guntrix Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 13 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: It's guntrix's attempt at humour... Liven up, that face is classic hilarity for all fan bases except ours. 49 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Fallacy of dismissal Fallacy by assertion Just because you don't know (or choose to ignore) the facts doesn't mean they don't exist. And no, I'm not going to do your due diligence in research for you. Remain willfully ignorant and/or continue to troll, either way it seems you're in your happy place on the pond. That's all I needed to know, thanks. 1 hour ago, J.R. said: I'm starting to wonder if the frog is Tony Gallagher's CDC account.... Ah, the "world's out to get us" view. It's cute that people think columnists care that much about a basement-dwelling team. It fits the egocentric theme around here tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Just now, guntrix said: Ah, the "world's out to get us" view. It's cute that people think columnists care that much about a basement-dwelling team. It fits the egocentric theme around here tho. Que? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 1 minute ago, J.R. said: Que? tldr - experts/columnists don't care about the Canucks as much as you think. Let's pull our heads out of ours asses. criticism ≠ obsession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Just now, guntrix said: tldr - experts/columnists don't care about the Canucks as much as you think. Let's pull our heads out of ours asses. criticism ≠ obsession. Gallagher has traditionally covered the NHL and pretty much exclusively....wait for it... the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 good that he started now as we will get to see what he is all about and how his game is at the NHL level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 1 minute ago, J.R. said: Gallagher has traditionally covered the NHL and pretty much exclusively....wait for it... the Canucks. Gallagher works for.... wait for it... The Province. It's obvious he'd focus more on the Canucks. lmao this is why they make fun of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Just now, guntrix said: Gallagher works for.... wait for it... The Province. It's obvious he'd focus more on the Canucks. lmao this is why they make fun of us. Sure frog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 1 minute ago, guntrix said: Gallagher works for.... wait for it... The Province. It's obvious he'd focus more on the Canucks. lmao this is why they make fun of us. When you are losing an arguement and you start arguing in favor of the guy you are arguing with.. good work bud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, J.R. said: Sure frog. How delusional can you be to think that a columnist from The Province won't naturally gravitate towards writing about the Canucks. I'm dumbfounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 13 minutes ago, guntrix said: Liven up, that face is classic hilarity for all fan bases except ours. The face is hilarious. No question. Would love to know what Benning was actually looking at to register such a surprised expression. That being said, the reductive nature in how many other fan bases still view Benning is old hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, guntrix said: Gallagher works for.... wait for it... The Province. It's obvious he'd focus more on the Canucks. lmao this is why they make fun of us. Gallagher makes fun of Canucks fans? I always thought he just hated people in general because he doesn't have a viable pulse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, guntrix said: How delusional can you be to think that a columnist from The Province won't naturally gravitate towards writing about the Canucks. I'm dumbfounded. I honestly don't even know (or particularly care) what you're arguing about Do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, J.R. said: I honestly don't even know (or particularly care) what you're arguing about Do you? Of course you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 1 hour ago, J.R. said: Three S's? Small, soft, and slow. His comments at the time of the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Small, soft, and slow. His comments at the time of the trade. Yup, pretty sure frog is Gallagher, especially with how defensive he got there ^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuckYa Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 On 25/03/2017 at 1:38 PM, gerry35 said: Remember this? He is the guy Benning really wanted and somehow it all worked out. Awesome stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry35 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 I love this kind of behind the scenes stuff, I just wish we could see more of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuckYa Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 On 28/03/2017 at 0:11 PM, Darius71 said: But burning off the ELC faster could work in the Canucks favor. What if Brock doesnt come close to hitting his ceiling till his third full year (or the first post elc contract year)? Also, dont you think that bringing in Brock at this point in the season helps to build the relationship between management and the player, and can benefit them down the road because loyalty has been fostered from the outset? Did you get that above image of JB above from a flames fans forum? I get it why they want to portray JB as an absolute dummy, but its kinda puzzling when supposed knowledgeable canuck fans try and portray him as a buffoon. 100%. How anybody could make a negative about this is plain ignorance. This was nothing short of a Win Win situation for both sides & it was all handled in the utmost professional way. Plus the big bonus is obviously for Brock himself as he gets a good taste of what the shows about, but also the Fans who get to see our bright future that was in so much doubt. Brock & Goldy have brightened that up in a big way. The Canucks organization does the no brainier, classiest move & it's still not good enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 On 3/26/2017 at 10:54 AM, guntrix said: They must have been really scared of losing him or they just wanted to give the fan base something to cheer for. I don't understand why they would burn one year off his ELC for a handful of meaningless games other than to provide entertainment value. My guess is it would be to give Boeser a feel for the NHL before the summer and really know what to work on in his game during the summer. That and I believe if a player is still 20 and not signed 2 years after they are drafted, they can be redrafted (I could be wrong on that though, wouldn't mind being corrected if I'm wrong as it was a quick research). Basically, we could lose him if we didn't sign him. Still, there's a couple of reasons it could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 On 3/26/2017 at 10:54 AM, guntrix said: They must have been really scared of losing him or they just wanted to give the fan base something to cheer for. I don't understand why they would burn one year off his ELC for a handful of meaningless games other than to provide entertainment value. Wow, negative much? I doubt there was any fear at all - they have a blue chip prospect that could rise above most all but a select few in that draft year and be a true 30-40 goal type sniper and front-door scoring threat that every team wants but only a few ever get. Having that talent have a look at the NHL and allow him to better prepare over the summer for a first full season is a great idea. The whole ELC burn is so overblown - it is a non-issue if you are going to keep the player anyway and if they are going to be great, they will get paid in any event. Trying to force one extra year of lower pay on a player will not foster the right long-term relationship anyway so what you call "meaningless games" are actually a pretty smart way of easing in a player who could potentially be a star and by all first appearance considerations, will at least be a solid top six player in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.f351d0829e1fa642c2ffece938019cb3.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.