Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

Is Toronto officially a better team than us now?

Discussion

  • Please log in to reply
204 replies to this topic

#181 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,690 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 04 November 2013 - 02:09 PM

They're 3 and 0. They don't have their # 1 free agent signing playing yet and Bernier has looked good when he's played.

Vancouver did nothing but sign a 4th liner in the off season and lost yet another game to SJ in the season opener.

I actually believe the Leafs are a legit cup contender and would beat Vancouver in a 7 game playoff series.


Thread of the year.
  • 3

#182 RockNroLLa.

RockNroLLa.

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,076 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 04 November 2013 - 02:13 PM

who started this thread?





:picard:
  • 0

#183 VMR

VMR

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 04 November 2013 - 02:38 PM

no
  • 0
They are my team!
Go Canucks Go!

Posted Image
Thank you VC!!!!!

#184 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,538 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 04 November 2013 - 04:04 PM

Have they ever been?. I mean, since canucks-leafs been in the league. What's their win/loss ratio? Head to Head?

Allgames                    HOME                         AWAY                     PLAYOFFS
  OVERALL: W-L-T    Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T    Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T    Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG 
           64-53-22 54.0 3.5  3.3 | 37-24-11 59.0 3.6  3.2 | 27-29-11 48.5 3.4  3.5 | 4-1-0 80.0 3.2  1.8

                 Allgames                    HOME             AWAY                     PLAYOFFS
DECADE: W-L-T   Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T  Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T  Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG 
2010's: 6-0-0  100.0 4.7  2.2 | 3-0-0 100.0 4.3  1.3 | 3-0-0 100.0 5.0  3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
2000's: 7-8-2   47.1 3.5  3.1 | 4-6-1  40.9 3.8  3.5 | 3-2-1  58.3 3.0  2.2 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1990's: 17-18-5 48.8 3.1  3.2 | 10-7-3 57.5 3.3  3.0 | 7-11-2 40.0 2.8  3.4 | 4-1-0 80.0 3.2  1.8 
1980's: 15-10-7 57.8 4.1  3.7 | 9-4-3  65.6 3.8  3.4 | 6-6-4  50.0 4.4  4.1 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1970's: 19-17-8 52.3 3.2  3.5 | 11-7-4 59.1 3.4  3.2 | 8-10-4 45.5 3.0  3.7 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0

these are the years in which the canucks win pergentage was below 50%
                 Allgames               HOME                   AWAY                  PLAYOFFS
YEAR: W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T  Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T  Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG 
2004: 0-2-0  0.0 2.0  3.5 | 0-1-0   0.0 3.0  5.0 | 0-1-0   0.0 1.0  2.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
2003: 0-2-1 16.7 2.0  3.0 | 0-2-0   0.0 1.5  3.0 | 0-0-1  50.0 3.0  3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
2000: 1-2-0 33.3 4.3  4.0 | 0-2-0   0.0 4.5  5.5 | 1-0-0 100.0 4.0  1.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1999: 1-2-0 33.3 3.3  4.0 | 1-1-0  50.0 4.5  3.5 | 0-1-0   0.0 1.0  5.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1997: 1-3-0 25.0 4.0  4.0 | 1-1-0  50.0 6.0  4.5 | 0-2-0   0.0 2.0  3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1996: 1-2-1 37.5 3.3  4.0 | 0-1-1  25.0 3.0  5.0 | 1-1-0  50.0 3.5  3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1995: 1-2-1 37.5 2.8  4.0 | 1-0-1  75.0 3.5  2.5 | 0-2-0   0.0 2.0  5.5 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1993: 1-2-0 33.3 2.7  5.0 | 0-1-0   0.0 1.0  8.0 | 1-1-0  50.0 3.5  3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1990: 1-2-0 33.3 3.3  3.0 | 1-1-0  50.0 3.5  2.5 | 0-1-0   0.0 3.0  4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1989: 1-2-0 33.3 1.7  3.0 | 1-0-0 100.0 2.0  1.0 | 0-2-0   0.0 1.5  4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1983: 1-2-0 33.3 4.0  4.3 | 0-1-0   0.0 1.0  4.0 | 1-1 -0 50.0 5.5  4.5 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1980: 1-3-0 25.0 2.8  3.5 | 1-1-0  50.0 3.5  3.0 | 0-2-0   0.0 2.0  4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1979: 1-3-1 30.0 2.0  2.8 | 0-1-1  25.0 2.0  3.0 | 1-2-0  33.3 2.0  2.7 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1978: 0-3-1 12.5 2.8  4.5 | 0-1-1  25.0 2.0  4.0 | 0-2-0   0.0 3.5  5.0 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
1977: 1-2-1 37.5 2.3  3.3 | 0-2-0   0.0 0.5  3.0 | 1-0-1  75.0 4.0  3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0  0.0  0.0 
2004 being the last year the leafs actually won against the canucks.
http://mcubed.net/nhl/van/tor.shtml

