What sports writers don't seem to see

[6string]

Please use full names, the nickname thing is so lame.

[Riviera82]

Yeah the Canucks have improved. My question is, have they improved to the point where they are as good as the '14/'15 version of the team? If they have then what will that get us? Another solid regular season followed by a quick playoff exit at the hands of an underdog team? We've seen that movie in every playoff appearance since 2011 and there's not a lot of reason to think that we should see anything different now. And this is assuming that everything goes our way during the season.

[xereau]

Here is what sports writers see:

 

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

They are professional trolls.  They bait you into biting with their provocative click bait.

The only way they will change, is quit biting.

[bp79]

On 9/15/2016 at 11:55 PM, Aircool said:

I mean, I happen to disagree with about half of your reasons that we are supposedly in great shape.

 

I'm not particularly excited by our prospect pool, it's pretty lackluster. We are in the process of having two franchise players retire in the next couple years and these doesn't seem to be any replacements lined up for them. I'm not willing to appoint Boeser as a sure-fire first line player in the NHL yet, although I'm hopeful.I feel extremely comfortable in saying that there are more teams in the league with better prospect pools than us, than there are teams with worse prospect pools than us. In English, our prospect pool is average at best.

 

Erik Gudbranson is a big defender, that's about it. Being big doesn't automatically make you a strong defender, just like being small doesn't automatically make you a bad defender, see Chris Tanev for an example of this. While Gudbranson can throw a good hit with the best of them (at least I'd imagine he can), that doesn't mean he has a positive impact as a defender, statistics say that he is about as good defensively as a bottom pair defenseman. Now I'm not a huge fan of statistics, but I'm not on the Gudbranson bandwagon... I haven't seen him play for the Canucks yet, and I'm not just going to jump on the bandwagon because I'm a fanboy or because he's big... As for Eriksson... well how many years until he is grossly overpaid? 2? This contract is going to hurt in 2-3 years. What are we going to win in the next 2-3 years? Nothing. Completely idiotic signing.

 

Being "solid" in one of many facets of being a GM isn't really a ringing endorsement. We all know that Benning is essentially incompetent at everything except scouting. As a scout, I think he is great, but that's hardly GM material. I've said this in a previous post... Jim Benning is the best assistant GM in the NHL, too bad Francesco Aquilini is the worst GM in the NHL... They cancel out quite fiercely.

 

 

 

...

Check out the stats on guud, and how much florida used  him in the playoffs. I was always under the impression that you used your best players in the scp. AS for Beniings trades, He hasn't lost one yet The Vey trade my bad we did lose . Mcann may be a great top 6 player in a couple of years, he's not even penciled into the panthers lineup this year. As for the shink trade, he is Bakersfield bound, chances are slim for a small guy who can't play d and from what Geen has said doubtful he will ever be that guy. Gaunce needs a chance getting rid of shink, makes that one step closer. Truth is. All you Benning haters bring the same things over and over again, even tho He has manged to revamp our Defense adding guddy tree  stecher oj. In return mcann. GM JB get's no respect. as for erickson He may be another typical swede. Play at a high level until 37. You have no basis to say it will suck in 2 years. All you gotta do is check out all the swedes who still were very very good at 37 As for our prospect pool. It is way better then 2 years ago, 

 

Maybe the media sees the obvious facts about the stupid decisions that our management makes on a monthly basis... Maybe it's time you open your eyes to the obvious truth, instead of letting your fanaticism take over.your words.     maybe You stop buying into media that predicts things no different then us fans,except they don't even follow this team. Bob mac and a few of the good ones.  barring injury, give us a chance at the playoffs. you wanna believe the media, believe them. They actually know hockey. UNlike that idiot yost among others

[Aircool]

3 minutes ago, bp79 said:

