-
Posts
21,791 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by IBatch
-
Talent level has been great since the 70's. Funny thing is you can track it by how the best compare to the new best in any era right to to present time. Orr was better then Potvin and Robinson all defenseman he played against. Gretzky and Lemuiex were better then anyone right up to close to retirement. Including guys like Yzerman, Selanne, Iginla who were better then a lot of the Getzlaf aged guys who still play today. So it's a bit naive to think that Luongo faced better competition then guys like Parent, Esposito, Smith, Furh, Belfour, Barrasso, Vernon, McLean, Hasek, Broduer and Roy etc. One could say the 80-90's goalies faced the best there ever was because it was true. Much smaller league back then and the level of forward talent was better then it's ever been. Just look at how many super stars, stars and best all-time talent there was compared to now. It's not even close and that's with 31 teams...although it seems to be on the upswing again for sure. Some of these guys posted elite sp before the butterfly existed - including Parent, Espisito, and Dryden. As far as comparing Luongo to his previous peers that didn't have the luxury of padding their win colums with shoot-out wins...well Luongo and especially Lundqvist take huge hits -there is a reason 400 wins used to be viewed as a exceptional accomplishment. Luongo would be in the low 400s if you made them ties instead - Lundqvist would around Vernon - outside looking in. THN has been making lists for decades now - which included experts views on players from long ago eras that were alive back then to make proper comparisons. One rule they have is once a player retires they can't move ahead of others that have etc. Luongo has been around the high 20's recently. Never won a Vezina - few second team all-star appearances etc. In other words he wasn't even considered the best during his own era - how does that compare to guys that were? Not favourably. Yes he's the best to ever play for us ....and one the best in his era too. And has consistently played at or near elite level for a very long time. Maybe Cujo is a good comparison. The difference is Luongo won two gold medals and one as a starter - which is why he should going to the HHOF. Otherwise he'd have to wait just like Cujo - even though factually Cujo has more wins if you level the playing field.
-
New Jersey - Vancouver (Proposal)
IBatch replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
TT is in his prime and managed a total of four 40 point or better seasons in his entire career. Also it's his contract year and big pay day as a UFA, so bouncing back to 44 points isn't a surprise- especially considering his career season was his last contract year. BB was ahead of him this year in the scoring race when he went down...factually 4th best by position...and is still ahead of him by one point in eleven less games now.... far as health goes that's an issue - well actually for both of them at various points in their careers they've both missed games. What BB has done his first three seasons is leaps and bounds better then what TT managed at the same age for the most part. His career PPG should only go up - at worst almost certainly won't go down. The ten game sample size look great I'd admit to that - but we've also seen ten game streaks with BB dominating too.... really don't get why we'd give up on him at this point just to get older - he's a huge part of our young core and in the right age group. Would be like giving up on a young Patrick Sharp in favour for an older worse player who just happened to be having a good try out with the team before free agency and his overpaid legacy contract. TT reminds me of Silverberg or even a slightly better version of Hansen - great guys to have on the team no doubt, very good middle six players. If we trade BB now we take a step back with our cores age and lose his best years. Naslund was 27 when he was doing his thing - the Sedins peaked at 30. Second fasted to 50 in our history.. On TT. We can keep both you know ... don't re-sign Leivo, let Stetcher walk and promote someone else - and pay a modest price to dump Bear. Can't see him getting the same money as Neal did - he's a proven goal scorer and a beast at times. Definitely can see a regression coming - as we've seen with well, LE, Okposo, Ladd, Neal, Lucic, Foligno and well a lot more then that. Hayes ... ugh not at the cap hit thanks. Skinner - wow! Duchene ugh ... and all these guys with the exception of maybe Lucic (who at least can punch things) have had great seasons - some quite a few - yet faded quickly. TT at least is young enough to buck that trend for a few years and it would be great to have him at a decent cap hit - but it comes with some risk too. -
So... how does 8 mins a game in the KHL as an 18 year old, compare to say what Mathews, or McDavid or Eichel managed as 18 year olds in the NHL - or even MT or his little brother BT. Or Svecknikov? Those guys had great first years in the NHL and most earned their ice time slowly as the season went on. Podz is a great prospect and so is Hoglander, but still a little early to writing them directly into the NHL top six-nine over even guys like AG and JV.... Do think that both end up in the top or at worst middle six - that's their trajectory (eventually ) but it's going to take some time. Most rookies have seasons like AG, not BB or EP or Hughes.
