Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Canucks need a new look.


  • Please log in to reply
270 replies to this topic

#151 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:37 PM

Hey, there's a great idea! Just think of the wonderful signal that'd be for future free agents otherwise inclined to sign with the Canucks!

You mean that same drop pass that Detroit employs on the PP (3 of 5 against Van) and which they incorporated from the Canucks system?

Which team will you be the GM for in the future, and when? I'm sure that city's fans will be in for a treat.


Would you rather trade Ballard who's playing great with Tanev or Garrison? I'd give the guy until the trade deadline to prove he fits on this team and if he doesn't adjust by then, we consider trading him. The drop pass may work for Detroit, but look at our PP this season. Wow, what a great one.

Edited by FutureNHLGm, 25 February 2013 - 10:37 PM.

  • 0

#152 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:45 PM

Not a knee jerk reaction. Should have been done ages ago when we coasted to the playoffs after the Boston game. And yes, I believe professional players should be coached in a manner not of AV's "Oh you lost 8-3? I wanna watch you do yoga and I booked a manicure session for all of you later!" They're full grown athletes who need a spark lit under their butts. They simply don't care. The defense is incredibly lazy and you think AV's calm and cool approach is gonna change that? No.... And did I say the changes had to be made now? They can be made from here until the trade deadline. I don't know where you got a "knee jerk reaction" from.


Bag skating pros? Another desperate, "knee-jerk" solution to an 8-3 drubbing. Yoga would do more for the team from a fitness / well-being standpoint than a bag skate. You have a PE degree. You should know that. Bag skating a team who are coming off of a 4 game road trip where they earned 5 of 8 points makes sense to you? Bah! Punish a team that has one bad game out of 4 and a .625 winning percentage on a road trip? Some GM you'll make.

Also, if this isn't a "knee-jerk" reaction, why didn't you post this months ago instead of the day after a lopsided loss? I see you just joined CDC yesterday, but, surely you must have published your Nostradamus-like insights somewhere else before then?
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#153 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,500 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:49 PM

Never said I was better than anyone, I'm just saying I have more experience. I had 4 years of getting my Bachelor in Sports Management compared to fans who sit at home and watch hockey. That's all I'm saying and to say I have bad qualities when this thread isn't even about how much I know, it's a step by step solution I've proposed. I have to say I've achieved a lot. I was chose over quite a few candidates for the position i'm in now so I'd say that's achieving something. Anyways, this thread isn't about that so can we stay on topic?


You sort of missed my point.

I'm glad your formal education got you a good career job. What you do in that career is what will determine whether you are successful or not. It is in the application of knowledge not the acquisition of it that success or failure is achieved. BTW - schooling is not experience, it is education. Experience is what you will have once you have applied that knowledge for a good many years.

As for your credentials not being the issue, you were the one that chose to make them the justification for your comments here.

I know a guy who had 1 year of business school and he built an empire worth billions. There are posters on here that, while not having your formal education, have been students of the game since before you were born. I woud venture a guess they know far more than you based on actual observation over many years and their opinions are just as valid if not more so.

On topic - as you requested - Many on here have been posting that change is needed both in the personnel on the ice and beind the bench. Nothing new in yoru suggestions. Your suggestion about lighting a fire under their butts and bag skating them is interesting but sounds overly symplistic and more like something someone who has studied how to be a GM but has never actually been one would say. These are human beings not questions on an exam or chapters in a book. Surely you studied and can offer more creative means to motivate professional athletes?

I don't disagree that a new message (coach) might be at least part of the answer and have posted the same myself on these boards. Having said that, I believe it is highly unlikely there will be a coaching change (coming off a President's Cup last year) until the end of this season at the earliest and then only if the Nucks faulter badly.
  • 1

#154 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:53 PM

Would you rather trade Ballard who's playing great with Tanev or Garrison? I'd give the guy until the trade deadline to prove he fits on this team and if he doesn't adjust by then, we consider trading him. The drop pass may work for Detroit, but look at our PP this season. Wow, what a great one.


I would rather not trade anyone now, in a short season, unless the deal helps the club. Even moving a goalie this late may damage team chemistry and may not provide a player who will help now. As for our PP, it has struggled, at times and is 13th and improving. It will get even better. Our 19th place, 79% PK is what is killing us right now, not our PP.
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#155 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:53 PM

Would you rather trade Ballard who's playing great with Tanev or Garrison? I'd give the guy until the trade deadline to prove he fits on this team and if he doesn't adjust by then, we consider trading him. The drop pass may work for Detroit, but look at our PP this season. Wow, what a great one.