how many times have the leafs been to the SCF since the nucks have been around?

they got to the conference finals/league semifinals 5 times, the last time was in the 2001-02 season. never to the Stanley cup finals.
http://en.wikipedia....e_Leafs_seasons

Edited by avelanch, 04 November 2013 - 04:13 PM.

  • 0

#185 16ToWin

16ToWin

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Joined: 06-September 12

Posted 04 November 2013 - 05:50 PM

Allgames HOME AWAY PLAYOFFS
OVERALL: W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG
64-53-22 54.0 3.5 3.3 | 37-24-11 59.0 3.6 3.2 | 27-29-11 48.5 3.4 3.5 | 4-1-0 80.0 3.2 1.8

Allgames HOME AWAY PLAYOFFS
DECADE: W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG
2010's: 6-0-0 100.0 4.7 2.2 | 3-0-0 100.0 4.3 1.3 | 3-0-0 100.0 5.0 3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2000's: 7-8-2 47.1 3.5 3.1 | 4-6-1 40.9 3.8 3.5 | 3-2-1 58.3 3.0 2.2 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1990's: 17-18-5 48.8 3.1 3.2 | 10-7-3 57.5 3.3 3.0 | 7-11-2 40.0 2.8 3.4 | 4-1-0 80.0 3.2 1.8
1980's: 15-10-7 57.8 4.1 3.7 | 9-4-3 65.6 3.8 3.4 | 6-6-4 50.0 4.4 4.1 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1970's: 19-17-8 52.3 3.2 3.5 | 11-7-4 59.1 3.4 3.2 | 8-10-4 45.5 3.0 3.7 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0

these are the years in which the canucks win pergentage was below 50%
Allgames HOME AWAY PLAYOFFS
YEAR: W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG| W-L-T Win% GFPG CPAG
2004: 0-2-0 0.0 2.0 3.5 | 0-1-0 0.0 3.0 5.0 | 0-1-0 0.0 1.0 2.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2003: 0-2-1 16.7 2.0 3.0 | 0-2-0 0.0 1.5 3.0 | 0-0-1 50.0 3.0 3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2000: 1-2-0 33.3 4.3 4.0 | 0-2-0 0.0 4.5 5.5 | 1-0-0 100.0 4.0 1.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1999: 1-2-0 33.3 3.3 4.0 | 1-1-0 50.0 4.5 3.5 | 0-1-0 0.0 1.0 5.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1997: 1-3-0 25.0 4.0 4.0 | 1-1-0 50.0 6.0 4.5 | 0-2-0 0.0 2.0 3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1996: 1-2-1 37.5 3.3 4.0 | 0-1-1 25.0 3.0 5.0 | 1-1-0 50.0 3.5 3.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1995: 1-2-1 37.5 2.8 4.0 | 1-0-1 75.0 3.5 2.5 | 0-2-0 0.0 2.0 5.5 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1993: 1-2-0 33.3 2.7 5.0 | 0-1-0 0.0 1.0 8.0 | 1-1-0 50.0 3.5 3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1990: 1-2-0 33.3 3.3 3.0 | 1-1-0 50.0 3.5 2.5 | 0-1-0 0.0 3.0 4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1989: 1-2-0 33.3 1.7 3.0 | 1-0-0 100.0 2.0 1.0 | 0-2-0 0.0 1.5 4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1983: 1-2-0 33.3 4.0 4.3 | 0-1-0 0.0 1.0 4.0 | 1-1 -0 50.0 5.5 4.5 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1980: 1-3-0 25.0 2.8 3.5 | 1-1-0 50.0 3.5 3.0 | 0-2-0 0.0 2.0 4.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1979: 1-3-1 30.0 2.0 2.8 | 0-1-1 25.0 2.0 3.0 | 1-2-0 33.3 2.0 2.7 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1978: 0-3-1 12.5 2.8 4.5 | 0-1-1 25.0 2.0 4.0 | 0-2-0 0.0 3.5 5.0 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1977: 1-2-1 37.5 2.3 3.3 | 0-2-0 0.0 0.5 3.0 | 1-0-1 75.0 4.0 3.5 | 0-0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2004 being the last year the leafs actually won against the canucks.
http://mcubed.net/nhl/van/tor.shtml

