Willie D needs to pipe down.

[aGENT]

I see we're still pitch forking over stupid crap... carry on CDC. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Its a discussion forum. You know, to discuss things about the team.

 

There is nothing in the rules that says if you are not a blind homer who thinks everyone and everything is perfect that you cannot post here.

 

So carry on trying to be a moderator wannabe. If it bugs you, why read it? Just stay out of the thread if it isn't something you are able to handle.

[mll]

46 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

But is there still an opportunity for Boeser and MacEwen to Utica as well.. thought I read that there was?

Yes.  Boeser could sign a ATO and play for the Comets (and have his ELC start only next season) but I think he would prefer to get a NHL game to burn a year of his ELC.  If he does than he can't go to Utica anymore because he wasn't on their roster at the TDL and would be under a NHL contract.  

 

MacEwen can sign a ATO to join the Comets.  His ELC starts next season only.

[alfstonker]

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Larsen also played in the AHL and NHL. Lots of his development came from there. He is also a very different player.

 

Tryamkin developed in the KHL and was very much the same player over there that he is now. He was not a raw player that the Canucks had to turn into that player. He still has a ways to go obviously but I do t think the Canucks can claim they made him much more than he already was yet.

 

Trying to send him to the AHL was almost a very costly mistake for the future of the Canucks. All because we wanted to keep and play Larsen who has shown his offensive game is not nearly enough to offset his defensive and physical deficiencies.

 

Again, the ice time thing is conveniently used as Willie's great development strategy. It doesn't explain why Stecher has received huge ice time though. Shouldn't he be spoon fed lower minutes too? It just shows as I have said that it's not about development it's about favourites with Willie. Conditioning, not knowing the system, and wanting to ease them into the NHL is just a convenient excuse to not play players he doesn't trust.

Total bollocks said by someone who doesn't remember how Try played at the end of season 205-16

 

As for your Stecher remark, you just don't get it do you - you have no clue about developing youngsters IN ANY SPORT. He hands out the minutes based on how hard they work, stamina, compete level, ability and ability to learn and take on coaching. 

 

You can't see any of that, you base everything on age and favouritism, you don't see any of what goes on in the room or in practice, you don't even give credit to players own testimonies. In short you appear to be riddled with bias that sours everything you see.

[TheOgRook]

39 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Its a discussion forum. You know, to discuss things about the team.

 

There is nothing in the rules that says if you are not a blind homer who thinks everyone and everything is perfect that you cannot post here.

 

So carry on trying to be a moderator wannabe. If it bugs you, why read it? Just stay out of the thread if it isn't something you are able to handle.

See you prove yourself wrong and I just have to give you under an hour.  

 

You say all the time to people you are here to discuss and everybody has a right to their opinion.  And even in the post I quoted, you state it's a discussion forum and then continue to call the people who disagree with you "blind homers".  How do you expect to have any credibility when you not only contradict yourself from post to post, you contradict yourself in the same post.  

 

Continue to call people "blind homers" and that people are delusional.  Sure sounds like you are here for a two sided discussion.  /sarcasm

 

ps telling people to leave the thread so can just continue to be pompous to people?!? That's rich. 

[coho8888]

31 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Total bollocks said by someone who doesn't remember how Try played at the end of season 205-16

 

As for your Stecher remark, you just don't get it do you - you have no clue about developing youngsters IN ANY SPORT. He hands out the minutes based on how hard they work, stamina, compete level, ability and ability to learn and take on coaching. 

 

You can't see any of that, you base everything on age and favouritism, you don't see any of what goes on in the room or in practice, you don't even give credit to players own testimonies. In short you appear to be riddled with bias that sours everything you see.

And you do?  Have you coached in the NHL before?  Do you know what goes on during the practices?  Why is your opinion any more important than ours?  Maybe you should look in the mirror and see if your bias is the problem here.  

[TheOgRook]

5 minutes ago, coho8888 said:

And you do?  Have you coached in the NHL before?  Do you know what goes on during the practices?  Why is your opinion any more important than ours?  Maybe you should look in the mirror and see if your bias is the problem here.  