I haven't seen the PP been shortchanged by the drop pass specifically, but then, perhaps you're watching the games under the influence, so to speak. Or perhaps you're trolling with a digital net and a borrowed IP.

Your first sentence is provocative , but follows no known rules of logic. Because I don't want to trade Garrison means it comes down to a choice between Garrison or Ballard as to who HAS to be traded? Do you think that GM Gillis is unhappy with Garrison? He's stated that a new team/system is an adjustment, which it is. Garrison's already showing signs of improvement, not that he was a bum in the first few games anyway.

And with your trigger finger, you'd have traded an underperforming Ballard long ago. But look at him now. He's playing great, you admit. But with your logic, you'd already have him shipped off when his value was low.

Which team again was it you have the inside edge on for GM?
  • 0

#156 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:07 PM

You sort of missed my point.

I'm glad your formal education got you a good career job. What you do in that career is what will determine whether you are successful or not. It is in the application of knowledge not the acquisition of it that success or failure is achieved. BTW - schooling is not experience, it is education. Experience is what you will have once you have applied that knowledge for a good many years.

As for your credentials not being the issue, you were the one that chose to make them the justification for your comments here.

I know a guy who had 1 year of business school and he built an empire worth billions. There are posters on here that, while not having your formal education, have been students of the game since before you were born. I woud venture a guess they know far more than you based on actual observation over many years and their opinions are just as valid if not more so.

On topic - as you requested - Many on here have been posting that change is needed both in the personnel on the ice and beind the bench. Nothing new in yoru suggestions. Your suggestion about lighting a fire under their butts and bag skating them is interesting but sounds overly symplistic and more like something someone who has studied how to be a GM but has never actually been one would say. These are human beings not questions on an exam or chapters in a book. Surely you studied and can offer more creative means to motivate professional athletes?

I don't disagree that a new message (coach) might be at least part of the answer and have posted the same myself on these boards. Having said that, I believe it is highly unlikely there will be a coaching change (coming off a President's Cup last year) until the end of this season at the earliest and then only if the Nucks faulter badly.


You're right, i haven't GM'd a team before. Have you? Back on topic. The playoffs are the only thing that matters for the Canucks. You're saying you want to go into the playoffs with horrible coaching and take another year off our window just because AV makes a stupid decision? Lindy actually has emotion and speaks up in defence of his players. That's the type of coach that will motivate our players. He also has a much better playoff record than AV. Anyways, thanks for your insight.
  • 0

#157 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:12 PM

I haven't seen the PP been shortchanged by the drop pass specifically, but then, perhaps you're watching the games under the influence, so to speak. Or perhaps you're trolling with a digital net and a borrowed IP.

Your first sentence is provocative , but follows no known rules of logic. Because I don't want to trade Garrison means it comes down to a choice between Garrison or Ballard as to who HAS to be traded? Do you think that GM Gillis is unhappy with Garrison? He's stated that a new team/system is an adjustment, which it is. Garrison's already showing signs of improvement, not that he was a bum in the first few games anyway.

And with your trigger finger, you'd have traded an underperforming Ballard long ago. But look at him now. He's playing great, you admit. But with your logic, you'd already have him shipped off when his value was low.

Which team again was it you have the inside edge on for GM?


Our only other two lefties are elite defencemen. You'd rather trade them? Try going through the whole thread before you call me a troll. I've also said to give Garrison to the trade deadline to adjust before we trade him otherwise we hope he adjusts by the time the playoffs come along.
  • 0

#158 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:15 PM

Hello. As you all know, the 2012-2013 Canucks are looking a lot like the 2011-2012 Canucks. This is a huge problem, as coasting into the playoffs and squeaking out wins really didn't seem to work in the playoffs and you all know what round we got knocked out in. I am here to offer a whole new look to the Canucks.

Step 1: Fire AV, Newell Brown, Bowness.

Step 2: Hire Lindy Ruff, Another Special Teams Coach, and another associate coach.

Step 3: Trade Ballard or Garrison for a capable shutdown RH shot. When a lefty has to play Right D, he can throw the whole pairing off and screw up his positioning.

Step 4: Trade for a 3rd line center. Whether it be picks, prospects or even a player trade, (Schneider trade, Luongo trade etc,) We need that defensive 3rd line shutdown center.

