WeneedLumme Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Only losers believe (or want to believe) that being a loser for years is the road to success. And in a era when the top 3 draft picks are all lottery picks, only simpletons believe that tanking is a sensible business plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Well if this was 4-5 yrs ago i'd say "omgosh losing more potential prospects sucks LARGE for this team BUT with Boeser, Oli, Demko and a few others that should turn out well for us and a bunch of cap space coming, i'm not that concerned as i would of been. I wish this re-build or re-tool whatever would have happened a long time ago but better late that never but that old school team that got beat on and gave up after a good fight is gone now and hopefully that fragile mind set is gone. 2 seasons and it should be a good watch at least instead of the old same oldddddddddd.... (get into the playoffs, bigger team beat us up) golfing season for the team and for us fans another year of cheering for some other canadian team!!! "wooohooo" !!! Not so much... However i hope it changes for once.. am i holding my breath? nah... just hoping... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Why do we have to have a new goddamn thread every time someone wants to start up the tank or not tank question? Isn't there any of the other dozens you can post this in (God I sound like Elvis)? Or more importantly why do we need to continue discussing it? 1 side wants to tank and 1 side wants to watch hockey the end. This horse has been beaten to death again and again and again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 6 hours ago, luckylager said: It still makes me groan. I can't believe the number of Canucks fans that have never participated in organized sports. Every game, regardless of your competition, you play to win. And for a team manager to set his team up for failure by stripping a roster down to a non-compete level is a disgrace and should be fired, shamed and publicly ridiculed to the point of retirement. It literally makes the entire sport look like a sham by setting up your team to lose. Tanking is for losers. Play your best, give a 110% and let the chips fall where they may. There was this tiny shapely, alluring Asian lass, who'd feel amorous when she slapped my buttocks on the chess board(ooh..ouch!). It was decades ago..but I was wiser then... I tanked :^) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stelar Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Mattrek said: Why do we have to have a new goddamn thread every time someone wants to start up the tank or not tank question? Isn't there any of the other dozens you can post this in (God I sound like Elvis)? Or more importantly why do we need to continue discussing it? 1 side wants to tank and 1 side wants to watch hockey the end. This horse has been beaten to death again and again and again. You would think this is what moderators would be here for...... how about we we don't allow threads that are redundant and already have 5 other threads that are the exact same. Just a wild idea..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By sea and land Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 16 hours ago, orcasgonewild said: Hello CDC, I know this is a controversial topic among Canucks fans and the few ppl around the league that still pay attention to us. ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTIONS: if the Canucks make the playoffs do u realistically think they get past the first round? And Lets say Canucks don't get that wildcard spot, are you prepared for a bad so-so draft pick along with the disappointment of lack of deadline moves and same roster next year? Don't get me wrong, I love how the team is winning and has a chance to compete in the playoffs but..... We need Young assets with top line to second line potential. With players of the Sedins magnitude retiring that leaves our team in an awkward limbo without top line centre and top wingers. Our team has strong goaltending and defensive prospects so that's not the issue Again I'm happy the Canucks are competing but long term boeser is potentially our only top line winger. We need more depth and with the 2018 draft being as deep as it is I think we should sell our older assets for younger assets. I also think we should be sellers at this year's draft. Do u agree with me or are u liking the team's direction? Win at all cost, it's why you play the game. If there isn't a McDavid, Matthews or Crosby available in any certain draft year, the draft is somewhat a crapshoot. Play hard, try to make playoffs and draft best player available wherever you end up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 I can't believe I still need to bring up this video. My favourite. "I WANT WINNERS!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 11 hours ago, Blömqvist said: I'm definitely team tank because I'm really high on Nico Hischier, but if the young guys continue to develop and become more consistent in their game and the Canucks figure out a way to score (or trade for someone who can) then I could see them go on a Cinderella run. I think Gudbranson's injury is somewhat a blessing in disguise because Tryamkin gets valuable playing time to develop. If at the trade deadline and we're in a playoff spot or in the hunt for a playoff spot I could see Benning pulling a trade of Tanev+ for a 1st line forward (cough Duchene cough). Because at that time Gudbranson would be coming back from injury and our 6 dmen would be Edler, Stecher, Sbisa, Tryamkin, Hutton, and Gudbranson -- all of whom are capable of playing top-4 minutes. A good mix