Check out the stats on guud, and how much florida used  him in the playoffs. I was always under the impression that you used your best players in the scp. AS for Beniings trades, He hasn't lost one yet The Vey trade my bad we did lose . Mcann may be a great top 6 player in a couple of years, he's not even penciled into the panthers lineup this year. As for the shink trade, he is Bakersfield bound, chances are slim for a small guy who can't play d and from what Geen has said doubtful he will ever be that guy. Gaunce needs a chance getting rid of shink, makes that one step closer. Truth is. All you Benning haters bring the same things over and over again, even tho He has manged to revamp our Defense adding guddy tree  stecher oj. In return mcann. GM JB get's no respect. as for erickson He may be another typical swede. Play at a high level until 37. You have no basis to say it will suck in 2 years. All you gotta do is check out all the swedes who still were very very good at 37 As for our prospect pool. It is way better then 2 years ago, 

 

Maybe the media sees the obvious facts about the stupid decisions that our management makes on a monthly basis... Maybe it's time you open your eyes to the obvious truth, instead of letting your fanaticism take over.your words.     maybe You stop buying into media that predicts things no different then us fans,except they don't even follow this team. Bob mac and a few of the good ones.  barring injury, give us a chance at the playoffs. you wanna believe the media, believe them. They actually know hockey. UNlike that idiot yost among others

I don't buy into the media at all actually. These are all my own opinions, and I would personally never run a franchise like this. Now my opinion is just that, I'm not forcing you to agree, I'm just expressing it. You say check out the "stats" on Gudbranson, but really you just mean ice time, not the stats. Because an analytics based management team came into Florida and the first move they made was to get rid of Gudbranson. Why? Because analytics hate Gudbranson. I've said this before, I don't put the whole weight of the world on that, but fundamentally Hockey is changing. You don't get credit for being big anymore, you have to actually deliver skill. Gudbranson is severely lacking in that department.

 

I don't hate Benning actually, I quite like his drafting ability. I think that if ownership wasn't over his shoulder demanding that we compete every year, we would have torn it all apart from day 1. That's just in his nature as a scout and drafter. It clearly shows too, because he doesn't trade well. He always overpays in picks, other teams just demand them and he folds. 

 

Even if Eriksson is good for 6 years, which he won't be, but EVEN IF, we will win nothing with him in the next 6 years, our team isn't close to cup contention. It's a pointless signing. The reality is, that's the best case scenario that it's a pointless signing. The worst case it's a brick on our cap.

 

Fanaticism is almost exclusively a syndrome for positive thinkers, people who are too optimistic and don't balance their optimism with objectivity. . When homers like yourself have people question your overly optimistic beliefs with reason, you fold like a cheap suit. You resort to basic and offside insults in an attempt to justify your irrational position. You are incapable of arguing with facts, because like religious people you hold a position that has no proof. Now it's perfectly okay to hold such positions, but to claim them as truthful is another story. In English, it's okay to believe in things that are objectively wrong or unproven, but when you decide to tell people you are right, you then have to prove it. You can't just claim it without proof. Positions like yours have no proof, they have no objectivity....

 

We COULD make the playoffs if we avoid injuries. It's the NHL... You get injuries, that's not a question of if, but only when and for how long. We had one significant injury last year. I mean really we played the whole year without Sutter, and we were doing fine. Then Edler gets injured, and we collapse. That's all it took, was 1 injury to Edler. So if this year Henrik or Daniel spend 50 games on the shelf, we're screwed. It's entirely possible. Real contenders don't have that problem. If Patrick Kane gets injured for 50 games, the Blackhawks make the playoffs. If Brent Burns gets injured for 50 games, the Sharks make the playoffs. People like you need to stop trying to prop up a sham of a team, the Vancouver Canucks are the definition of what baseball fans would call a "pretender". In the playoff race in September, but never going to make noise. And that's our best case scenario.

[bp79]

56 minutes ago, Aircool said:

I don't buy into the media at all actually. These are all my own opinions, and I would personally never run a franchise like this. Now my opinion is just that, I'm not forcing you to agree, I'm just expressing it. You say check out the "stats" on Gudbranson, but really you just mean ice time, not the stats. Because an analytics based management team came into Florida and the first move they made was to get rid of Gudbranson. Why? Because analytics hate Gudbranson. I've said this before, I don't put the whole weight of the world on that, but fundamentally Hockey is changing. You don't get credit for being big anymore, you have to actually deliver skill. Gudbranson is severely lacking in that department.