Step 5: Bag Skate these lazy D-men and every time they play a bad game, take them out and replace them with other Candidates such as Barker, Alberts or Vandermeer.

I think these are the key changes the Canucks need to become a contender again and the firings of AV, NB, and Bowness will help light a fire under their butts to start performing.

Thank you.

Step 1: Fire AV, Newell Brown, Bowness. Why? bold statement with no reasoning behind it. The team has a winning record. Sure the team is looking very bad at times especially the D-core.

I could see a reason to fire Bowness if he is unable to get the D playing better. Why is it that both Tanev and Ballard are excelling well the other have struggled, are they the only two getting the system. Players problem or coaching?

Firing AV for want ?having an injured team and coming up one game short of winning the Cup! For posting a winning record to start the season with two top six forwards just coming back form injuries.

The only reason to fire AV is for change and that is not good enough. ( I question some of the things AV does but the same can and will be said of any coach)

Step 2: Hire Lindy Ruff, Another Special Teams Coach, and another associate coach. Easy to type not easy to do.

Step 3: Trade Ballard or Garrison for a capable shutdown RH shot. When a lefty has to play Right D, he can throw the whole pairing off and screw up his positioning. The bold is not always true but having a right and left shot is something most team want in their D pairing.
Ballard could be the man to trade as he is playing good right know. Garrison will not be traded he is doing better than most can see, also has not been giving enough time to adjust to the team and division.

Step 4: Trade for a 3rd line center. Whether it be picks, prospects or even a player trade, (Schneider trade, Luongo trade etc,) We need that defensive 3rd line shutdown center.
Disagree , schroeder is playing fine and is back checking better than anyone on the team and showing his speed is a threat in the offensive zone.
Trade for a two-way threat that can play both wing and center who can score. If Canucks can not get this type of player keep Schroeder in the middle.

Step 5: Bag Skate these lazy D-men and every time they play a bad game, take them out and replace them with other Candidates such as Barker, Alberts or Vandermeer. Not going to happen with games so close together and actually pretty stupid suggestion,

I would like to see some of the D sit and get a rest, which allows Barker and Vandermeer to play and show what they can do.

firings of AV, NB, and Bowness will help light a fire under their butts to start performing. NO!

Edited by Vancanwincup, 25 February 2013 - 11:31 PM.

  • 0

#159 aqua59

aqua59

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,935 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 08

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:21 PM

Hello. As you all know, the 2012-2013 Canucks are looking a lot like the 2011-2012 Canucks. This is a huge problem, as coasting into the playoffs and squeaking out wins really didn't seem to work in the playoffs and you all know what round we got knocked out in. I am here to offer a whole new look to the Canucks.

Step 1: Fire AV, Newell Brown, Bowness.

Step 2: Hire Lindy Ruff, Another Special Teams Coach, and another associate coach.

Step 3: Trade Ballard or Garrison for a capable shutdown RH shot. When a lefty has to play Right D, he can throw the whole pairing off and screw up his positioning.

Step 4: Trade for a 3rd line center. Whether it be picks, prospects or even a player trade, (Schneider trade, Luongo trade etc,) We need that defensive 3rd line shutdown center.

Step 5: Bag Skate these lazy D-men and every time they play a bad game, take them out and replace them with other Candidates such as Barker, Alberts or Vandermeer.

I think these are the key changes the Canucks need to become a contender again and the firings of AV, NB, and Bowness will help light a fire under their butts to start performing.

Thank you.

Why hasn't Gillis thought of this? Thank God for your thinking.
  • 1

#160 canucklehead44

canucklehead44

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,358 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 03

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:27 PM

Posted Image
  • 0
Sig too big.

#161 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:28 PM

Step 1: Fire AV, Newell Brown, Bowness. Why? bold statement with no reasoning behind it. The team has a winning record. Sure the team is looking very bad at times especially the D-core.

I could see a reason to fire Bowness if he is unable to get the D playing better. Why is it that both Tanev and Ballard are excelling well the other have struggled, are they the only two getting the system. Players problem or coaching?

Firing AV for want ?having a injured team and coming up one game short of winning the Cup! For posting a winning record to start the season with two top six forwards just coming back form injuries.

The only reason to fire AV is for change and that is not good enough. ( I question some of the things AV does but the same can and will be said of any coach)

Step 2: Hire Lindy Ruff, Another Special Teams Coach, and another associate coach. Easy to type not easy to do.

