dougieL

Sorry I didn't realize comparing stats on a per game basis, especially when one player played more games than the other, was moving the goalposts. BTW..."move the goal posts to decimals" is a pretty hilarious quote. I'm going to use that from now on in real life if you don't mind

And yet those 0.1 extra blocks per game, 0.03 hits per game, and 0.08 takeaways per game are so meaningful you had to use >>> and >> to emphasize their importance.

Right and I guess Murray Baron was a 2-way defenseman for the Canucks because he once scored 12 points in 81 games for them. Pretty sure preventing goals is a much bigger part of playing defense - still not sure why you said giveaways was the ONLY stat in Hughes' favor when Eriksson was -26 while Hughes was +15. Hughes also had a 5v5 goal differential of around +20 while Karlsson's was 0. Really? Giveaways was the ONLY stat in Hughes' favor? I guess you were too busy trying to say 1.1 >>> 0.91 blocks per game, 0.4 > 0.37 hits per game, and 0.99 >> 0.91 takeaways per game to notice other stats. Good job setting up the goalposts in the wrong part of the field

Pretty sure 5v5 goal differential and plus/minus are also heavily in Hughes' favor. I don't even know why you mention blocks and hits. They're not that type of defensemen. Is that your way of trying to claim that Karlsson played a shred of defense? And 90 is not substantially larger than 71 and 81 not substantially larger than 71 when it comes to blocks and hits, respectively, especially when Hughes played four fewer games. Karlsson had a wild year offensively (IPP anomalously high) while barely playing any defense, and the points are why he won the Norris. I'm pretty sure that doesn't necessarily make him more valuable or a better player than Hughes.

It disturbs me greatly that the Canucks were even in the mix to begin with.

I think Allvin mentioned in his presser a few days ago that he wants to beat teams with speed. If that's the case, Toffoli likely doesn't fit the mold. I've never been a big fan of Toffoli due to his lack of footspeed, even though he did put up the points when he was here (and whenever he played against us).

Assuming he hits UFA next summer, would you consider signing him, and if so, at what price/term? He could replace Myers assuming the price is right.

I wonder if either Tanev or Markstrom regret signing there and/or if Calgary regrets signing either of them.

I didn't say they complained.

Linden's "longer term" view started only after the Sedins retired. Funny how Linden failed to mention that.

Funny how they play Hughes and Demko into the ground to win meaningless games, then try to pay assets to move up in the draft.

This kind of proves that Green wasn't able to land a head coach job. Goes against everything the media was saying at the time about how highly regarded Green was around the league.

Did Allvin's notes mention anything about protection on the 2024 1st?

This is really well-said. Thank you.

People have already dug up my old Virtanen takes, and when they did, I happily admitted that they were wildly wrong and incredibly stupid. And feel free to say so - I imagine they look pretty funny in hindsight. My buddies still remind me of it from time to time and we laugh. But the difference is I didn't ridicule or belittle people for criticizing Virtanen.

That is pretty funny and kind of a good point

Not going to argue that Benning's time here was a complete and utter failure. But to be fair - the current main pillars of this team (Demko, Hughes, Pettersson, Miller) were all acquired under his watch. How much credit he gets for those players is of course open to debate.

Yeah I remember laughing at Arizona when they signed the original deal. Never in my life did I think it would end up on our books. I was stunned beyond belief when the Canucks made this trade.

I agree with everything you said. But Benning did said himself that they convinced him to add the second round pick to complete the deal. I just get tired of the Sedins being viewed as legends beyond reproach. I feel there must be some acknowledgement of the role they have played in the current state of the team (both good and bad).

There were people here who began ridiculing and belittling criticisms of OEL. I'm wondering how they view their comments in light of recent developments.

This is really getting hilarious and quite entertaining. Your "logic" excludes the possibility that management just thinks OEL is a massive waste of cap space, injured or not. And in which one of your responses below do you qualify that only a healthy OEL is not a problem? According to you, he was not healthy in November 2022, and so by your own "logic", he should have been a problem.

The cap hit still remains at 7.26 and he still has a no move clause. And his play is likely to have declined even more by then.

OEL has a no move clause - I really doubt we could have traded him at any point in his contract. And even if we could, think about what assets we need to give up to unload him. A buyout later into his contract would not have nearly the cap savings that we get with a buyout this summer.

Uh no - review your logic. You said "the only way a buyout makes sense, is if the team feels his ankle was never going to return to form." This in itself is a presumption that you know the only condition under which management would execute a buyout. Are you privy to that piece of information? Back in November, you ridiculed someone for suggesting the possibility of a buyout which happened 7 months later, and you flippantly told me without qualification or justification that OEL was not a problem. Now you're trying to cover with further mental gymnastics - I'm impressed how willing you are to keep digging deeper into the canyon you're already in