One thing the folks on the side of Willie being a decent coach have going for them is actual quotes from actual hockey players that have played for Willie not only currently, but in the past. Whereas the opposite side has what?? Some washed up journalists? Some eternal haters at 1040?  Sorry but I'll take the word of the players thx..

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, TheOgRook said:

One thing the folks on the side of Willie being a decent coach have going for them is actual quotes from actual hockey players that have played for Willie not only currently, but in the past. Whereas the opposite side has what?? Some washed up journalists? Some eternal haters at 1040?  Sorry but I'll take the word of the players thx..

Almost ALWAYS hockey players avoid saying (publicly) negative things about their coaches.  The Canuck players still don't say negative things about Torts for heaven sake.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Almost ALWAYS hockey players avoid saying (publicly) negative things about their coaches.  The Canuck players still don't say negative things about Torts for heaven sake.

Burrows does NOT like Torts. That's abundantly clear. 

[Alflives]

Just now, J.R. said:

Burrows does NOT like Torts. That's abundantly clear. 

Hansen likely has a dislike for Torts too, but I never heard him state it publicly.  If Burr said negative stuff about Torts, I trust you heard it.  That's why I used "almost".  

[coho8888]

15 minutes ago, TheOgRook said:

One thing the folks on the side of Willie being a decent coach have going for them is actual quotes from actual hockey players that have played for Willie not only currently, but in the past. Whereas the opposite side has what?? Some washed up journalists? Some eternal haters at 1040?  Sorry but I'll take the word of the players thx..

Sure, if you ask Vey, the Sedins, Edler, Megna and Chaput you would hear nothing but accolades from them.

[darkpoet]

8 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hansen likely has a dislike for Torts too, but I never heard him state it publicly.  If Burr said negative stuff about Torts, I trust you heard it.  That's why I used "almost".  

It was also abundantly clear the Burrows hated Auger. He spent an entire interview blasting him on live TV.

It takes an awful lot for most players to get to the point they're going to publicly rip a ref.

Even more to do that to your coach.

I'm not convinced what players say has anything to do with the truth, or absence of it. If you wanna go that route, go by how they play for him. That would be the best indicator IMO.

This team definitely plays hard. I do believe they respect the coach. He's a nice guy and he's a "players coach" - what player wouldn't like that?
Having said that, it doesn't mean hes the right guy, or that his players think he is, either. 
 

[Salmonberries]

2 minutes ago, coho8888 said:

Sure, if you ask Vey, the Sedins, Edler, Megna and Chaput you would hear nothing but accolades from them.

Or we could ask Stecher, Horvat, Baertchi, Granlund, Hutton and Tryamkin. Don't you think you'd get a similar answer from those players?

[wallstreetamigo]

56 minutes ago, TheOgRook said:

See you prove yourself wrong and I just have to give you under an hour.  

 

You say all the time to people you are here to discuss and everybody has a right to their opinion.  And even in the post I quoted, you state it's a discussion forum and then continue to call the people who disagree with you "blind homers".  How do you expect to have any credibility when you not only contradict yourself from post to post, you contradict yourself in the same post.  

 

Continue to call people "blind homers" and that people are delusional.  Sure sounds like you are here for a two sided discussion.  /sarcasm

 

ps telling people to leave the thread so can just continue to be pompous to people?!? That's rich. 

I call people blind homers when they are pompous suggesting that an opinion they don't agree with is "Wrong" or they suggest that people did using things about the team that they don't agree with is "stupid". 

 

This forum exists to discuss all things Canucks. That includes things you don't agree with and I don't agree with. If people don't like it or have nothing to add to the discussion other than "I see we are discussing stupid things" THAT is being pompous. Why come here and post if you are so butthurt about the comments and dont have anything valuable to add on either side of the debate? Seems like a waste of time to me.

 

As for my credibility in your eyes, why would I care? You don't have the capacity to see value in anyone's opinions that don't match yours and you clearly show it every time you post. If that seems credible in your mind then go nuts man. 

 

I dont worry about who agrees with me or who doesn't because I don't post my opinions to get people's approval. I post them because I enjoy discussing the team and giving my thoughts on it. 

