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

JM_

Members
  • Posts

    52,426
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    104

Everything posted by JM_

  1. it very well could. Tonight e.g., were facing a team thats lost 5... which always sucks since they'll be hungry and of course the usual ref game management. Start things off with a loss and I can see this fragile group not doing well. It sucks to watch, but it is what it is. I'm happy they tried giving it another run, but I just don't see how this gets fixed unless our 1st is on the table which it had better not be.
  2. tone down yourself. You see it as hyperbole, etc. I see it as reality. Your path is extremely unlikely imo, based on the fact that we're never seen a series of trades go down in team history like you are suggesting.
  3. sure, particularly that move for a 1RHD should be easy street.
  4. it would probably have to be an audio book, he's called Gabby for a reason.
  5. unless JR is priming the market for some big changes.
  6. yeah no kidding. It not fantasy hockey where all deals are possible.
  7. cap would be the bigger problem, again kind of back to Boeser imo.
  8. all its going to take is the best 4-5 series of trades in Canucks history to fix.
  9. 11 months and we're ready to show Rutherford the door :lol: we're a tough audience. 

  10. sure but what good does that do moving forward? we have to cut the cord with the past mistakes and look at what we can do now.
  11. I don't know if its quite that simple tho. We did need more speed and PK ability so Mikheyev fits that bill. Kuzemko was essentially free. There wasn't a great selection of D in UFA in 2022 for us, I mean did we really want to pay Chiarot 5 mil? Its not like we let the ideal Hughes partner slip away. People have suggested we should have just let Brock go to free agency to have cap space for a move for a guy like Marino. Might be some truth to that.
  12. IF they trade some of that F depth into a better d group, then its all good. Will we see that?
  13. other than burning another 1st for the same results, sure.
  14. fair point. There just may be too many things to fix. We're not in an era where its easy to make trades, and we'd need to make 3 or 4 really excellent ones to right this thing. Oh and not burn the future doing it too. Just don't see this happening.
  15. but Linden's re-tool failed before he suggested the tear down. Who knows tho, it may have been the right time.
  16. hey maybe we'll get lucky and have a goalie controversy too.
  17. interesting.... good take by Bruce to try to leverage JR's comments.
  18. and sometimes they work extremely well. I have zero faith that this mgmt team can thread the needle with a series of brilliant trades that fix everything. When's the last time we even saw one trade that had a significant positive impact on this team? Luongo? Why would we expect that we can see 3 or 4 hockey trades now, when we have rarely seen one thats had a lasting positive impact in the last 10+ years?
  19. but if our current roster player aren't valuable as you say, how do we make those significant hockey trades?
  20. that doesn't matter, and is also a bad reason not to tank. We're too shitty to tank? You get your elite players from your own picks, every other return adds to the depth to whatever degree additional picks and prospects work out.
  21. if we do end up in tear it down mode, I can see something along the lines of a shorter bad contact + pick back for Brock, something along those lines. If a team can shed a problem that certainly helps us on the return side. yep. If we go tank mode really it should be very easy to make deals for all these guys. Rutherford seems to be heading into some serious old dude anger, so who knows what he's thinking, I wouldn't be surprised at anything right now.
  22. It's really interesting to see the effect the cancel culture boogeyman videos have had on some folks. It's dulled their ability to have compassion for the right person.
×
×
  • Create New...