Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Don’t Believe Anything Iain MacIntyre Tells You


Rocksterh8

Recommended Posts

From my slightly teetering limb over here (I've been reading without pause this morning), can I suggest that the "losing with Boucher" approach is not always the most effective way of fostering the types of long term, effective habits we want to instill in our players? Someone I'm sure will site the exception, but certainly in our local experience, I"m at a loss to recall a time when the teams fortunes turned on the purposeful over indulgence of youth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always appreciated Imac's opinion- he is usually quite level headed and fair with his criticisms, but willing to give credit where credit is due (unlike a lot of other local Canucks's beat writers).  

 

As far as the OP @Rocksterh8, it is guilty of a straw man.  Imac was stating that popular opinion/criticism wants to see more youngsters incorporated int the line up and yet still be a winning team. More or less, popular opinion wants to jettison whatever vets they can for more youth.  But to demand a winning product isn't fair, in his point of view.  The article then disagrees with this point, stating all along the Canucks/JB have wanted to do this.  But the quote the article references misinterprets things.  JB's stated a goal of incorporating youth into the line up and still be a competitive team.  That's different than what popular opinion wants which is more like a full on rebuild.  The article is attacking an argument Imac never made, and one that isn't supported by the quotes references.  Bogus writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stawns said:

Trust me, I know where the issues lie with and around this org.  Most of it around dimwits who feel the need to lash out and just move from target to target.  Some in the media, some on this board, some are both.  

Media, in this case MacIntyre, misrepresented (IMO) the beliefs of a large chunk of the fanbase instead of making the easy argument: the small but loud and persistent group of dimwits that make criticizing the fanbase an easy target. 

 

It is very easy to mistake prevalence for frequency, and MacIntyre has fallen into this trap, and in turn, made a very stupid statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WeneedLumme said:

Yeah, because this forum is for attacking members of the Canucks organization the way you do, right? 

Find me a post where I *only respond to attack a poster and not a poster's opinion and you'll have something more than chewing gum to connect me to this claim. I think you either back this up or admit you're wrong. 

 

If the the only content you post is aimed at slandering a poster, it's personal. If you can manage to build a retort around an opinion instead, then it's fair game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tas said:

hint: it's because they are.

 

iain's alleged arrogance is nothing compared to the hubris of canucks fans thinking they know more than the accredited media when every shred of information they receive to base their beliefs on are provided by those same media members who actually have legitimate access to the team. 

This might be the most accurate post I have ever read on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tas said:

hint: it's because they are.

 

iain's alleged arrogance is nothing compared to the hubris of canucks fans thinking they know more than the accredited media when every shred of information they receive to base their beliefs on are provided by those same media members who actually have legitimate access to the team. 

That's what you get when the city a team plays in turns into the biggest representation of PC, SJW, Hipsters in the world. They're always right, because that's what the majority of 2 million people are like. Even if 7.5billion people everywhere else in the world have different viewpoints. 

 

 Most people who believe they know everything have never played hockey, let alone anything better than recreational hockey. Or have been in a dressing room, travelled with a team. Any "knowledge" they have is from playing the EA game or listening to the extremely PC local media. I remember anytime any national hockey media were critical of the Nucks there was mass hysteria chalked full of conspiracy theories and hurt feelings. 

 

 But regardless there are lots of good hockey fans out there and the Team itself is worth cheering for regardless of how embarrassing the Local media and fanbase is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tajun said:

What elephant? They're getting old, and are no longer first line stars. That's why we are trying to bring in younger stars. That's not an elephant, it's an unfortunate fact of life.

why are they getting top PP1 minutes, offensive zone starts, and playing 19 minutes a game if they want to develop the kids? Yeah, there is an elephant in the room, you just chose not to see it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

It's Botch that claimed that and on twitter he implied that one of the teams was LA - guess which contracts would be coming back the other way.