Step 3: Trade Ballard or Garrison for a capable shutdown RH shot. When a lefty has to play Right D, he can throw the whole pairing off and screw up his positioning. The bold is not always true but having a right and left shot is something most team want in their D pairing.
Ballard could be the man to trade as he is playing good right know. Garrison will not be traded he is doing better than most can see, also has not been giving enough time to adjust to the team and division.

Step 4: Trade for a 3rd line center. Whether it be picks, prospects or even a player trade, (Schneider trade, Luongo trade etc,) We need that defensive 3rd line shutdown center.
Disagree , schroeder is playing fine and is back checking better than anyone on the team and showing his speed is a threat in the offensive zone.
Trade for a two-way threat that can play both wing and center who can score. If Canucks can not get this type of player keep Schroeder in the middle.

Step 5: Bag Skate these lazy D-men and every time they play a bad game, take them out and replace them with other Candidates such as Barker, Alberts or Vandermeer. Not going to happen with games so close together and actually pretty stupid suggestion,

I would like to see some of the D sit and get a rest, which allows Barker and Vandermeer to play and show what they can do.

firings of AV, NB, and Bowness will help light a fire under their butts to start performing. NO!


Ballard and Tanev are doing well vecause they're in their correct positions. Is Bieksa in his right position? Yes, but he's being his typical bonehead self. Ruff doesnt sit on leads and ive observed that from watching Buffalo play as they're my second favourite team. I proposed maybe hiring Baumer as a special teams coach. Schroeder isnt big enough for the playoffs. I'drather have a big, lefty, defensive faceoff specialist centering the 3rd than an unproven rook. We have something like a three day break after the LA game so they do have time for a bag skate.
  • 0

#162 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 03

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:34 PM

how about this then:

6-0-2 against non-playoff teams, 4-4-2 against playoff teams. no more "weak division" argument involved.



How about the Truth then - In real language?

7 outright wins 4 outright losses 3 ot wins 4 ot losses

Against Playoff teams
1 outright win (1-0 Nashville) 2 outright losses 1 OT win, 3 OT losses

This is not the same team of 2 yrs ago
The players are not the same players
The ones that are still here are older (for better or worse)
The team 2 yrs ago could dominate games- You would feel confident that they would find a way to win whenever they wanted too
They had the Best of everything pk,pp,goalies
Is it neccesary for people to be living in the past about what the Players did 2 yrs ago as arguments?
That was awesome ! But this isnt 2 yrs ago and cannot you see some concern for this team?
Is not the present and the future more compelling and concerning? (You cannot change the past)
Yes players have been injured thats part of the game (Ottawa etc)
This team has not dominated any team like 2 yrs ago
They have lost how many 2 goal leads?
I think after leading 2 periods before ,they were unbeatable
This is not that team and what if it doesnt come together after all this?
Will you "real" fans make excuses for what you feel is defending to the "troll" fans, who ask questions and make suuggestions?.
The "sheep" fan is more of a fan than the "passionate" fan? I thought fan is a fan, only different styles?
These are only discussions, Its not the be all to end all
Seeing as these are only opinions, there is no need to call out people
None of us are actually in charge of any decisions
If we are on here, we are obviously "all Canuck fans"
It doesn't make one of us right or one of us wrong
Again they are only fans opinions
  • 1

#163 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:36 PM

Our only other two lefties are elite defencemen. You'd rather trade them? Try going through the whole thread before you call me a troll. I've also said to give Garrison to the trade deadline to adjust before we trade him otherwise we hope he adjusts by the time the playoffs come along.


You missed my rather obvious point. Who said I wanted to trade any Dman? Are you usually this obtuse, or is it just a sign of frustration because it's harder to troll in waters where knowledgeable sharks swim?

I've gone through the whole thread. But there's also an old saying: "you don't have to eat the whole apple to know it's rotten".

You didn't answer my first sarcastic point. What would you think a Vancouver-inclined, game-changing (next year) free agent would think when he hears that Gillis shipped out 6 year contract-bound Garrison after 25 games in year one? Think he's gonna want to come, or for that matter, whether it'll help lure anybody else?

You also failed to answer my point regarding your hasty decision-making. Do you admit that the same underperforming (last year) Ballard would be gone by now if you adhered to your same act-now philosophy, and traded him last year?

Edited by Barry_Wilkins, 25 February 2013 - 11:39 PM.