 

I don't hate Benning actually, I quite like his drafting ability. I think that if ownership wasn't over his shoulder demanding that we compete every year, we would have torn it all apart from day 1. That's just in his nature as a scout and drafter. It clearly shows too, because he doesn't trade well. He always overpays in picks, other teams just demand them and he folds. 

 

Even if Eriksson is good for 6 years, which he won't be, but EVEN IF, we will win nothing with him in the next 6 years, our team isn't close to cup contention. It's a pointless signing. The reality is, that's the best case scenario that it's a pointless signing. The worst case it's a brick on our cap.

 

Fanaticism is almost exclusively a syndrome for positive thinkers, people who are too optimistic and don't balance their optimism with objectivity. . When homers like yourself have people question your overly optimistic beliefs with reason, you fold like a cheap suit. You resort to basic and offside insults in an attempt to justify your irrational position. You are incapable of arguing with facts, because like religious people you hold a position that has no proof. Now it's perfectly okay to hold such positions, but to claim them as truthful is another story. In English, it's okay to believe in things that are objectively wrong or unproven, but when you decide to tell people you are right, you then have to prove it. You can't just claim it without proof. Positions like yours have no proof, they have no objectivity....

 

We COULD make the playoffs if we avoid injuries. It's the NHL... You get injuries, that's not a question of if, but only when and for how long. We had one significant injury last year. I mean really we played the whole year without Sutter, and we were doing fine. Then Edler gets injured, and we collapse. That's all it took, was 1 injury to Edler. So if this year Henrik or Daniel spend 50 games on the shelf, we're screwed. It's entirely possible. Real contenders don't have that problem. If Patrick Kane gets injured for 50 games, the Blackhawks make the playoffs. If Brent Burns gets injured for 50 games, the Sharks make the playoffs. People like you need to stop trying to prop up a sham of a team, the Vancouver Canucks are the definition of what baseball fans would call a "pretender". In the playoff race in September, but never going to make noise. And that's our best case scenario.

First off not once have I unsulted you. I am not some 16 yearold with a keyboard. Second I am no homer. Am I fan? Yes. That doesn't mean I think we are near the top echelon of the NHL. All I said in my post is simple truth. And imho in the playoffs ice time especially with d are the most important stat Doughty Burns etc etc. I am not propping up anything. I simply said what real analysts have said about the nucks. Made no predictions of my own. All I said was what I see happening. So if you decide to reply al least don't make up lies about me, or group me into something im not.

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, Aircool said:

I don't buy into the media at all actually. These are all my own opinions, and I would personally never run a franchise like this. Now my opinion is just that, I'm not forcing you to agree, I'm just expressing it. You say check out the "stats" on Gudbranson, but really you just mean ice time, not the stats. Because an analytics based management team came into Florida and the first move they made was to get rid of Gudbranson. Why? Because analytics hate Gudbranson. I've said this before, I don't put the whole weight of the world on that, but fundamentally Hockey is changing. You don't get credit for being big anymore, you have to actually deliver skill. Gudbranson is severely lacking in that department.

 

I don't hate Benning actually, I quite like his drafting ability. I think that if ownership wasn't over his shoulder demanding that we compete every year, we would have torn it all apart from day 1. That's just in his nature as a scout and drafter. It clearly shows too, because he doesn't trade well. He always overpays in picks, other teams just demand them and he folds. 

 

Even if Eriksson is good for 6 years, which he won't be, but EVEN IF, we will win nothing with him in the next 6 years, our team isn't close to cup contention. It's a pointless signing. The reality is, that's the best case scenario that it's a pointless signing. The worst case it's a brick on our cap.

 

Fanaticism is almost exclusively a syndrome for positive thinkers, people who are too optimistic and don't balance their optimism with objectivity. . When homers like yourself have people question your overly optimistic beliefs with reason, you fold like a cheap suit. You resort to basic and offside insults in an attempt to justify your irrational position. You are incapable of arguing with facts, because like religious people you hold a position that has no proof. Now it's perfectly okay to hold such positions, but to claim them as truthful is another story. In English, it's okay to believe in things that are objectively wrong or unproven, but when you decide to tell people you are right, you then have to prove it. You can't just claim it without proof. Positions like yours have no proof, they have no objectivity....