-
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
Hard to tell at this point. One thing both EP and Hughes have in spades is a competitive spirit - and thing both could amp up their performance when it matters the most. EP will become a much more complete player once he adds ten or fifteen pounds of man muscle to his frame - Hughes will never be a physical guy like say Pronger - but he's no slouch when it comes to heart and try so wouldn't count him out before it even happens. Can't wait to see what Podz can do - he's a pit bull when it comes to getting the puck back and that if it translates completely at the NHL level our top line is going to be furious - like adding a Forsberg lite or Claude Lemuiex...people won't be happy paying us for sure....2022-2208 our team looks to have what it needs to be back on top in our division...and a team built come playoff time. -
Yep - pretty much business advice usual with the exception wearing PJs until noon instead of 10:00 o'clock or so...
-
Linden, again - now that I understand this better, nominate Mogilny
-
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
Dallas wouldn't have won a cup without Zubov. Glad he's finally in the HHOF - much deserved. Al Maccccinnesss too. MVP CAL cup ... without him they don't win either ha ha. -
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
Not really sure what your point is. The state of the team was we still had WCE elements and the start of the Sedin team who were part of both. The Luongo trade sealed the deal - I saw it right away and said to my friends we just became a contender. Didn't take long for that to happen - a playoff miss a year after wasn't a big deal - you could see it coming and I wasn't one bit surprised we ended up a top team for a couple of years. Without Luongo it was never going to happen. With a so / so goalie it would have just been the WCE era 2.0. Again AV was a good coach- but give WD or TG the same team and they would have still been good. AV hasn't had to coach a bottom team yet - TG and WD have. Funny how the "better coaches" are almost always the ones behind the bench on good teams. And the ones that fade away quickly are the ones who get crappy assignments with bottom teams. The "Great" I AM BABCOCK in the third person couldn't make it work outside of a good ANA team and a still great Detroit team (and did he ever bail fast when the end was near! Couldn't hurt his reputation right?" and lost 2/3 finals but still got his huge pay day - and the "Coach of the Decade " did a sub-par job with a supposed start of the year contender in Florida. They had all the pieces yet completely sh!t the bed - maybe should have gone with with better mustache in WD right? Bad teams break careers - good ones make them. -
Have to say the OP at least did his homework about who might want Demko - Jones played way below standard for much of the year. One of a few teams that would us a protection spot on Demko over what they already have. That said they are cap crunched as it is so no way they'd at all be interested in LE. We are best off keeping Demko as either our own sacrifice to Seattle, a back-up and a possibly better trade chip later (after expansion or if he's trending up next TDL). We are stuck with LE. Other guys like Bear or Sutter could be used as cap dumps possibly without too much sting. Or we could make a hockey trade for Pearson ....
-
Or Mogilny's Byng. I watched most of the games with both them in the lineup - but saying Bure was a better skater and Mogilny was a better everything else including mean streak (Bure did crunch or hit so I'm not sure where this is coming from - and best yes I've read Acuions funny comments before) - other then a personal preference which is understandable. They were both otherworldly talents for sure - and from a pure skill perspective they would go one and two on most lists - Bure/Mogilny followed by the Sedins and Naslund (for now)...
-
Voted Bure... then changed it to Linden. Best player all-time is definitely Bure, Greatest is Linden, then maybe Hank. Nominate Mogilny if he's not up yet ... and Bieksa and Babych
-
When first saw we acquired him wasn't sure I heard it right - like it was fake news or something. Was pretty excited - Mogilny and Bure? How the heck is anyone going to stop the pair of them? Luongo trade had me high as a kite for a week or two as well....
