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:05 PM

I think alot of Bieksa's stats can be atributed to the type of team he plays on. Almost every forward back checks or plays a responsible two way game. I remember the last time Toronto came into Vancouver and it was obvious that the Leafs have nothing in team systems structure compared to the Canucks. It seemed like the Canucks were playing against a team from the BCHL rather then the NHL. That being said, I still really like BIeksa and wouldn't trade him away for anything less then a home run return.

Phaneuf may thrive under the Canucks system if given the chance, but I don't really like the idea of bringing him in and risking it either.

Yeah, it is all anecdotal evidence, so it's basically meaningless. The point is that the comparison is definitely there.
Phaneuf could do well in our system, but could also clash horribly with AV.
The only reason we are talking about this is for fun anyway.
There is no way TO wants to make a sideways trade, especially one involving their captain.
MG doesn't want to take back that type of salary either.
It's a fun discussion though.
  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1005 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:21 AM

Were you not the guy who said career accomplishments did not matter when you were comparing Luongo and Dubnyk? Or am I mistaken?


You're mistaken.
  • 0

#1006 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:28 AM

I completely disagree with calling him a cornerstone. He just isn't a defenceman that carrys a team. He'd be a great 3rd defenceman playing in the low 20s and should get paid less than 5 mil per.


When he left Calgary, he had played in 378 games, accumulating 75 goals and 228 points during that time. All this while both being probably the league's most feared hitter and only between the ages of 20 - 25.

If that's not a cornerstone, I really don't know what is. Calgary was also a very, very strong team throughout those 4.5 seasons.
  • 0

#1007 BenDrinkin

BenDrinkin

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,355 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 07

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:11 AM

When he left Calgary, he had played in 378 games, accumulating 75 goals and 228 points during that time. All this while both being probably the league's most feared hitter and only between the ages of 20 - 25.

If that's not a cornerstone, I really don't know what is. Calgary was also a very, very strong team throughout those 4.5 seasons.


He was good early in his career but disappeared shortly after. I think he was a joke by two seasons ago, do you not? But then, you also think he was the league's most feared hitter.


What am I missing here? Why are we talking about Phaneuf? He sucks balls harder than any defenseman in the league, and it's not even close.

Edited by BenDrinkin, 13 November 2012 - 09:22 AM.

  • 0

#1008 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,073 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 13 November 2012 - 10:07 AM

He was good early in his career but disappeared shortly after. I think he was a joke by two seasons ago, do you not? But then, you also think he was the league's most feared hitter.


What am I missing here? Why are we talking about Phaneuf? He sucks balls harder than any defenseman in the league, and it's not even close.

Phaneuf's ego and attitude make Kesler look humble.
  • 0

#1009 Monty

Monty

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,378 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:03 AM

What am I missing here?  Why are we talking about Phaneuf?  He sucks balls harder than any defenseman in the league, and it's not even close.


When you say, "he sucks balls harder than any defenseman in the league," do you mean he literally does, or that he is the worst defenseman in the league?If it's the latter, than that's a ridiculous statement to make, and I don't even like Phaneuf, the Leafs, or Calgary.While Phaneuf's play has gone downhill over the years, he still has the skillset to get back to where he was. I think he needs to be surrounded by a more talented group, a great leader on defense, and no longer carry the "C."There are quite a few overpaid defenseman that I would not want any part of before Phaneuf (who is also overpaid).1. Bouwmeester2. Kaberle3. Timmonen (I like him, he's just overpaid)4. Regehr5. Campbell (also like him, but way overpaid)6. Ballard (yup)7. Komisarek
  • 0

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#1010 tebeaune

tebeaune

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 09

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:27 AM

*
POPULAR

I don't post on this board much.  The main reason?

People Like King of E(verything) S(tupid). Can you people not see that his opinion means everything to him.  There is no logic, no reasoning, no material fact that can't be twisted to suit his all important opinion.  

His insecurity leaps off the page and clouds any potential for rational judgement or reasoning.

He can't be objective. There is no perspective except his own.  It's not possible. Please stop feeding his insecurity and let the professionals do their job.  Maybe then these posts won't get hijacked into the world according to King of E(go) S(entric).   Man I'm tired of the drivel.

PS: I know sentric is spelled centric.  (Thanks King)

Thank you

Edited by tebeaune, 13 November 2012 - 11:47 AM.

  • 9

#1011 sampy

sampy

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,073 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 07

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:57 AM

I don't post on this board much.  The main reason?

People Like King of E(verything) S(tupid). Can you people not see that his opinion means everything to him.  There is no logic, no reasoning, no material fact that can't be twisted to suit his all important opinion.  

His insecurity leaps off the page and clouds any potential for rational judgement or reasoning.

He can't be objective. There is no perspective except his own.  It's not possible. Please stop feeding his insecurity and let the professionals do their job.  Maybe then these posts won't get hijacked into the world according to King of E(go) S(entric).   Man I'm tired of the drivel.

