Gawdzukes
-
Posts
8,241 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Gawdzukes
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, shiznak said:It isn’t, but it gives you in an unbiased view of a player.
People suggesting Soucy is a better fit in our top 4, when neither players has ever played in the top 4 throughout their careers. Every micro/advance stats in the book suggests Burroughs is an equal player.
I actually do watch both players. I’m curious to see why people think Soucy is a better fit on our top 4? While providing hard evidence.
Not “you just need to watch them play”.
I see Soucy stepping up physically, being in control, and very hard to play against. He provides positive value more often than not when he's on the ice and helps create offence. I see Burroughs try hard but he's always a step behind and has a lot of trouble making good hockey IQ plays. As a result we end up scored on or running around in our own end half of the game. Burroughs adds nothing offensively or towards tilting the ice in our favor.
Soucy has a far better understanding of time and space and what he himself is able to accomplish without doing too much. He understands his limitations, is confident, and he has over 250 games of experience to Burroughs 95. Burroughs looks like a kid in the candy store just happy to be out there playing. In addition, he probably got into 30 games this year simply due to us not having any other options.
It seemed to me Soucy took on a tonne more responsibility in Seattle, and Minny, and played in top 4 situations all the time, where as Burroughs was a guy forced into the line-up that played when there were no other options.
It seems blatantly obvious to me if you watch them play who I would choose. Not to take anything away from Burroughs. I love his attitude and compete. Soucy is just a far better, more well rounded player, with size. Again, stats are extremely limited and that's why they are no substitute for watching the games. This is a good example of that if indeed their stats are equal.
Edit: The biggest problem with stat watching is that for the most part they don't actually measure what people claim they do. For example sometimes letting the other team take control of the puck and reversing pressure is more advantageous than trying to waltz your way through the opposition and getting stripped as the last man back. Yet it gets recorded as a negative. Other times they call a shot on goal a high danger chance when in fact the player was tied up and had zero chance of scoring. Until they actually break down every play and analyze it on it's own merits the cumulative results we see now are overly simplistic and often not representative, and therefore pretty useless. NHL teams actually keep track of more detailed stuff like this and don't use the simple advanced stats we as fans have access to. As a fan who watches the games this is basically what we're doing by keeping our own more detailed, more meaningful statistical analysis.
https://thehockeynews.com/news/secret-formula-analytics-in-the-nhl
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
10 minutes ago, IBatch said:
Wasn't saying we should sign Reaves, and have been vocal about that in the past. It just goes to show how GMs value this sort of thing still. Marroon was also a guy who prolonged his career (better player for sure) because of a lack of this sort of thing overall now. I'd rather give a young guy like Gadj as shot.
Also wasn't opposed to signing Lucic to a one year min contract or thereabouts - Boston didn't mind either, but also said back when he was getting started, he wasn't nearly as good as people think, just picked his spots. Gino and half the enforcers in his era would have beat him badly. Got burned for saying that - then Orr made him cry,
Reaves is garden variety if he played in the 90's and 2000's. At best. Wilson acting like an idiot picking up and smashing Panarin to the ice. He crossed a line for sure. And should have had some retribution but didn't. Like it or not Gawdzukes, when it comes to the post season, who in the heck, is going to stop anyone from running Demko, EP or QHs? Nobody. At least we got some size now. But we aren't going to intimidate or stop anyone from roughing up our stars either. We haven't had that ability since the early 2000's.
Sucks growing up watching hockey, and not getting pushed around (80's-90's). When we got Jovo, he was a smallish D on our team lol. Like it or not, the few guys who still can do this and do it well (and it's for sure not "well" it's just the best today) are still coveted by GM's. Not hard to imagine why given their age.Teams will still decide whom they will target come the post-season (something we haven't even managed yet), and take them out of the series. Tell me, who on this team, exactly, is going to stop that from happening IF we even get there? Sure wasn't Horvat, skates away from every scrum. Maybe Tochett can become a player coach or Foote. Who was never a fighter. But today would probably be a top ten one in this league. Clifford lol. Not a scary guy. He's still getting deals because at least he was a willing combatant. Same with Guddy and his two fights a year.
Ah yes. This makes a lot of sense. I agree for the most part, I long for the days when we had Murzyn, Diduck, Gino, Linden, Momesso, Brashear, etc. Even a guy like Gus Adams played hard and heavy, Courtnall and Bure too. I get what you're saying now. I always appreciate your deeper understanding of hockey past ... kudos to your memory on a lot of these things ... across the entire league as well. You are a wealth of knowledge.