-
I 100% get where your coming from. Predicted that we'd take Podz if he was still available (back pat whoopee do good for me ha ha) a few days before the draft as even though some lists ranked him as high as three was hoping teams would skip over him given his KHL commitment and that one or two teams before us as usual would go off board a bit. It happened and was totally stoked at the time...and now even happier about it. He definitely hasn't disappointed so far. Back at the draft his biggest criticism was his offensive upside (even though he'd showed a scoring touch at international tourneys against his peer group), one thing that he had better then anyone else in the draft was the ability to as one scout put it " get you ". What he meant by that was IF you had the puck - Podz was going to get it back and you were going to feel it. And possibly going to pay for it to boot. That said a lot considering Kakko and Hughes were the consensus 1-2 but not when it came to this particular skill set. Get you ... like Claude Lemuiex? Know you love BT - it's possible we got our own version of that right now in the system (wouldn't that be great!) Havent read or seen a lot of him since but what I have so far is he's impressive. Hoglander might have stole the show with his lacrosse like goals before and during the WJ's, but Podz was an important member of their silver medal squad for sure. THN takes the average ranking of ten NHL scouts when making their lists and like any they never prove exact but i like their process. For example Maker was 4 to start this season and Q Hughes was right where Podz is now at 10. J Hughes and Kakko were both higher - but it's also based on how they anticipate their entire career will end up so even then it's too early yet. Usually the top 30 or so go on to have decent to great careers but of course there are busts too. OJ was as high as 22 - right around where BB was at the start of his rookie season (not including his 9 games). Just nice to see Podz ahead of guys like Krebs and Turcotte and Caufield, but who knows for sure how things will turn out. To be considered a top ten prospect world wild is no small thing...the only guy on our team to beat that since we've made the lists for Future Watch is EP, who was ranked #2 right behind Dahlin after his first overall draft... Hes played some center since getting drafted, and is in the second best league in the world as an 18 year old (SHL a close third). ... his floor is very high and his ceiling is still unknown. Generally scouts felt if his offensive game grew to match everything else he'd become the best of his draft class. He will also drop the gloves - not much at all not to like. Wonder if Tree is taking notice too ....
-
Describe the Current Vancouver Canucks in 1 word (Discussion)
IBatch replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Canucks Talk
I see your "Green" and raise your a "Babcockless".... Seriously when I just saw this my first thought was "promising".... -
Thing is we've seen how expensive those free agent vets are to fill the lineup with though - we need some of these guys to hit for our cap situation even if they are bottom six or bottom pairing defenseman. Think maybe your selling Hoglander short too - if you read some of the drool worthy prospects around where he's ranked you might change your mind on him too. He's 30 pots ahead of Hobey Baker season Madden for example - and almost 50 spots of where AG was after his Hobey Baker season. Is AG not making an impact? Cheaper then everyone around him - and these guy can also be traded as they have value there too (Madden was...although it's yet to determine if that was a zero return on investment or not yet). Brisbois is already a decent call-up/7th defenseman, and he didn't make the cut. On OJ...well he's likely getting his turn next year - whether he will sink or swim or get injured again is all understandable. Have said enough on him in the past ... haven't given up completely on him...but get that others have and definitely have lowered my expectations. Rafferty is ahead of him now and THN has actually been one of his bigger defenders over the years...
-
Well I guess pat yourself on the back..ha ha ..Yzerman faced some criticism picking him that high - it worked out for him so far for sure...next highest was TSN/Mckenzie at 15, ISS 17 etc etc.. THN had him 22....at the start of the year you'd be hard pressed to find much about him, on some top 100 lists but he flew up to be picked in the top ten - the WJ's was definitely his coming out party. Most on here wanted higher ranked Brobeg (the next Edler! Yeah!) even though he's a Lefty and really it's splitting hairs at that point - liked Seider too but was surprised to see him go that early with some sure thing forwards still on the board - including Podz...
-
For reference they have Hoglander about exactly where they had BB after he had played 9 NHL games scored some goals and won the Hobey Baker award ... that's very encouraging. He's a dynamic player and could be fighting for a spot as soon as next year as a teenager....great pick.
-
MD is #6. It's a testament to our depth that top ten regular Brisbois slipped out. Don't make the lists - it's an average of ten NHL scouts that make them - with the idea of how good their actual NHL careers will be - so not who is better then who at the moment otherwise Brisbois would definitely make the list and others would drop out....do you really thing Mike Diepetro is going to have a better career then the guys ahead of him? I have some serious doubts he will.