of size and nastiness on the backend but also mobility and puck movement. Add in a 1st line forward like Duchene and with the return of Hansen and Rodin from injury then all of a sudden we'll have three lines that can get hot and score on any given night. Plus two more-than-capable goaltenders in Miller and Markstrom. Hmmmm... maybe we have more depth than I originally thought. Maybe we can be a true wildcard in the playoffs with continued development of the young guys, players returning from injury, and maybe a trade for offense. Or maybe we are that sixty-something point team that the media thinks we are and we're just playing way over our heads right now. I am pretty much with you. Many are saying win no matter what and in my humble opinion that is short sighted and a tad naïve. You could expand on that premise by saying trade the prospects and picks to enhance the existing roster for a playoff birth. That said and I would imagine the 'winners' side would say whoa. To me it is always about a team development time line. Who is your core and where are they in their development. Right now the Canuck core are Horvat, Hansen, Ericksson and pretty much the entire d-core. The forward group is no where close to CUP competitive and I do not want to trade assets to acquire a forward who might take them to playoffs. The team is not strong enough and there is more that has to be put in place before the move up takes place. It is basic asset management that vets are moved to compliment the team in an effort to build towards a CUP contender. Yes, to me this is more important than playoffs. I have been around hockey for a long time. Anyone who thinks it is a matter of course that teams can maintain a high competitive level on a ongoing basis has to cherry pick their orgs that have accomplished that. Teams peak and if lucky can maintain for a period and then they have to rebuild. The Canucks have rarely done that in their history. They have more often traded youth or picks for a quick solution rather than built an org that could produce a winner from within. The clubs greatest GM Pat Quinn who drafted Linden and Bure also was a trader who made deals that put the team into the Finals. My assessment of the Canucks is that their goal tending and d-core have CUP quality potential. The forward group is weak and the prospects might have promise but are no where broad or deep enough. Fans are very high on Horvat right now but a 1C prospect is desperately needed. That is why getting the highest draft prospect is essential. The standard reprise by fans who disagree is the suggestion that games are thrown to ensure the pick. I would say that is over simplification to make an argument. My counter is than management picks their core vet group that will lead the team through their transition and then move those that can bring a return back. The core I would stay with are Ericksson, Hansen, Sutter and one of Tanev or Edler. My vets to move are the Twins, Burrows, Dorsett (if not injured), Skille and preferably Tanev on defense. Tanev is moved because he can be (no NTC yet) and because of his injury history and size. His abilities would bring back a decent return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: There was this tiny shapely, alluring Asian lass, who'd feel amorous when she slapped my buttocks on the chess board(ooh..ouch!). It was decades ago..but I was wiser then... I tanked :^) It would seem you two were playing different games at the chess table. There are exceptions when you have no team and the goal is to get spanked.... and the spectators aren't invested in your loss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 20 hours ago, HerrDrFunk said: Who? Everyone projected us to be dead last in the league. No lol. Once we went on that 9 game dive everyone threw us to the bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 5 minutes ago, cyoung said: No lol. Once we went on that 9 game dive everyone threw us to the bottom. Nope. Pretty much every sports writer, prognosticator and talking head had us pegged as being last well before the season even started. Where do you think the 65 points, magic number thread came from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: I can't believe I still need to bring up this video. My favourite. "I WANT WINNERS!" What video? I still get only a blank screen, a big empty box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 4 hours ago, luckylager said: It would seem you two were playing different games at the chess table. There are exceptions when you have no team and the goal is to get spanked.... and the spectators aren't invested in your loss & with this, one is splitting hairs... :^/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: I can't believe I still need to bring up this video. My favourite. "I WANT WINNERS!" Thank you Ghost... this is what the tankers just don't get. Players and management plays to win... always Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Horvat would not be the player he is today if it wasn't for playing in the playoffs in 2015. Same case with all our other players if we were to make it this year - Granlund, Sutter, Eriksson, Gaunce, Tryamkin, Stetcher, Markstrom, Baertschi - players who haven't had prominent roles in the playoffs on our team before who would become better players by being exposed to this environment (I know Sutter and Eriksson have played in the playoffs, I'm referring to having a playoff run on our team). I look at it as the greater good: Sure we could draft in the top 10 (not guaranteed 1st overall as we've seen the last couple years, especially with WPG getting Laine last year). Let's say we draft