For myself I like Maroon, and also a guy like Perry, or Kolesar, Kostin, Carrier, Lomberg, this year. Those guys actually know how to play hockey and deter the other team where as Reeves doesn't. He was only effective against teams who lost their composure. Even Lucic is a far better player and contributes to the game outside of the rough and tumble. Personally I think Gadj is in the Reeves category myself so we differ on that one. Very little to add hockey wise he's just a total pylon out there waiting for his 2 minutes of glory every 12-18 games.
I wish we had another pick and had a guy like Barlow (maybe) in the pipeline. These types of players are far more effective when they can play hockey too. Agree though, we need to find this type of element but it's more of a finishing move on our team at this point. Miss the good old days.
Cheers!
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, 5nothincanucksohno said:
The Canuck teams he played on definitely could have been a lot better but I look more at the inconsistency and repeated slow starts to seasons. The teams lacked focus and cohesiveness. Ultimately it was the right move to trade him, it was time for a change. Hopefully EP and QH can bring that focus to the group.
I think it's also a reflection of just how poor the management group was. With the state of the team and lack of quality they should have brought in a veteran to lead an otherwise young team. Not thrust it upon a kid who was going through his own challenges hockey wise (skating, scoring, etc.). Now Bo didn't grab the bull by the horns and lead them to greatness but like @spook007 said, in all fairness I don't think that was all his fault. A very poor decision from management imo.
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, shiznak said:
I don’t see how Soucy is a borderline top 4B/5A, when analytically he and Burroughs has the same statistics, defensively. Soucy also has never played in the top 4 in either Minnesota or Seattle averaging 30 seconds per game against elite competition in his career. While Burroughs averages about the same as Soucy (he actually averages .02 seconds higher), in his short NHL career.
If you compare both players on natural stat trick, this season. They pretty much have an identical advance stats, with Soucy being the better offensive defensemen.
I think you need to spend some time watching hockey games. The difference is night and day if you watch them. Stats don't tell the whole story ... they don't even tell half the story.
What @aGENT said is completely obvious if you've watched both players for any amount of time.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:
Yes, he can live in sunny California and play with Leo Carlsson...
You add Nylander to that team and they'll be competitive within 2 years. They have the potential to get good quick with a lot of quality prospects at top positions. Obviously they have to actually do it but they are in a good position.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, IBatch said:
Allvin called EP a "top 15 player in this league" .... so he will get paid like one. Yes that means 11.5 x 8 or something like that. He's done it once. There will be an expectation, that he can keep it up. Personally feel he can rattle off another 5 or so 100 plus point seasons in a row, and end up leading the Canucks all-time if he plays 8 more seasons with us after this one, and doesn't get injured. Glad Allvin understands the team needs to get bigger. Hope he also understands the value of a guy like Reaves. EPs longevity could depend on that somewhat, especially come playoff time.
Does Reaves ever do anything in the playoffs though ... except for the one (fake) year the Canucks let him get in their heads Ferland style? Better teams than ours show if you ignore him he has nothing else to give and dissapears.
With the Wild having a smaller team, many have wanted Minnesota to employ an enforcer like Reaves for years. The Wild got a Reaves-type in Nic Deslauriers, which ended up working out poorly. Maybe it was just because they got the Shasta version of Reaves. This time Guerin traded for Coca-Cola Classic. Reaves' reputation for being a deterrent was so great that few in the NHL were even brave enough to take them on. The thinking was, if opponents didn't want to answer to Reaves, they'd be on their best behavior.
That demonstrably did not work out.
6-foot-7 giant Logan Stanley fell on 5-foot-9 Kirill Kaprizov, taking him out for weeks and reducing his effectiveness in the playoffs. Reaves' response? Nothing. He didn't deter Stanley from touching their superstar, and he didn't dish out any consequence for doing so.
This continued in the playoffs, where Reaves was helpless to stop the Dallas Stars from taking liberties with the Wild throughout their six-game set. This includes Ryan Suter in particular hacking away at Kaprizov with such intensity that you'd have thought the Russian superstar said something truly awful, like that Suter should play on the second power play unit.
The idea is that giant, physical players like Reaves are what get you through the playoffs. The Wild played the gritty identity that they wanted, with Reaves being a key part of that, and the result was the same: Out in the first round, in the same six games the skilled, high-flying Wild of 2021-22.