 

We COULD make the playoffs if we avoid injuries. It's the NHL... You get injuries, that's not a question of if, but only when and for how long. We had one significant injury last year. I mean really we played the whole year without Sutter, and we were doing fine. Then Edler gets injured, and we collapse. That's all it took, was 1 injury to Edler. So if this year Henrik or Daniel spend 50 games on the shelf, we're screwed. It's entirely possible. Real contenders don't have that problem. If Patrick Kane gets injured for 50 games, the Blackhawks make the playoffs. If Brent Burns gets injured for 50 games, the Sharks make the playoffs. People like you need to stop trying to prop up a sham of a team, the Vancouver Canucks are the definition of what baseball fans would call a "pretender". In the playoff race in September, but never going to make noise. And that's our best case scenario.

Crossing some lines there Aircool. Have you ever heard of 'irony'...

 

You talk about fanaticism and believing things that cannot be proved, yet you offer no proof. Pot meet Kettle. 

 

Your position has no more validity than a more optimistic one, just your belief that it so, makes it so.  

 

What I have read from your posts is a dogmatic negative view reinforced by other negative views.  Anything that differs with your stance is shouted down with the fevour of a baptist revival. 

 

 You stat watch without context, fail to look beyond individual players to see how they might mesh as a team.  

 

Why be a fan of a team that you clearly do not like?  This team has too many questions about it for anyone to have a clear idea of how good or bad it might be. Your certainty of failure is every bit as fanatical as Apollo's certainty of success.  

 

Neither will ill likely be right, both are extremely one sided.  At least Apollo and the positive fans like the team they cheer for.... 

 

EW

 

 

[ice orca]

2 hours ago, bp79 said:

First off not once have I unsulted you. I am not some 16 yearold with a keyboard. Second I am no homer. Am I fan? Yes. That doesn't mean I think we are near the top echelon of the NHL. All I said in my post is simple truth. And imho in the playoffs ice time especially with d are the most important stat Doughty Burns etc etc. I am not propping up anything. I simply said what real analysts have said about the nucks. Made no predictions of my own. All I said was what I see happening. So if you decide to reply al least don't make up lies about me, or group me into something im not.

I don't think Gudbranson is in the same league as Doughty or Burns, but he can play big minutes like a lot of other d-men in the playoffs.

[combover]

Classic, all the world,all the paid professional analysts, all the sports writers, everyone is against the Canucks. The only people that are right are the cdc posters who think benning and company have improved this roster... .everyone else in the world is wrong.lol.

 

Always the victim are the cdc masses. Crying foul and "nobody likes us" 

It truly  is laughable. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[riffraff]

33 minutes ago, combover said:

Classic, all the world,all the paid professional analysts, all the sports writers, everyone is against the Canucks. The only people that are right are the cdc posters who think benning and company have improved this roster... .everyone else in the world is wrong.lol.

 

Always the victim are the cdc masses. Crying foul and "nobody likes us" 

It truly  is laughable. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Psssst.

 

Bob Mackenzie.

[bp79]

Its not about right and wrong. I could give two craps what most media says except for Bob Mac and both mguires, and to a point the tsn panel. THey have great skits so i overlook dregs to a point. And just out of curiosity ,how has Benning not made this a better roster? Not just that keeping Markstrom over lack. letting hammer and his 3.5 walk signing Miller and Vrbata to short deals and getting a 100 point season out of it.allowing  us to develop Bo the right way. Cdc has never once said Bennings plan has been perfect and there is no other way.They just happen to like the direction of and and knew as do I. 

2 hours ago, combover said:

Classic, all the world,all the paid professional analysts, all the sports writers, everyone is against the Canucks. The only people that are right are the cdc posters who think benning and company have improved this roster... .everyone else in the world is wrong.lol.

 

Always the victim are the cdc masses. Crying foul and "nobody likes us" 

It truly  is laughable. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bp79]

3 hours ago, ice orca said:

I don't think Gudbranson is in the same league as Doughty or Burns, but he can play big minutes like a lot of other d-men in the playoffs.

I used them as examples. You put your best out as much as you can. You knew what i meant, you just wanted to keep trollling. Pick on the nucks when you have a bone to pick, like if they suck this year say your piece.

