mpt
-
Posts
7,437 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by mpt
-
-
He wont sign without a NMC or NTC at very least
-
On 6/14/2019 at 2:59 PM, brownky said:
Schenn is, and always a smart player. He's making up for his deficiency in footspeed by simply remaining in position as a defensive defenceman. Schenn is also not paid $6.5 million to be behind the play for 13 minutes a game.
Lucic is a dumb hockey player who, as a winger, has zero hope of regaining form in a league which is only getting faster. He can't keep up.
Guys that can’t keep up don't finish the league 7th in hits with only 13 minutes of ice time. If they can’t keep up and have no agility they never get contact, especially not 7th most in the league. Just because people keep saying he’s extremely slow doesn’t make it true. Is he slow than average? Yup, is it as bad as everyone says? Nope!
#fakenews
Lucic’s biggest problem is his acceleration not his speed
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, babalu said:
As I said he is going to be paid like a top pair D.
For sure at least 6 mil if not more. Frankly the way our D is, i’d consider it
-
19 hours ago, babalu said:
I don't think Meyers is a top pairing guy. Although he's going to be paid like one
He’s not a top pairing guy, we dont have a top pairing guy, we pretty much have to spread it around evenly
-
Depends on the ask. I think Myers and Edler would make a good pairing without having to give up anything if he chooses us.
Edler Myers
Hughes Tanev
Hutton Stetch
Juolevi Biega Schenn
-
2 hours ago, HKSR said:
And how do you suggest that be done when no other teams really want him? If he is such an issue for the team, you don't think GMJB would have tried to move him for anything he could these past couple seasons?
Like I said, just because the Canucks WANT to move him, doesn't mean he'll be moved. Nor does him wanting to be moved, mean he'll be moved.
Well if the agent is saying its best to move on, likely means he wants out. Trading him might be a harder option. Lucic though might make sense for both teams
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, HKSR said:
May be 'best' for both parties, but sometimes we don't always get what we want in life.
Would you rather keep a player and bring down the whole team or remove him from the dressing room and allow the rest of the players to be around players that want to be here. Best thing to do is cut off the wound.
-
Thats what happens with Joseph Smith craps in the river.
In all seriousness hopefully they can stop the disaster
-
-
No because we will still be picking in the top 10
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:
Have you been watching Canadian media lately? The Cons have been leading in the polls for some time.
Right because there’s no way the media will deny this outcome. Check out BC’s history when the NDP was going to win a majority and the liberals smoked them
-
The media tries to push this agenda because it typically gets people to vote more for the leading party. You’ll never see the media say anything conservative is leading or expecting to win.
-
4
-
-
The rumors are true, we finally landed Karlsson
-
While I like Gudbranson as a person, and I like how he stands up for his teammates (sometimes) the trade makes a lot of sense for Vancouver. One defender needed to go for Hughes, and it needed to be a righty, Tanev, Stech, and Biega are all good in their roles. Canucks with Baertschi out needed left wingers. Pearson gives us what we need as long as he can give us what he gave the Kings that last few years
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, 112 said:
There's a difference between how a law is written and how it's interpreted just as there's a difference between peacably smoking in a designated place where the activity is to be expected and wildly flailing one's arms about in close proximity to others. Nobody is impeding your right not to use when you have the option of keeping distance and staying out of smoking areas.
Not sure there are many common smoking areas in public.
-
1 hour ago, Russ said:
Pretty much my view on the topic too. As long as it doesn't create more problems, hopefully reduce petty charges on people where the tax payers end up funding jail/prison sentences, and doesn't cost more money from my pocket for peoples stupidity then sure I am ok with it. I am really interested in seeing what the new tax revenue is going to benefit the everyday person.
Probably just special interest groups and paying off terrorists
-
2 hours ago, Russ said:
I don't believe so, its only supposed to be cars and homes???
If that is true, then i have no problems. I’m pretty libertarian on drugs, just dont harm others, and dont screw your life up and ask me (or other tax payers) to pay for it.
-
5 hours ago, 112 said:
You're not going to get high off of second-hand smoke.
e: and you can always move to a non-smoking area or away from the person smoking, which is entirely reasonable.
Its not about getting high off second hand smoke. Yes cigarettes are worse but marijuana smoke is still harmful, your right to use can’t impede someone else’s right not to.
Its public property, you aren’t allowed to harm anyone, its your duty to move so you dont harm anyone. Thats like you saying its the other person’s job to move away from the person windmilling their hands in the air. Maybe the person should stop throwing their hands around when others are nearby, otherwise you might hit someone; and that would be on the responsibility on the person who is potentially harming others, not on the innocent people walking by. Its the duty of any individual to avoid harming anyone for any reason except in self defence; not the other way round.
-
2 hours ago, Russ said:
Doesn't it have the same rules as smoking? As in you can't just smoke it wherever you want?
Personally, I don't like the smell, I have never done it and never felt like I wanted to but if this helps people then good for them. I don't think its going to change much in the way people live their lives. If people did it before they will continue doing it, and I doubt there will be many who will just start smoking up just because its suddenly legal.
Yes the same rules as smoking, not sure about enforcement of the rules. Are you allowed to smoke cigarettes while walking down a city sidewalk?
-
9 hours ago, 112 said:
Where in the Charter does it say you have a right not to smell marijuana smoke?
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
-
As well as no one smokes it around me, I’m good. No one should be allowed to violate my rights not to use by 2nd hand smoke. If I can’t drink a beer walking down the street, why are you allowed to get high?
-
3
-
-
They have to renovate the arena first then apply. After the arena is finished, its just a matter of time. I dont see the NHL denying them
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, Ilunga said:
Yeah after all trump needs other sexual predators to hang out with.
Birds of a feather will hang together.
Would be funny if sometime you get charged with slander.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, BPA said:
Republicans will get BK in. Isn't that their thing...Party before country?
You must be confused with all politicians. If you think the democrats are the moral ones, think again.
-
2
-
[Signing] Sharks re-sign Erik Karlsson
in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Posted
Except for it sets a precedent, I bet Edler’s agent now asked for >7 million