they got to the conference finals/league semifinals 5 times, the last time was in the 2001-02 season. never to the Stanley cup finals.
http://en.wikipedia....e_Leafs_seasons

Wow.. Great job Ave!
  • 0
Home honey,.I'm high

#186 Lychees

Lychees

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,150 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 07

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:37 AM

I just want to say at least the Nucks haven't gone a period/OT without a shot, and to my knowledge given up a 3-goal lead in recent memory

Edited by Lychees, 28 November 2013 - 12:37 AM.

  • 0

#187 Green Building

Green Building

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: 16-October 09

Posted 28 November 2013 - 08:09 AM

I just want to say at least the Nucks haven't gone a period/OT without a shot, and to my knowledge given up a 3-goal lead in recent memory


That's because there are no 3 goal leads to surrender when scoring once per game. Pittsburgh played a good game last night, as did the Leafs, for the most part.
  • 0

#188 TheRussianRocket™

TheRussianRocket™

    Abused Potato

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,127 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 13

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:04 PM

I think so.

Top notch offensive players in Kessel, Lupul, van Riemsdyk, Kadri.
Toughness and grit in Clarkson, McLaren, Orr, Phaneuf, Fraser
Excellent defensive players in Bozak, Bolland, McClement, Kulemin, Gunnarsson, Ranger
Stellar offensive defenseman in Phaneuf, Gardiner and Franson
Two young goalies on the upside of their career in Bernier and Reimer.

They got all the right pieces, just need to click. Luckily they are a young team and will only keep on improving. Could see a cup in 2-3 years.


Not to brag, but I told you so PK and the rest of the people that were blinded. Said it here and saying it now; they start off good and fade away and only made the playoffs last year cause a half season.

There is NO way they are in any way better than us and even on the same level.


Yes it has..they're not making the playoffs this year. I said it numerous times that they always start good but always fall later on. They're lucky they made the playoffs last season cause it was shortened..a full season, no way, and cause they made the playoffs last season they hand out money to players like it's growing on trees. Lol, what a joke.

Have fun TO..Canada's team right? Oh yea :lol:


  • 1

tumblr_ne9qdcWVIs1sow28do8_400.gif


#189 Amish Rake Fighter

Amish Rake Fighter

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,117 posts
  • Joined: 06-October 08

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:12 PM

Not to brag, but I told you so PK and the rest of the people that were blinded. Said it here and saying it now; they start off good and fade away and only made the playoffs last year cause a half season.

There is NO way they are in any way better than us and even on the same level.


Posted Image
  • 1

#190 Patrick Kane

Patrick Kane

    Assistant to Regional Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,415 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 08

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:39 PM

Not to brag, but I told you so PK and the rest of the people that were blinded. Said it here and saying it now; they start off good and fade away and only made the playoffs last year cause a half season.

