runtzguy Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 And the dumbest statement of the thread goes to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 You. Hes right. Sedins are not considered superstars. Split them up and compare Henrik to Toews, whom Henrik make the same amount of money. Who would you pick as your center? And compare Kane to Daniel. Who would you pick? Who has the deadlier shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 You. Hes right. Sedins are not considered superstars. Split them up and compare Henrik to Toews, whom Henrik make the same amount of money. Who would you pick as your center? And compare Kane to Daniel. Who would you pick? Who has the deadlier shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 The Sedins have won the Art Ross, the Hart and the Ted Lindsay. They are superstars, and any person that says they aren`t are either a troll, ignorant, or a bitter fan. Or maybe all three. Oh and Kane is a complete no show in this series, and Toews has 3 points in 9 games. Those numbers really scream superstar. Meanwhile Hank has as many points as Toews despite only playing 4 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 You. Hes right. Sedins are not considered superstars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puckinaround Posted May 25, 2013 Author Share Posted May 25, 2013 It's always great how a thread goes completely to hell when negative haters show up to bomb everyone else by calling them trolls, newbies or whatever. Thanks Bedbeats and Deniro, you are obviously the only ones in the entire city of Vancouver who know anything about hockey. Your a troll, No, your a troll, whaaaa, no you are. This is a summary of you last 3 posts. Notice how everyone else in this thread has kept it to respectful and useful comments until you showed up. The point of posting is not to prove that your right or wrong, but to chew through ideas with other people. Instead you choose to be ugly to others. Must be fun living your life full of hating on others. Maybe you've noticed how people respond to your attitude. You should learn from that. It's easier making friends when you respect that people have different ideas. It's okay to disagree but why you gotta be so rude. Now cue all your fancy video clips to show how fancy your hating is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 It's always great how a thread goes completely to hell when negative haters show up to bomb everyone else by calling them trolls, newbies or whatever. Thanks Bedbeats and Deniro, you are obviously the only ones in the entire city of Vancouver who know anything about hockey. Your a troll, No, your a troll, whaaaa, no you are. This is a summary of you last 3 posts. Notice how everyone else in this thread has kept it to respectful and useful comments until you showed up. The point of posting is not to prove that your right or wrong, but to chew through ideas with other people. Instead you choose to be ugly to others. Must be fun living your life full of hating on others. Maybe you've noticed how people respond to your attitude. You should learn from that. It's easier making friends when you respect that people have different ideas. It's okay to disagree but why you gotta be so rude. Now cue all your fancy video clips to show how fancy your hating is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Hilarious post. You drew heavy parallel. Of course the anti-AV bias shines through with a bit of revisionism. Babs and AV are more alike than people would ever want to admit to. You oughta re-read all of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I disagree. Glad you got a chuckle though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Okay, aside from Know it all bartender guy and loose-monkey analogy guy, I think eveyone else understands what I was getting at. The Canucks look limp, and they need heart. Firing AV is a good start even though I respect him and thank him for leading us to a cup final. The next step is to light a fire under our limp emotionless team stars. Also the injury excuse is too played out. If we are injured we need a young, developed prospect to come up and perform well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puckinaround Posted May 25, 2013 Author Share Posted May 25, 2013 Okay, Im relaxed. Lol, your okay in my book. I was expecting a mega hate bomb though. haha. Yah, I disagree with the "no talent" guy too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Sorry if I'm not gonna stand for someone trying to crap on the best players this team has ever had. I don't see how saying we do have superstars like the Red Wings is derailing the thread. When someone says something so ridiculous like "the Sedins aren't superstars", you have to call them on it. Otherwise this forum fills up with posters saying, "this team sucks", "trade all the players", "fire everyone". Maybe a bit of an overreaction on your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neversummer Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 I thought this thread was about the Wings. Anyhow ... mad props to them for going so far. Admittedly, no one saw this coming, not even Babs himself in some press conference. I think it is partially exactly that ... no one expects them to beat Anaheim, no one certainly expects them to beat Chicago so the kids go out, have lots of fun and play loose. We lose ... oh well, we were #7 ranked ... we win ... wow, this is pretty awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clutesi Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Keep drafting skill and talent and develop depth on the farm. It's not a mystery but it takes patience which gillis lacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SergioMomesso Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Detroits best players play their best when the going gets tough. They have a skilled third line that isn't getting schooled every other shift. Their Europeans play grittier than our North Americans. Their goalie is an absolute stud. Even with their so called inexperienced blue line. And their building is intimidating to play in. Unlike the Rog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lui's Knob Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 They