Botch was the source? Enough said :P

 

The idea is still valid tho, of us taking back an expiring contract to allow for a Sedins trade to occur. Say e.g., that Florida wants them for next season, we could send them the Sedin's with 3.5 mil of Henriks salary retained, and take back Jokinen's 4 mil. The Panthers get both Sedin's for an effective cap increase of 6.5 mil, which they will easily have next season. 

 

I'd like to see us trade the Sedin's in this way for Luongo. I understand the relative impossibility of that, but we'd avoid the giant cap recapture penalty if he decides to retire early, and if he sits out the rest of his career due to injury then it would be a very good cap management move for us. Sounds like that hip of his is having some issues. If he's healthy he's a great partner for Marky and Demko. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Pete M said:

why are they getting top PP1 minutes, offensive zone starts, and playing 19 minutes a game if they want to develop the kids? Yeah, there is an elephant in the room, you just chose not to see it.

 

The shift is happening.  Next year the Bo-Baer line will carry the bulk of the icetime.

 

If you're worried about last game, the low minute (11 and less) guys were Chaput, Megna, Biega and Cramarossa.

 

A guy like Boucher, who has had some conditioning concerns, had 15 minutes but more PP time than the Sedins.

 

Of course there are still going to be nights where the twins get a lot of ice - even too much ice - team depth demands it.  Couple in that Willy makes the newbies earn their time, the shift will always be slower than people want.

 

I saw a comment somewhere about the Canucks taking a clue about Ho-Sang playing up the lineup.  The Islanders.  That's who you want to emulate?  What a joke.

 

Those dying for them to be punished for a turnover is one of the silliest witch-hunts on this board.  They have a ton of credibility in the bank with Willie and every coach they've had... earning every drop.  This team seems to have a great culture in the room so any worry that giving the Sedins rope on their mistakes will negatively affect the rookies has no credibility. They'll continue to be scaled back as Bo-Bear are finally ready to take the torch.  Patience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I read this article, I could see it would be a very good basis for a  healthy discussion as it showed two opposite sides of not only media but also fans. You have Imac (being the brown noser he's always been) with his analysis of how Canucks management can do no wrong with their transition.

 

Then you have this Canucks Army writer basically debunking what Imac has said about what other fans are wanting. That management is not doing what a lot of other fans think would be a better for the young players and make for a more efficient rebuild.

 

IMO both kind of fan's are right, but just have different idea's of what would be the best way for the team to quote *rebuild* and move forward into the future. There is no right or wrong fan as we all want whats best for the team to finally win the pot of gold.

 

I did not create this article nor approve or disapprove, I just copy and pasted it and the headline to see if a healthy discussion would arise from it. For the most part it did, with a few exceptions from some posters who chose to post hateful and negative things about me, and totally ignore the article. They know who they are and hopefully they will learn to post more about the threads/article's than just attack the posters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I'm not playing this game. How old are you?! 

 

You quoted me quoting CB51,stating that I've stated that CB was aggressive, which is clearly a misquote. Man up. 

 

 

But I quoted you directly.  Are you accusing me of changing your quote? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pete M said:

I guess the Sedins play cannot be talked about...their play and results are below par to what the fanbase is use to seeing...this is a major factor to the performance of this team.

The elephant in the room is not being talked about.

Do real fans really think like this? It's like the fans are brainwashed into believing the Sedins will perform 1st line minutes into their 50s or something, their human and decline like everyone else that's a no brainier, you really think the Sedins were going to produce the same or better as they keep getting older???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

maybe, we should just put every topic into an opinion poll. then JB and WD can read and know how to run the team. they need our help. 

There's a few on here for sure that think they are more capable...:wacko:  If they actually were not sure why they haven't been hired yet...

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I was a little slow on the uptake.  This is a cut and paste of an article by Jackson McDonald of the venerable Canucks Army.