  • 0

#164 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:42 PM

You missed my rather obvious point. Who said I wanted to trade any Dman? Are you usually this obtuse, or is it just a sign of frustration because it's harder to troll in waters where knowledgeable sharks swim?

I've gone through the whole thread. But there's also an old saying: "you don't have to eat the whole apple to know it's rotten".

You didn't answer my first sarcastic point. What would you think a Vancouver-inclined, game-changing (next year) free agent would think when he hears that Gillis shipped out 6 year contract-bound Garrison after 25 games in year one? Think he's gonna want to come, or for that matter, whether it'll help lure anybody else?


Well if he can't adjust to our system and there's a better option than him for playoff success, you take it. Future free agents will know that on the Canucks you earn your spot. It isnt set in stone. If it was, J Schultznwould be signed and in the top 4 with pp time.
  • 0

#165 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:51 PM

Well if he can't adjust to our system and there's a better option than him for playoff success, you take it. Future free agents will know that on the Canucks you earn your spot. It isnt set in stone. If it was, J Schultznwould be signed and in the top 4 with pp time.


Possibly the most ignorant comment I've read this year on CDC, and that's saying something.

Yeah, Schultz would have loved to have come to a team that treats it's recent acquisitions like that. Especially a young player just learning how to adapt to the tough D position. Oh but wait! The Canucks have managed to introduce Bieksa, Edler, and Tanev seamlessly as pros in their first years on D.

Future free agents would shun the Canucks like lepers in a trapped outhouse if what you think is appropriate was enacted.

And you still didn't answer my point about Ballard.

Keep fishing, my friend. Bon voyage. And don't forget about Davy's locker.
  • 0

#166 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:01 AM

Ballard and Tanev are doing well vecause they're in their correct positions. Is Bieksa in his right position? Yes, but he's being his typical bonehead self. Ruff doesnt sit on leads and ive observed that from watching Buffalo play as they're my second favourite team. I proposed maybe hiring Baumer as a special teams coach. Schroeder isnt big enough for the playoffs. I'drather have a big, lefty, defensive faceoff specialist centering the 3rd than an unproven rook. We have something like a three day break after the LA game so they do have time for a bag skate.


What makes small plays good in the playoffs? -Heart and Schroeder has that heart.
What makes small players hard to play against?- Speed and Schroeder is one of the fastest in the league,
What make small players stay in the league against bigger players?- Hockey sense and Schoeder has just as much as anyone one the team.
What makes small players hard to hit? Lateral mobility and Schroeder is topnotch is this ability.

The biggest player in the league Chara when asked "who is the hardest player to play against" answered without hesitation " that little speed bug Saku Koivu".

Schroeder size is not a factor for him with his other skill sets, he has proven that at every level and is doing so at the NHL level.

Schroeder will be moved to the wing if we get a two-way player who can play both center and wing with a scoring touch. Kesler and Lapierre can share the faceoff specialist role. Lapierre and Hansen can be defensive specialist.
We need scoring from the third line center,
  • 0

#167 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:03 AM

Possibly the most ignorant comment I've read this year on CDC, and that's saying something.

Yeah, Schultz would have loved to have come to a team that treats it's recent acquisitions like that. Especially a young player just learning how to adapt to the tough D position. Oh but wait! The Canucks have managed to introduce Bieksa, Edler, and Tanev seamlessly as pros in their first years on D.

Future free agents would shun the Canucks like lepers in a trapped outhouse if what you think is appropriate was enacted.

And you still didn't answer my point about Ballard.

Keep fishing, my friend. Bon voyage. And don't forget about Davy's locker.


Spots aren't set in stone on this team my friend. We sign a free agent making 4 mil who doesn't perform anywhere near his capability and that's a sign that he's not adjusting to our system well. He can play the soft, Eastern, Florida game but not the hard hitting, tight defensive Western game. Easy as that.
  • 0

#168 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:07 AM

What makes small plays good in the playoffs? -Heart and Schroeder has that heart.
What makes small players hard to play against?- Speed and Schroeder is one of the fastest in the league,
What make small players stay in the league against bigger players?- Hockey sense and Schoeder has just as much as anyone one the team.
What makes small players hard to hit? Lateral mobility and Schroeder is topnotch is this ability.

The biggest player in the league Chara when asked "who is the hardest player to play against" answered without hesitation " that little speed bug Saku Koivu".