[Salmonberries]

1 hour ago, alfstonker said:

Total bollocks said by someone who doesn't remember how Try played at the end of season 205-16

 

As for your Stecher remark, you just don't get it do you - you have no clue about developing youngsters IN ANY SPORT. He hands out the minutes based on how hard they work, stamina, compete level, ability and ability to learn and take on coaching. 

 

You can't see any of that, you base everything on age and favouritism, you don't see any of what goes on in the room or in practice, you don't even give credit to players own testimonies. In short you appear to be riddled with bias that sours everything you see.

Do you recall the temperature in here earlier this month after the game in LA? The place went crazy negative AFTER A ROAD WIN because the coach didn't play Goldobin in the third period. It was surreal. Never mind that we were on the ropes killing penalties for the whole period and that it was Goldy's first game, the pitchforks were out and it was time to fire Willie. It's gotten completely bull goose loony around here regarding this whole issue.

[coho8888]

13 minutes ago, Salmonberries said:

Or we could ask Stecher, Horvat, Baertchi, Granlund, Hutton and Tryamkin. Don't you think you'd get a similar answer from those players?

Sure if you believe that current players will give the media an honest assessment of their coach's abilities in an interview.

[Salmonberries]

Just now, coho8888 said:

Sure if you believe that current players will give the media an honest assessment of their coach's abilities in an interview.

I don't. But I do believe one set of players will be about as truthful as the other.

 

It was a question that you posed, not me. If we weren't assuming a truthful answer it's kind of a pointless statement isn't it.

[coho8888]

Just now, Salmonberries said:

Do you recall the temperature in here earlier this month after the game in LA? The place went crazy negative AFTER A ROAD WIN because the coach didn't play Goldobin in the third period. It was surreal. Never mind that we were on the ropes killing penalties for the whole period and that it was Goldy's first game, the pitchforks were out and it was time to fire Willie. It's gotten completely bull goose loony around here regarding this whole issue.

Hate to break it to you but we had no business winning that game.  LA scored two goals into their own net.  Willie does what he does by shortening his bench with one entire period left, plays his Vets to the point that they start taking penalties and we came close to losing that game.  And yes we did make it an issue not just because he didn't play Goldy in the third but his innane tactics of sitting back and letting them come at us.  Time and time again he does this yet you Willie Lovers are blind to this. 

[TheOgRook]

36 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Almost ALWAYS hockey players avoid saying (publicly) negative things about their coaches.  The Canuck players still don't say negative things about Torts for heaven sake.

Oh "almost alway" is that true or one of those things you make up?? Where's the quote of players saying that?  I've seen a ton of guys come out and say they hated playing for certain coaches.  Never heard one player say they were scared to say something.  This is where some confuse them stating their opinion with stating a fact.

 

As far as the torts thing.. did it ever cross your mind maybe he's not that bad??  They seem to like him and play hard for him in Columbus.  

[Salmonberries]

5 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I call people blind homers when they are pompous suggesting that an opinion they don't agree with is "Wrong" or they suggest that people did using things about the team that they don't agree with is "stupid". 

 

This forum exists to discuss all things Canucks. That includes things you don't agree with and I don't agree with. If people don't like it or have nothing to add to the discussion other than "I see we are discussing stupid things" THAT is being pompous. Why come here and post if you are so butthurt about the comments and dont have anything valuable to add on either side of the debate? Seems like a waste of time to me.

 

As for my credibility in your eyes, why would I care? You don't have the capacity to see value in anyone's opinions that don't match yours and you clearly show it every time you post. If that seems credible in your mind then go nuts man. 

 

I dont worry about who agrees with me or who doesn't because I don't post my opinions to get people's approval. I post them because I enjoy discussing the team and giving my thoughts on it. 

I know some of us are getting pretty wound up here but you have suggested that people "aren't worth talking to" if they don't agree with you on certain issues. I know because you directed that thought my way just last night.

 

I don't really see the need to personalize this or any other hockey argument here. Some of my buddy's here are on the anti Willie bandwagon, I can't imagine being upset about it. Hell I was on the opposing side of the much more serious Trump thread from most of my friends here lol.