There is NO way they are in any way better than us and even on the same level.


49 games left...
  • 0


You will be missed.


#191 La Mauviette75

La Mauviette75

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,244 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:45 PM

Not to brag, but I told you so PK and the rest of the people that were blinded. Said it here and saying it now; they start off good and fade away and only made the playoffs last year cause a half season.

There is NO way they are in any way better than us and even on the same level.


i mean it's a little bit early to say no? the canucks have three more wins than the leafs... the canucks are on a winning streak and the maple leafs on a losing streak. it could be the opposite in just a couple weeks. definitely too early for the "i told you so".
  • 1
Posted Image

O Ville Lumière, Sens la chaleur, de notre coeur

#192 Patrick Kane

Patrick Kane

    Assistant to Regional Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,415 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 08

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:51 PM

I'm not going to be sitting back on my big leather seat laughing while sipping on some hot cocoa if the Leafs do better then the Nucks... Obviously I want Vancouver to succeed, and I'm proud of how Santorelli/Higgins/Luongo are playing but I just think the Leafs have the better team. Kessel, Lupul, JVR, Kadri, Bolland, Raymond, Clarkson, Kulemin, McClement, Phaneuf, Franson, Gardiner, Gunnarsson, Bernier/Reimer.
  • 0


You will be missed.


#193 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,690 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:51 PM

http://canucks.nhl.c...e?id=2013020208

When was the last time the Leafs beat the Canucks again?

I think Burkie was GM back then, the Sedins were still playing behind the WCE, and Cloutier was the Canucks starter....
  • 0

#194 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,728 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:59 PM

I think so.

Top notch offensive players in Kessel, Lupul, van Riemsdyk, Kadri.
Toughness and grit in Clarkson, McLaren, Orr, Phaneuf, Fraser
Excellent defensive players in Bozak, Bolland, McClement, Kulemin, Gunnarsson, Ranger
Stellar offensive defenseman in Phaneuf, Gardiner and Franson
Two young goalies on the upside of their career in Bernier and Reimer.

They got all the right pieces, just need to click. Luckily they are a young team and will only keep on improving. Could see a cup in 2-3 years.

HAHAHAHHAHAHA

Thanks for the laugh.

LOOOOOL.
  • 0

#195 TheRussianRocket™

TheRussianRocket™

    Abused Potato

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,127 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 13

Posted 14 December 2013 - 12:17 AM

I'm not going to be sitting back on my big leather seat laughing while sipping on some hot cocoa if the Leafs do better then the Nucks... Obviously I want Vancouver to succeed, and I'm proud of how Santorelli/Higgins/Luongo are playing but I just think the Leafs have the better team. Kessel, Lupul, JVR, Kadri, Bolland, Raymond, Clarkson, Kulemin, McClement, Phaneuf, Franson, Gardiner, Gunnarsson, Bernier/Reimer.


I personally think the difference is even though the leafs look better on paper, the reason why they're not as good as they should be is due to chemistry. And by that I mean they acquire too many players from trade/free agency and it leads to just slotting in players and hoping they produce. You need a bit of organizational development and players to break through but when majority of the players are t, you won't have much chemistry and won't succeed much. Just my take on it...Nucks have a core which has been together for a while so their leadership and experience is just superior I think.
  • 0

tumblr_ne9qdcWVIs1sow28do8_400.gif


#196 Brad Marchand

Brad Marchand

    Sphincter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,724 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 09

Posted 14 December 2013 - 12:41 AM

I personally think the difference is even though the leafs look better on paper, the reason why they're not as good as they should be is due to chemistry. And by that I mean they acquire too many players from trade/free agency and it leads to just slotting in players and hoping they produce. You need a bit of organizational development and players to break through but when majority of the players are t, you won't have much chemistry and won't succeed much. Just my take on it...Nucks have a core which has been together for a while so their leadership and experience is just superior I think.