 

Let's do a little deconstructive surgery

 

6 hours ago, Rocksterh8 said:

Don’t Believe Anything Iain MacIntyre Tells You About The Canucks And Rebuilding

MARCH 10, 2017, 4:20 PM | JACKSON MCDONALD

Iain MacIntyre was on Team 1040’s morning show yesterday to discuss the team’s direction and the job Willie Desjardins has done as head coach. MacIntyre provided about six minutes of analysis, but it was an early exchange that caught my ear and struck me as a bit misguided:

Iain MacIntyre: “The one thing that I’ll say, that I think is unfair about criticism of the hockey team generally is that it seems often now people are advocating… that the priority needs to be on development and bringing kids along and making the team younger… and yet they’re outraged and hyper-critical when the team loses.” 

Don Taylor: “There you go. That’s well said.” 

IM: “You can’t have everything. You can have one or the other. If people think that the young players are already better than the experienced players I’m afraid that’s just not reality. Older players, even ones that might be considered journeymen, or pedestrian, or depth players in the NHL, if they’ve been around they still have more know-how, they have more trade craft than younger players who have, granted, perhaps more talent, and certainly more potential, but haven’t learned to play the game.”

There’s a lot to chew on here, so I’ll deconstruct this point by point.

It seems often now people are advocating… that the priority needs to be on development and bringing kids along and making the team younger… and yet they’re outraged and hyper-critical when the team loses.  

This is perhaps the greatest misconception to plague the Vancouver hockey media over the past three seasons, and to be fair, this isn’t unique to Iain MacIntyre in the slightest. He’s just the most recent example. The purpose isn’t to put him on blast, but rather to finally put a group of misconceptions that have permeated the local media to bed.

What MacIntyre is completely failing to understand here, [hang on, what McDonald is completely failing to understand here is that MacIntyre gets this, he is saying that the fans don't]  as others have before him, is the distinction between criticism of process and criticism of results [yes, but you're being pedantic]. I don’t claim to have insight into the thoughts and feelings of every Canucks fan, but the majority of the criticism I’ve seen and the majority of which we’ve published in this space and others like it, has very little to do with the fact that the Canucks are losing, and much more to do with how they’re losing.

They’ve been raked over the coals for playing boring, low-event hockey, for doling out undeserved ice time to marginal players, or for scratching promising youngsters, but they’ve rarely been criticized simply for failing to close out games.

You can’t have everything. You can have one or the other. 

This was the highlight of MacIntyre’s radio hit for me. It’s funny to see one of management’s biggest defenders in this market suggest that the team can’t have it both ways considering having it both ways has been their stated goal from day one. It’s even funnier in the context of the rest of the interview, where IMac goes on to defend the Canucks’ attempts to be competitive and rebuild at the same time, something he just said doesn’t work. Hmm…

In this instance, IMac has provided us with a classic example of moving the goal posts. The message from the outset from this management group has been that they could compete for the playoffs, and that a winning environment will help the development of their young players. There have been many people in this market that disagree with that direction, but it only seems fair to judge the team based on the criteria they themselves have established. [yes, this is right]

If people think that the young players are already better than the experienced players I’m afraid that’s just not reality. 

It’s difficult to know what players IMac is talking about specifically, [the concept is that there is talent and there is experience, raw talent peaks relatively young and experience keeps improving a player.....it's a pretty general comment but the key point is that the 2 factors added together in an individual equal a total......the optimal age for most, where both contribute the most together is age 27-30.  When you start talking about high end players like Austin Matthews, the lines get blurred because his raw talent is very high and overshadows his experience.] but at face value this couldn’t be further from the truth. In general, this line of thinking is extremely flawed from the outset, as it can be used to imply that experience makes Paul Gaustad a better forward than Auston Matthews. That’s likely distorting MacIntyre’s point, but his assertion doesn’t ring any more true when applied to the Canucks. This season, only three Canucks’ players produced offense at a top-six clip: Bo Horvat, Jannik Hansen, and Sven Baertschi. Those players rank 5th, 7th, and 8th among Canucks forwards in TOI/GP, respectively. So, the idea that ice time has been divvied up in a manner befitting a meritocracy doesn’t exactly hold water. Even Hansen, one of the team’s most established players prior to the trade to the San Jose Sharks, wasn’t being used to his full potential at even-strength, and certainly not on the power play.