PS: I know sentric is spelled centric.  (Thanks King)

Thank you

Very good post
  • 0

#1012 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:36 PM

I don't post on this board much. The main reason?

People Like King of E(verything) S(tupid). Can you people not see that his opinion means everything to him. There is no logic, no reasoning, no material fact that can't be twisted to suit his all important opinion.

His insecurity leaps off the page and clouds any potential for rational judgement or reasoning.

He can't be objective. There is no perspective except his own. It's not possible. Please stop feeding his insecurity and let the professionals do their job. Maybe then these posts won't get hijacked into the world according to King of E(go) S(entric). Man I'm tired of the drivel.

PS: I know sentric is spelled centric. (Thanks King)

Thank you


:lol:

I guess your definition of "logic" and/or "reasoning" are the guys on here who expect to receive Yakupov, or Purcell/Aulie/1st for Luongo. Right? That sound pretty logical, to you?

What about the guy who says that Dion Phaneuf is our 5th defenceman? A very factual statement, in your eyes?
  • 0

#1013 Rhinogator

Rhinogator

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 10

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:21 PM

I cannot believe you people are still discussing this.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#1014 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,925 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

:lol:

I guess your definition of "logic" and/or "reasoning" are the guys on here who expect to receive Yakupov, or Purcell/Aulie/1st for Luongo. Right? That sound pretty logical, to you?

What about the guy who says that Dion Phaneuf is our 5th defenceman? A very factual statement, in your eyes?

And you're the guy that said the Canucks couldn't even get Magnus Paajarvi or Jeff Petry for not only Luongo but Keith Ballard as well. Once again you contradict yourself.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#1015 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:39 PM

And you're the guy that said the Canucks couldn't even get Magnus Paajarvi or Jeff Petry for not only Luongo but Keith Ballard as well. Once again you contradict yourself.


You must not know the definition of "contradiction".

I never said anything about Petry. I said Luongo/Ballard for Paajarvi was an idea. And yes, I still doubt that the Oilers would do it. Problem?
  • 0

#1016 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,815 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:40 PM

And you're the guy that said the Canucks couldn't even get Magnus Paajarvi or Jeff Petry for not only Luongo but Keith Ballard as well. Once again you contradict yourself.

Shall we just chalk it up to lots of people having their own opinions, only some of which are reasonable or based on factual evidence? If so, then we can just go back to ignoring people who make stupid comments with no facts based in reality to back them up and discussion in this thread can get back to something more resembling that of intelligent beings.

One final word for King: we know there are people on the opposite side of your spectrum of thought, but to try and troll that all people with thoughts other than yours are just as unreasonable is ignorant of how unreasonable you can be when factual arguments are presented to you without bias or opinion.

Let's just try and talk sense here, and if people come up with an unreasonable opinion, we know the ones that are open to hearing why they're off base and the one's that don't care how many facts you hit them in the face with. Even if there's a reply to those types of posts, we don't need to drag the whole thread down with it.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#1017 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 13 November 2012 - 03:44 PM

thnks Ossi.

I still think there is a strong chance Roberto doesn't get traded at all this season, even after the lockout ends. There would have been more urgency to trade him had Schneider not re-signed. Schneider may not have entered into a multi year extension had he thought Roberto will be here for another year. Now that Schneider is signed for 3 years Gillis has a lot more control. If the right deal does not present it self, Roberto will be a Canuck for the foreseeable future.

Furthermore, Schneider will get a chance to be number 1 just as Roberto will. If Roberto is the better goalie he will continue to be the number 1 goalie on the Canucks.
  • 1

#1018 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,099 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 13 November 2012 - 03:57 PM

I agree, Roberto will be on our roster if the season finally begins. We likely won't need to lose salary for cap reasons till the next off season. There probably isn't an offer on the table for Roberto that makes sense. The only logical thing to do is wait until the season begins and see which teams need to re-evaluate in net.

Or perhaps you could call it a conspiracy theory to keep this thread going as long as possible, so that CDC has something to talk about. My hunch is that Tampa may slump out of the gates, and come calling with an offer.
  • 0

#1019 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,308 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

thnks Ossi.

I still think there is a strong chance Roberto doesn't get traded at all this season, even after the lockout ends. There would have been more urgency to trade him had Schneider not re-signed. Schneider may not have entered into a multi year extension had he thought Roberto will be here for another year. Now that Schneider is signed for 3 years Gillis has a lot more control. If the right deal does not present it self, Roberto will be a Canuck for the foreseeable future.

Furthermore, Schneider will get a chance to be number 1 just as Roberto will. If Roberto is the better goalie he will continue to be the number 1 goalie on the Canucks.

NEWS ALERT!
Roberto will be stayin with the Canucks for another 'season' because there won't be a season! Sorry!
  • 0

#1020 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,925 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:32 PM

You must not know the definition of "contradiction".

I never said anything about Petry. I said Luongo/Ballard for Paajarvi was an idea. And yes, I still doubt that the Oilers would do it. Problem?

Edmonton would be stupid to not take that absolute steal of a trade.
  • 1

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it





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.