have well coached systems and skill Canucks had no skill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 They have well coached systems and skill Canucks had no skill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 In regards to players being injured, if your second line center is always injured is it not in the best interest of the team to find a second line center that can actually play in the playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Well, this is a bit of a departure from what you were initially saying, however, part of the problem might not have been having a 2nd line center who was injured, but rather the uncertainty at the 3C after Malhotra was injured. Had Malhotra not gotten that unfortunate eye injury, then Kesler would likely have been played in a more offensive role and more of the defensive zone heavy lifting could have been left to Malhotra, which could well have resulted in Kesler remaining healthier through the entire playoffs. Are you are suggesting that the Canucks should have held on to Hodgson for his offensive talents, and that this would have somehow saved the Canucks in the playoffs? Is the fact that he was (and still is) weak in the faceoff circle lost on you? Is the fact that he is a soft player okay with you, because his name is Hodgson rather than Sedin? Actually, I was going out for brunch, but that isn't related to my opinion that neither Grabner nor Hodgson would have made it in Detroit's system. I would agree that Detroit likes to develop their prospects. They are not unique in this regard. One of the aspects which the Wings stress is sound defensive play, as do the Canucks. Are you suggesting that had Grabner and Hodgson been drafted by Detroit, that they would have played a sound, defensive style to supplement their offense, but for some reason they chose not to do the same thing in Vancouver? I suggest that they would both have continued to show their lack of defensive ability (as indeed they have), and that the Wings would have traded them for veterans who are physical and know how to back-check. Yes, Detroit is all these things you've mentioned. All teams would like to do this. There's also a few things you are perhaps not taking into consideration which has allowed the Wings to develop what young players they have drafted, and kept. 1.) Detroit has had the very good fortune of obtaining a number of very talented players who have stayed with that team for a lot of years, while still playing at a very high level. I suspect this is not that common in today's NHL. How many other teams have had the good fortune of having guys like Yzerman (22 yrs), Lidstrom (20 yrs), Draper (17 yrs), Holmstrom (15 yrs), Maltby (14 yrs), McCarty (13 yrs), Datsyuk (11 yrs and counting), Chelios (10 yrs) and Zetterberg (10 yrs and counting) playing for them as long as they have? And then there's Kronwall, Franzen, Filppula and Cleary who have been around for 8 - 9 years. The Canucks have the Sedins at 12 yrs. Kesler, Burrows and Bieksa have been around for 8 - 9 yrs. Having longevity in these players has allowed the Wings the luxury of time to develop their picks/prospects, or to move them. 2.) Detroit has traded away their 1st round pick 6 out of the last 10 years (10 of the last 20). They got in return assets like Quincey, Lang, Schneider, three 2nd round picks, and one 3rd round pick, The Wings have also been without a 2nd round pick three of those years, and had no 3rd once. With that many high picks out the door, they certainly had better be good at drafting in the later rounds. Moving picks and prospects for veteran players has been one of the hallmarks of Detroit's success over the last 20+ years. I would say that Grabner and Hodgson would have been part of that fine tradition. 3.) Luck. Detroit has gotten "lucky" in some of their drafts, and those successes blind folks to their failures. Datsyuk was drafted in the 6th round in '98. Maybe the other teams were unaware of him and so Detroit felt they could wait until that late to draft him, or maybe they were unsure that he would/could make it over to the NHL. That being said, was taking Fischer, Barnes, Valtonen, McCracken, Hobday, Steen, or Deleeuw ahead of Datsyuk an example of good drafting? Holmstrom was drafted in the 10th round. It may have been astute scouting to draft him, but it was damn lucky that he was still there that late. And other than Dandenault in the 2nd round, the Wings really didn't do that well in '04. Take a walk through the Wings' draft history. They took a flyer on a few European players with some late round picks which paid off in a very big way, kind of like the Canucks did with Bure in '89 (6th round), or Larionov in ''85 (10th round). Detroit has had some absolutely miserable draft years, from their 1st down to their last pick. Not a hunch, but an observation that Detroit demands certain things from their prospects, and if the prospects fail to live up to expectations then they are moved. Grabner is better than anyone who Detroit drafted in the 1st round of '06, mostly because Detroit had traded away their 1st round pick for a couple of 2nd round picks (Emmerton and Matthias). And Hodgson is certainly better than anyone Detroit drafted in '08, but I'm not sure how that supports your position of how Detroit has built their team since clearly Detroit had an epic failure that year (as did a number of teams, to be fair). I suspect that if Detroit had the position which allowed them to drafted Grabner and/or Hodgson, that they would have traded the picks. And if they did select those two players, then they would have been traded for the above stated reasons. Oh no, sarcastic laughter. I might not ever post on the internets again I am so crushed. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 Sorry if I'm not gonna stand for someone trying to crap on the best players this team has ever had. I don't see how saying we do have superstars like the Red Wings is derailing the thread. When someone says something so ridiculous like "the Sedins aren't superstars", you have to call them on it. Otherwise this forum fills up with posters saying, "this team sucks", "trade all the players", "fire everyone". Maybe a bit of an overreaction on your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.