Older players, even ones that might be considered journeymen, or pedestrian, or depth players in the NHL, if they’ve been around they still have more know-how, they have more trade craft than younger players who have, granted, perhaps more talent, and certainly more potential, but haven’t learned to play the game.”

Given what MacIntyre says immediately following his claim that the Canucks’ veterans are still better options than the team’s youth, it’s likely he’s actually referring to less established players like Nikolay Goldobin and Reid Boucher [yes, and all the players in Utica like Grenier, LaBate, Virtanen, Pedan, McEneney, Subban] . That doesn’t make MacIntyre’s claims any less ridiculous, though. While players like Brandon Sutter and Jayson Megna may have the edge over these players in terms of experience, that experience isn’t driving results [the alternative is worse, it means not being competitive and going against management stated objective above, and it means not developing the players who have made the grade already like Horvat, Baertschi, Granlund, Gaunce, Stecher, Hutton etc.....you can't have your cake and eat it too]. They’re among the team’s worst forwards by both offensive and defensive metrics, whereas Boucher’s numbers have been positively glistening, albeit over a small sample. Goldobin is still an unknown commodity for the most part, and carries a reputation for poor defensive play, but he at least provides the team with some form of tangible value, which is more than can be said for some players in the team’s lineup.

I think I speak for most fans when I say that frankly I’m sick and tired [of hearing pedantic hacks who aren't as smart as they are pretending to be throwing stones at their intellectual superiors] hearing that this team has to fight tooth and nail to finish 20th overall because the market won’t support a team that finishes 30th overall. Clearly, this market can’t stand the thought of a rebuild, right? I assume that’s why the trades for Jonathan Dahlen and Nikolay Goldobin, transactions that clearly substituted short-term pain for long-term gain, where met with almost unanimous approval by the fanbase? And why the moves the team has made with it’s eye on the present day have been much less well-received?

Anyone who suggests this market isn’t accustomed to losing needs a serious history lesson [fans younger than 29 were 10 years old when the Sedin's were drafted and probably don't remember when the Canucks truly sucked] , not only regarding the past three years, but also the majority of the thirty or so that preceded the West Coast Express Era. What’s made the Canucks’ recent run of awful play so unpalatable hasn’t been the losses themselves, but the amount of assets, money, and effort that’s been poured into putting lipstick on this pig. Brandon Sutter, Erik Gudbranson, Loui Eriksson… those aren’t transactions that were made with the intention of making the team’s future brighter. They were made for the express purpose of improving the team in the here and now. From that standpoint, they failed spectacularly. [see above where you say that management thinks that winning helps development....sounds like adding these players are consistent with their stated plan]

To his credit, IMac does have enough sense to see that the team’s young players have more talent and potential than their older counterparts. They just have to learn to play the game. [yep, management also talks about putting young players in positions to succeed] From where I stand, it would seem that the easiest way to learn to play would be for those players to get as many reps as possible while the games don’t mean anything, rather than by sitting in favour of players that won’t be here next season.

Maybe that’s unfair criticism. You can’t have it both ways. Unless you’re the Canucks from six months ago, apparently.

Sorry, that started out being fun.  I could have done more but the further I got, the more pathetic the article became.  I'm not a fan of Canucks Army and rarely read any of it.  :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Down by the River said:

Media, in this case MacIntyre, misrepresented (IMO) the beliefs of a large chunk of the fanbase instead of making the easy argument: the small but loud and persistent group of dimwits that make criticizing the fanbase an easy target. 

 

It is very easy to mistake prevalence for frequency, and MacIntyre has fallen into this trap, and in turn, made a very stupid statement. 

I doubt it.  Even the level headed ones on CDC who are OK with the direction and management of the team seem like a minority.  I dont think it's unreasonable to agree with Imac that a large chunk of the fanbase are dissatisfied with the make up of the roster and the results of the team.  You look at last year's season ticket holder's discussion with management and it was basically them roasting JB & TL.  Things have probably only gotten worse since then no matter the fact how much the roster has been turned over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...