[Li'l Fra]

We've all watched a few horrible Canucks teams over the years. This isn't one of them.

 

Benning and Linden are doing a pretty good job. Are they perfect? No.

 

Do I like the team they've put together? Hell yeah!

 

I like these players. I have hope for the present and the future. I think it'll be fun to watch. One thing is for sure; I will be watching.

 

I'm a fan.

 

That said. I would like to comment on the idea of an overly negative media. I think it is safe to say that our local analysts and especially bloggers are not writing very positive things about the Canucks.

 

When other media sources are looking for info on the Canucks, they just read what our local guys are saying and parrot it. Very few Eastern media have any clue what is going on in Vanouver and they just repeat what's coming out of the local market.

 

They have created a negative feedback loop. It has spiraled out of control and now it is the narrative.

 

This market is in dire need of a media shake up. Moaning and whining has hit its peak.

 

There are positive stories if a person chooses to see them.

 

I believe it is effecting the fans and their opinions too. It's hard to remain positive in the face of so much negativity.

 

It is time to flip the script!

 

It would be AMAZING to read an article with some positivity.

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, combover said:

Classic, all the world,all the paid professional analysts, all the sports writers, everyone is against the Canucks. The only people that are right are the cdc posters who think benning and company have improved this roster... .everyone else in the world is wrong.lol.

 

Always the victim are the cdc masses. Crying foul and "nobody likes us" 

It truly  is laughable. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually no, so far so these 'articles' have largely been written by click baiting, amateurish bloggers.

 

Most legit media are saying basically the same as the 'Homers'. That there's a lot of questions about the team and that if reasonably healthy, they could be a bubble team so long as the kids come along reasonably. Things will likely have to go pretty well for that to happen. Near perfectly if they're going to be better than a wild card/ bubble team. Out of the playoffs if we have above average injuries/players don't take steps. 

[Aircool]

10 hours ago, bp79 said:

First off not once have I unsulted you. I am not some 16 yearold with a keyboard. Second I am no homer. Am I fan? Yes. That doesn't mean I think we are near the top echelon of the NHL. All I said in my post is simple truth. And imho in the playoffs ice time especially with d are the most important stat Doughty Burns etc etc. I am not propping up anything. I simply said what real analysts have said about the nucks. Made no predictions of my own. All I said was what I see happening. So if you decide to reply al least don't make up lies about me, or group me into something im not.

LOL... Don't be ashamed to be a homer, just recognize what you are. Your opinions are completely illogical and never criticize the team, the DEFINITION of a homer. With every post you make you demonstrate this trait. I mean to dare to use Doughty and Burns in the same thought as Gudbranson. That's laughable. I understand your example, but that's still laughable. How far did the Florida Panthers make it in the playoffs this year? Oh that's right, they got bounced in the first round. But please, cite the ice team of a player who played in 6 games and lost 4 of them as some sort of evidence of his ability to make his team win. 

 

You miss the entire point of my commentary on Gudbranson, I can't decide if that's your homerism not allowing you to agree with logic that is negative about our team, or a more serious problem. My commentary on Gudbranson is a simple one. While I do not agree with ONLY using advanced stats, I don't discount them entirely, Gudbranson is shown to be a bottom pairing defenseman on advanced stats, and I don't give players credit just for being big, you have to deliver skill as well. I have yet to really see him play, so I'd reserve pinning him as a failure or anything until such a time, but I'm just expressing the fact that he is SO OVERRATED on these forums. It's hilarious.

 

If you repeat their opinions, you endorse their opinions. It's that simple. If you don't offer commentary on them and just repeat them, you are endorsing them. Nothing else makes sense. If you are using their opinions as some sort of evidence, as if I should care about their opinions... That's also dumb. Name me any person in the world who gets every thing right about a hockey season across the whole league. My opinion could easily be wrong, I doubt it, I'm taking a very narrow opinion on the Canucks, Heck I haven't even told you where I think they might finish. I just hate the direction this team is taking, because while some of you think it's getting more competitive, you fail to see the struggle we are going to have to make this team take the next step, especially after the Sedins retire.