Schroeder size is not a factor for him with his other skill sets, he has proven that at every level and is doing so at the NHL level.

Schroeder will be moved to the wing if we get a two-way player who can play both center and wing with a scoring touch. Kesler and Lapierre can share the faceoff specialist role. Lapierre and Hansen can be defensive specialist.
We need scoring from the third line center,


I'm not saying take Schroeder off the team, I'm saying I want the 3rd line center position to be filled by a big, defensively responsible, left handed center who's a good faceoff taker. Chicago had Bolland, Anaheim had Pahlsson, insert more centers here.
  • 0

#169 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:08 AM

Posted Image


I have this card and set, dude. Classic "look" of the time! This was right after "Cowboy" was traded from the Leafs to Atlanta. Check out the sweet, airbrushed jersey to cover the Leafs colors. You can see a tip of a leaf shoulder patch and the laces on the chest were not part of the Flames jerseys. Pretty damn valuable player, Flett was. Part of the "Broad Street Bullies", my second fave team of all time, next to any version of the Canucks.

Edited by Hugemanskost, 26 February 2013 - 12:13 AM.

  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#170 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:15 AM

I'm not saying take Schroeder off the team, I'm saying I want the 3rd line center position to be filled by a big, defensively responsible, left handed center who's a good faceoff taker. Chicago had Bolland, Anaheim had Pahlsson, insert more centers here.


Only if that center can score just as well as he plays defense. We need scoring more than a player who can play defense.
  • 0

#171 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:18 AM

Only if that center can score just as well as he plays defense. We need scoring more than a player who can play defense.


I'd like a player like Alex Steen, Brooks Laich or Jarret Stoll to center the 3rd line
  • 0

#172 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:22 AM

Spots aren't set in stone on this team my friend. We sign a free agent making 4 mil who doesn't perform anywhere near his capability and that's a sign that he's not adjusting to our system well. He can play the soft, Eastern, Florida game but not the hard hitting, tight defensive Western game. Easy as that.


Thanks for once again failing to answer the questions I put to you!
  • 0

#173 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:23 AM

I'd like a player like Alex Steen, Brooks Laich or Jarret Stoll to center the 3rd line


What would you offer to St. Louis, Washington or LA to acquire these guys? Are they even available? I don't see any of these clubs moving these players right now. Maybe the 'Caps, if they don't start moving towards the playoffs, but, Stoll and Steen are pretty vital parts of their teams.
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#174 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:24 AM

Thanks for once again failing to answer the questions I put to you!


Doesn't answer questions... just makes statements.
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#175 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:26 AM

Doesn't answer questions... just makes statements.


I know. It's the modus operandi of a troll. Make 16 scattered, ridiculous and provocative statements. Then when called on them, shift the focus to another 10 or so equally worthless speculations in order to avoid the heat from the first set.
  • 0

#176 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:33 AM

I know. It's the modus operandi of a troll. Make 16 scattered, ridiculous and provocative statements. Then when called on them, shift the focus to another 10 or so equally worthless speculations in order to avoid the heat from the first set.


What's your question sir?
  • 0

#177 FutureNHLGm

FutureNHLGm

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 01:34 AM

What would you offer to St. Louis, Washington or LA to acquire these guys? Are they even available? I don't see any of these clubs moving these players right now. Maybe the 'Caps, if they don't start moving towards the playoffs, but, Stoll and Steen are pretty vital parts of their teams.


Never said I'd make an offer for them. Just the types of players i'd want centering the third line.
  • 0

#178 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,049 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 26 February 2013 - 02:28 AM

Well if he can't adjust to our system and there's a better option than him for playoff success, you take it.


And if that better option has trouble adjusting you're back to square one.

Future free agents will know that on the Canucks you earn your spot. It isnt set in stone. If it was, J Schultz would be signed and in the top 4 with pp time.


That's exactly why Schultz didn't sign here. He wanted a guaranteed spot in the top four. Something virtually guaranteed in Edmonton as opposed to having to earn it in Vancouver.
  • 0
Posted Image

#179 SNACanuck

SNACanuck

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,106 posts
  • Joined: 07-May 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 07:53 AM

Still waiting for new Canuck jersey photos to start popping up in this thread...
  • 0

Cheers, 

  

Canucks fan in SoCal


#180 1975Canuck

1975Canuck

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 13

Posted 26 February 2013 - 07:55 AM

New look, maybe a hair cut...
  • 0




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.