a player in the 5-10 range, like a Virtanen/Nylander/Ehlers type player. Someone who could develop 1st line potential, but would definitely be a 2nd line player. Now compare that with the above players on our team (Granlund, Sutter, etc.) becoming better players by having playoff exposure with our team. If each of these players becomes a little better because of it, then we have achieved the "greater good" of improving the play of more players, as opposed to getting a player in the draft who may or may not turn out to be a 1st liner. An easier way to put this into context would be to look at ratings as per EA Sports games - say each player gets bumped up 3-4 points in their overall ranking, vs drafting a 75-80 with a high pick. Anyways this is why I want the Canucks to make the playoffs. Of course if in 4 weeks they're out of it, then sell as much as you can. But for now, I'm rooting for wins, and the competing teams to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Boudrias said: I am pretty much with you. Many are saying win no matter what and in my humble opinion that is short sighted and a tad naïve. You could expand on that premise by saying trade the prospects and picks to enhance the existing roster for a playoff birth. That said and I would imagine the 'winners' side would say whoa. To me it is always about a team development time line. Who is your core and where are they in their development. Right now the Canuck core are Horvat, Hansen, Ericksson and pretty much the entire d-core. The forward group is no where close to CUP competitive and I do not want to trade assets to acquire a forward who might take them to playoffs. The team is not strong enough and there is more that has to be put in place before the move up takes place. It is basic asset management that vets are moved to compliment the team in an effort to build towards a CUP contender. Yes, to me this is more important than playoffs. I have been around hockey for a long time. Anyone who thinks it is a matter of course that teams can maintain a high competitive level on a ongoing basis has to cherry pick their orgs that have accomplished that. Teams peak and if lucky can maintain for a period and then they have to rebuild. The Canucks have rarely done that in their history. They have more often traded youth or picks for a quick solution rather than built an org that could produce a winner from within. The clubs greatest GM Pat Quinn who drafted Linden and Bure also was a trader who made deals that put the team into the Finals. My assessment of the Canucks is that their goal tending and d-core have CUP quality potential. The forward group is weak and the prospects might have promise but are no where broad or deep enough. Fans are very high on Horvat right now but a 1C prospect is desperately needed. That is why getting the highest draft prospect is essential. The standard reprise by fans who disagree is the suggestion that games are thrown to ensure the pick. I would say that is over simplification to make an argument. My counter is than management picks their core vet group that will lead the team through their transition and then move those that can bring a return back. The core I would stay with are Ericksson, Hansen, Sutter and one of Tanev or Edler. My vets to move are the Twins, Burrows, Dorsett (if not injured), Skille and preferably Tanev on defense. Tanev is moved because he can be (no NTC yet) and because of his injury history and size. His abilities would bring back a decent return. You say you have been around hockey for a long time, yet you want to trades the Sedins and Skille? I understand the Sedins in terms of getting a return back, and we'll ignore the fact that they bring so much more to the organization than just their on ice play. Fine. I get your point. Skille? Guy was a PTO and a 4th liner, what could he possibly get us in return? Any team in the NHL could have had him, but since you've been around hockey for a long time, I guess that's enough reason that we can rebuild our team by trading Jack Skille lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 41 minutes ago, Hectic said: You say you have been around hockey for a long time, yet you want to trades the Sedins and Skille? I understand the Sedins in terms of getting a return back, and we'll ignore the fact that they bring so much more to the organization than just their on ice play. Fine. I get your point. Skille? Guy was a PTO and a 4th liner, what could he possibly get us in return? Any team in the NHL could have had him, but since you've been around hockey for a long time, I guess that's enough reason that we can rebuild our team by trading Jack Skille lol Skille because he has shown a solid season as a 4th line addition. Yes, playoff bound teams do need 4th liners at times. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 14 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: There was this tiny shapely, alluring Asian lass, who'd feel amorous when she slapped my buttocks on the chess board(ooh..ouch!). It was decades ago..but I was wiser then... I know the feeling....then she sprung a leak & all the air came out of the doll.... oops...wrong forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: I know the feeling....then she sprung a leak & all the air came out of the doll.... oops...wrong forum. If you find love 'deflating', Tom Petty made a song vid for you(Yer So Bad) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Just now, Nuxfanabroad said: If you find love 'deflating', Tom Petty made a song vid for you(Yer So Bad) re: Love.. I'm still working on the 'money' part of the equation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.