 

I'm not making up lies about you, I'm judging you on your actions, if you don't like the judgement you can ignore my opinion or change your behaviour. I'm well within my rights to make such a judgement and I will continue to do so. If you offer an opinion that I can consider something more reasonable than homerism, I will acknowledge it as such. Talking about Gudbranson relative to Doughty and Burns (two players who actually provide offense....) is not the way to go about that.

 

9 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Crossing some lines there Aircool. Have you ever heard of 'irony'...

 

You talk about fanaticism and believing things that cannot be proved, yet you offer no proof. Pot meet Kettle. 

 

Your position has no more validity than a more optimistic one, just your belief that it so, makes it so.  

 

What I have read from your posts is a dogmatic negative view reinforced by other negative views.  Anything that differs with your stance is shouted down with the fevour of a baptist revival. 

 

 You stat watch without context, fail to look beyond individual players to see how they might mesh as a team.  

 

Why be a fan of a team that you clearly do not like?  This team has too many questions about it for anyone to have a clear idea of how good or bad it might be. Your certainty of failure is every bit as fanatical as Apollo's certainty of success.  

 

Neither will ill likely be right, both are extremely one sided.  At least Apollo and the positive fans like the team they cheer for.... 

 

EW

Exactly what lines have I crossed out of curiosity. I know what irony is, I'll give you an example. He tells me to stop making up lies about him and grouping him into things.... He does that, after making a post prior where he tells me something stupid like I'm too fanatical in my following of the media, and that I should stop listening to the stupid media. Because apparently everyone who thinks the Canucks are poorly managed can only think that because they listen to the media. Well I don't listen to sports talk about the Canucks at all really. I listen to Tim and Sid and Bob McCown if I listen to sports talk, and let me tell you they don't care about Vancouver.

 

You see I didn't think I actually had to provide proof that Gudbranson's analytics are crap, I thought you'd be capable of not being lazy and looking them up. I didn't think I'd have to provide proof that players, in general, significantly decline around age 30-32, I thought we all understood that. I didn't think I'd have to provide proof that giving a player an expensive contract until he is 37 is a risky idea. Most rational people wouldn't require the proof for that, they've seen enough of it, and it makes sense to them. But please, in your endeavour to create irony where it is doesn't exist, struggle as much as you'd like.

 

I haven't claimed that my opinion is infallible or beyond reproach, I'm just calling out the BS in his opinions. Now he can reply and attempt to call them out in mine, or any of you can try to call them it in mine, that's fine. I believe my opinions, so I think they are right, you will have to work hard to convince me otherwise, because my opinions are well thought out and well supported. So you will have to produce a well thought out opinion with strong evidence. Not homerism, that won't move the needle, not even close. I've heard all the garbage that all the homers on CDC have had to say, I've never agreed with any of it. I've heard some opinions from the more rational people on CDC, and often I agree, or at least I let them know that their opinion seems rational but I disagree (only if directly quoted anyways).

 

Talk about baseless claims, but okay let's try this. If you post nonsense in reply to one of my posts, and I believe it to be nonsense, I will not hesitate to call it what it is. Why would I? You act like replying to stupid replies is somehow sacrilege. CDC had clearly become a homogenous community of stupidity and homerism. Now, some more intelligent people who actually question opinions are coming in here, and you guys can't handle it. It's clearly evident, you've started fighting with your minus buttons, but even then my posts come out positive. Are you all so intellectually stupid, that you believe that debate and argument are somehow negative concepts? It's not like it's the foundation of any intelligent organization/community. Oh wait!

 

You see, I count you as amongst the stupidest on this community, I'm sorry to say. Because you are a part of a segment of this community that dictates that not agreeing with the decisions of a clearly inexperienced GM, means you dislike the team. I don't dislike the Canucks, I'd like them to succeed, I don't agree with how this management is going about it. They probably disagree with how they are going about it, but ownership is ownership.

 

As I said in my reply above to bp79, I haven't yet stated how I think the Canucks will do this year, they might actually do sort of 'okay'. Bubble playoff team, or with a very significant injury. They finish bottom-5. I could be wrong on that I don't care. What I have sort of indicated is that my opinion on the Canucks winning a Stanley Cup in the next 15 years let's say, is the following. They won't even sniff it.

[Li'l Fra]

Holy crap! lol.