Their offensive production has been fine until recently (although it's been bolstered by their strong powerplay for most of the season).

Frankly, it's their team defence that's been the issue. You can say all you want about shots on goal being an important stat but it's not a coincidence that the league's 8 best teams are all in the top 10 in shots allowed per game. They can't expect to stay competitive with such poor puck possession. Transition offense and great goaltending will only carry them so far.

For all the offensive talent on that team, they're lacking a dominant two-way centre that almost all of the league's best teams have (eg. Toews, Bergeron, Richards, Backes etc.). Bozak, Bolland and Kadri are good, but none of them are exceptional. Their defencemen are offensively gifted, but many of them are unreliable defensively and their depth hasn't performed to expectation (Paul Ranger and Mark Fraser have been trash).

The Leafs have talent but having the "better team" means nothing if they don't play up to their potential.
  • 0
Luc Bourdon & Rick Rypien: Forever Canucks

#197 Canuck or Die

Canuck or Die

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,518 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 11

Posted 14 December 2013 - 12:50 AM

49 games left...


That's what people said before, yet they still fail. I think the 2011-2012 season they were hot up until December, then started free-falling after Christmas.
  • 0
EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GO CANUCKS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We WILL be drinking from Lord Stanley's Cup soon, Canucks Nation!

Posted Image

#198 Frazzy Desjardins

Frazzy Desjardins

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 787 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 13

Posted 14 December 2013 - 01:24 AM

Lol lots of dummies on this page
  • 0

#199 Tangerines

Tangerines

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 14 December 2013 - 02:04 AM


Edited by Tangerines, 14 December 2013 - 02:06 AM.

  • 0

#200 Thirteen

Thirteen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,314 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 06

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:04 AM

Annual no playoff run happening. Short season obviously they would make the playoffs since they only play good for half a season anyways.
  • 0

Posted ImageWooooooooooooooooooooooo!Posted Image

Posted Image
Favorites: Sir. KesLord , Kaner, Stammer, Toes & Pavelski



#201 N7Nucks

N7Nucks

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,685 posts
  • Joined: 20-June 13

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:13 AM

Every couple weeks someone decides to revive this thread, leafs suck lets move on.
  • 0

#202 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,371 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 14 December 2013 - 05:39 AM

How aboot those Leafs eh!
  • 0

#203 Patrick Kane

Patrick Kane

    Assistant to Regional Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,415 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 08

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:49 AM

I personally think the difference is even though the leafs look better on paper, the reason why they're not as good as they should be is due to chemistry. And by that I mean they acquire too many players from trade/free agency and it leads to just slotting in players and hoping they produce. You need a bit of organizational development and players to break through but when majority of the players are t, you won't have much chemistry and won't succeed much. Just my take on it...Nucks have a core which has been together for a while so their leadership and experience is just superior I think.


That's a big reason why, I believe as well. Another reason why Chicago has been so good.

You agreed that on paper they look better, and I made my claim near the start of the season. My reasons still will remain the same as I posted before, we'll see how they do the rest of the season as well as the Canucks. Not too long ago Canucks were in a similar losing streak.

All in all, two great Canadian teams.
  • 0


You will be missed.


#204 Patrick Kane

Patrick Kane

    Assistant to Regional Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,415 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 08

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:52 AM

That's what people said before, yet they still fail. I think the 2011-2012 season they were hot up until December, then started free-falling after Christmas.


Much different team. They now have:
Kadri, Lupul (full season), van Riemsdyk, Raymond, Bolland, McClement, Clarkson, Franson, Gardiner, Fraser, Ranger, Bernier

+ Carlyle as coach.

Way too early to write them off. 2 weeks ago Canucks were out of a playoff spot. Now they are in 6th place. Things change quickly.
  • 0


You will be missed.


#205 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,325 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 14 December 2013 - 08:33 AM

No.


I'd like to take ANSWERS THAT ARE STILL APPLICABLE for $200 please Alex.
  • 0

Posted Image






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Discussion

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.