-
Liked him too given he was the top ranked RHD after Byram....that said he was nowhere near the top ten on any list and most had him in the low 20's as far as BPA. Without a strong WJ's he wouldn't have been noticed and likely available in the second round. Goes to show how things change and how hard it is to accurately project things....like a skinny kid in Sweden who went to OTT in the middle of the first round when it was all about who was better - Pouty Doughty or frail things Bogasian....I wouldn't at all have been disappointed if he was available and JB took him - was rather fond of RHD Bouchard the year before (ahl-all-star and most certainly joining the Oil next year - ranked 15 overall this year) ... that said I admit (so far and probably in the long haul) I was wrong and QH was the better pick...just glad it wasn't Boqvist.
-
I've subscribed for about 25 years now - haven't missed an issue and but a lot end up in the recycling eventually (keep maybe five years just to help my hockey pools, plus the special ones) and they've only been doing the best under 21 for maybe a decade. Used to be one prospect mag a year - then it was two and now it's three of 40 not including the draft. They've done a great job the past decade predicting what teams are on this rise based on their pools. It's pretty funny really they like to remind us readers when they get it right - and they even did that in a way with the introduction with JB (right?) this issue. First in the division for a lot of the season (what they said first page plus other nice things). Print media, outside of THN is hard to find now - aside from hockey pool magazines and the occasional SN rag so not sure what else your reading. I agree they don't ever get the order down right - but they are pretty close overall. The order is also very fluid as new guys often supplant the last year or two flavours of the month - see Kakko and J Hughes - and on this site a lot of fans were willing to sell the farm for them. Same with "the next Lidstrom" and the year before that Hirschier and Patrick. Funny that Detroit was blasted for taking Seider...but now he's rated 6th best prospect in the world ahead of some huge names from the same and previous drafts .... in other words it's a crapshoot. Despite all the modern tools it's the same as it ever was - just as many busts, surprises and sure things. JB looks to have found the best guys two drafts in a row despite slipping both times - QH was ranked 10 coming in behind his brother and Kakko - imagine if he did it again with Podz wouldn't that be a laugh....i figured we'd have slipped out of the top ten....we still have both quantity and quality..and we will absolutely need it. And it's always fun to read nice things about us, for a few years recently you just couldn't find it.
-
Everyone has their own viewpoint of course - i do too. It's interesting to see how the experts line things up and I'm a little biased towards the average of ten scouts (what THN does then reports) over some lists as their track record has been very good since they started this quite awhile ago. As of right now they are predicting (in no order) the Senators, NYR, Canucks and Avalanche to have the youngest and strongest cores in the league going forward ... had a lot of nice things to say about JB too saying his traditional approach to a rebuild has and will pay huge dividends over the scorched earth ones that are now in vogue (cap related). Accidentally or on purpose he's done a good job - and I'm stoked to see that the experts appreciate what we still have in the wings ... we will certainly need it.
-
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
Never doesn't go back very far for the first part. Bertuzzi, Linden, Mommesso, Smyl and a whole bunch of guys that shouldn't have been in the top six but were at times says differently. Also yes a great defenseman helps but a good one by committee has worked in the past too. I do get where your going with this but ... but we've also got a long way to go before we approach the 2010-2012 team .... and don't see any irony in it - we had some tough players then too. -
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
The difference in the 2011 final was we had no answer for Thomas. One of the most dominant goaltending I've ever seen in a playoffs and a final (he does hold the record for most shots against and saves in a final , and for the playoffs too). Only Roy's 93 playoffs was better. And we has exceptional goaltending too - how else does a series go to seven games scoring what - 8 goals? 1994. The difference in that series was a goal post and open net (Lafayette, Ronning). A couple goals separated the entire series - still get a little sick thinking about it. The point is either team could have won either of these series. But especially 94. Still considered the best final of the modern era (since expansion) and maybe we were the bridesmaids but we could still hold our heads high coming back from a 3-1 deficit etc...losing Bure one game was ridiculous. They changed the rule back after that. I'd say the luckier teams probably won both those cups. -
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
WD and TG would both have long careers if they lucked out coaching that team. Not saying AV wasn't good - he was - but let's be honest here he had the best team we've ever had with the best goalie we've ever had to work with. Quin was a better coach IMO - he'd be awesome in today's game where both tactics and a players coach matters the most. -
The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners
IBatch replied to whcanuck's topic in Canucks Talk
Same thing as guys like Iginla and Dionne...it happens doesn't take away from the fact they had great careers .... but I get what your saying.