[Knucklehd]

On 15/09/2016 at 11:55 PM, Aircool said:

I mean, I happen to disagree with about half of your reasons that we are supposedly in great shape.

 

I'm not particularly excited by our prospect pool, it's pretty lackluster. We are in the process of having two franchise players retire in the next couple years and these doesn't seem to be any replacements lined up for them. I'm not willing to appoint Boeser as a sure-fire first line player in the NHL yet, although I'm hopeful.I feel extremely comfortable in saying that there are more teams in the league with better prospect pools than us, than there are teams with worse prospect pools than us. In English, our prospect pool is average at best.

 

Erik Gudbranson is a big defender, that's about it. Being big doesn't automatically make you a strong defender, just like being small doesn't automatically make you a bad defender, see Chris Tanev for an example of this. While Gudbranson can throw a good hit with the best of them (at least I'd imagine he can), that doesn't mean he has a positive impact as a defender, statistics say that he is about as good defensively as a bottom pair defenseman. Now I'm not a huge fan of statistics, but I'm not on the Gudbranson bandwagon... I haven't seen him play for the Canucks yet, and I'm not just going to jump on the bandwagon because I'm a fanboy or because he's big... As for Eriksson... well how many years until he is grossly overpaid? 2? This contract is going to hurt in 2-3 years. What are we going to win in the next 2-3 years? Nothing. Completely idiotic signing.

 

Being "solid" in one of many facets of being a GM isn't really a ringing endorsement. We all know that Benning is essentially incompetent at everything except scouting. As a scout, I think he is great, but that's hardly GM material. I've said this in a previous post... Jim Benning is the best assistant GM in the NHL, too bad Francesco Aquilini is the worst GM in the NHL... They cancel out quite fiercely.

 

Maybe the media sees the obvious facts about the stupid decisions that our management makes on a monthly basis... Maybe it's time you open your eyes to the obvious truth, instead of letting your fanaticism take over...

Wow...do you watch the games, scout our prospects or just read the media clips?

 

I watch every game and follow our prospects pretty closely.  There is nothing you have said that i can agree with.

[danaimo]

No one likes us. We don't care.

[Aircool]

2 hours ago, Knucklehd said:

Wow...do you watch the games, scout our prospects or just read the media clips?

 

I watch every game and follow our prospects pretty closely.  There is nothing you have said that i can agree with.

Well you are entitled to disagree, but is it really so atrocious to say that Boeser isn't guaranteed to succeed in the NHL. I mean the NCAA isn't even the AHL. I wouldn't put the whole future of my franchise on a player who has had some NCAA success. Now I'm not saying he'll flop or anything, I'm just moderating my enthusiasm. I hope he turns into a Top-10 winger in the league, might not happen though.

 

I haven't seen much Gudbranson, which is why I have since stated I'm not going to completely write him off or anything, but he is overrated. Eriksson is old, pretty simple. I don't see how this opinion is extremely ludicrous... I think Juolevi looks to be a good prospect, with very good but not great upside. The best prospect pools in the league have a lot more than Boeser, Juolevi and Demko. Unless you want to start telling me that I must start giving credence to players that are extremely far away like Zhukenov, Brisebois, and Olson. Or that I must hop on the Subban bandwagon. There are teams out there with significantly better prospect pools.

 

Am I supposed to care that there is nothing I have said you can agree with. You haven't given me any specifics that could change my opinion, you've just said you disagree.. Congratulations, why do I care?

[coastal.view]

On 2016-09-16 at 3:28 PM, TheGuardian_ said:

No, the players and their agents aren't morons, that is evidenced by Eriksson's contract. Do you have to wonder which side of that deal won? Right now it looks like the player won, big time, a front loaded, signing bonus contract is a death nail for the team, basically he is untradeable now, unless the Nucks sweeten the pot with a prospect or draft pick, they can't even retain half his salary to get a deal a done.

So, IMO, it is a moronic contract, whose fault is that?

no sir, you are wrong

a front loaded contract makes the salary in his later years much lighter

that means he is much more tradeable each year as his contract progresses

this is similar to burrows contract.. he is not paid his cap hit this year.. he could be traded

but i think the nucks want to keep him as he is reasonable value this year