And again, if he's not that deterrent for other teams, and definitely not that in the playoffs at age-36, how is that going to be better at 37, let alone 39?
Pretty useless in my books. I remember watching a playoff series after he destroyed us in 2019 and getting ready to watch him unleash the terror. Eventually even the announcers were making fun of how ineffective and useless he was as long as you don't get mixed up in his antics.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Tower102 said:
Agreed. Top players like Hughes and Hronek can carry players, plus they can both play to full potential with the freedom of having a defensive guy beside them opposed to each other. Hronek and Hughes can still pair at times as well. Plus I'd rather 45-50 minutes of Hughes or Hronek on the ice than 25. It also allows us to shelter the 3rd pairing even more.
I like Hronek quite a bit but elevating him to Hughes level is a bit much. I'm not saying directly you are doing this but I'm seeing this more and more. Let's see what Hronek is for us before deciding we only need two D.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:
I have a feeling that Foote and Gonchar are going to mold this defense into something far better than what fans have been used to.
If they can beat
then yes
Maybe some sticky Mozza D.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, EdgarM said:
Ok that makes sense. You are right, no matter who they bring in, its not going to make Marner and Co. any tougher. Their core group just doesn't look like they are built for playoff hockey, period.
I don't think we are either but it seems lately we are moving in the right direction. Our latest acquisitions all are not afraid to lay the body if the opportunity arises and play a physical game if it goes that way at some point.
I noticed Vegas was able to play a physical game without taking too many penalties, an ideal way to play in the playoffs IMO.
Reaves is 36 I think. Who knows maybe he adds that harder to play against style in the playoffs, but can he play the minutes? Vegas seemed to blend just enough skill to go with toughness. I think we're a couple of those players away in our top6/top 9 but our identity is forming and we're getting there.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, EdgarM said:
I am not sure what your argument is Fighting has never been key as Goons usually spent very little time playing playoff hockey over the years. Its the ability to withstand and answer to agressive physical play from your opponent, which is important. We had no answer for the Bruins in 2011 or Ferlund back in the 2016 playoffs?
Toronto probably realized they had no answer for Tkachuk and Bennett. Marner and Matthews is a missmatch, and is not going to protect themselves, let alone anyone else on their team.
Vegas had Kolesar and had their stars like Pietrangelo stick up for themselves.
Vegas was able to nullify Tkachuk, Toronto? Not so much.
I think its a matter of having the right tools on your team to deal with whatever your opponent throws at you. You are not always going to encounter a "Tkachuk/Ferlund" , but you better be ready to deal with them, in case you do.
The whole gist of the post I was replying to was about fighting in hockey in which I pointed out it's not really a deterrent anymore. Yeah we definitely need to be able to win the physical fight player vs player or you're not going to win in the NHL. We really need to have some more toughness/aggressiveness throughout our roster. No question about it. I don't really think Reaves is the answer. If you don't engage Reaves and force him to play hockey he is very ineffective. I don't think he is going to change anything there.
-
4 hours ago, Fanuck said:
On the offensive side of the puck what impresses is his constant changing of angles to confuse defending wingers/goalies and patience to wait for plays to develop and traffic to establish in front of the net - he rarely just chucks it on net hoping for something to happen, he's making attempts on net only with a plan in mind.
On the d side of the puck he's excellent at angling forwards away from high danger areas and disrupting plays before lines can establish anything in the o-zone.
If he develops at the next level he's going be a steal for us. We should have a really good sense of where he's at developmentally in the NCAA next season as opposed to guessing about his development from playing sporadic shifts in a Swedish men's league.
Good eye and props to you for mentioning it. I've noticed this as well.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, rekker said:
100 percent. If you put yourself out of position to make a hit, it's selfish and costly. Need to know when to stick check, when to angle, when to get in the way, and when to light someone up. All totally different plays at different times.
Schenn was so slow. I like our signings way better. It's nice to have a frequent and heavy hitter ... but at what cost? Schenn is a good 6/7 guy at this point in his career not playing every game. Like you said the quality of the hits is probably far more important than the #. A lot means you're doing a lot of chasing.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, IBatch said:
That usually took a Probert/Kocur combo. So many ex NHLers have said, having those types of guys around allowed them to play without the fear of reprisal. Chara, McQuaid and Thornton did this for Boston, why pukes like Marchand just do whatever they want. No superstar in the history of the game, had to put up with what Crosby did at the start of his career (Gillies and a lot of other ex NHLers, Roenick, Brett Hull have said removing the enforcer is going to shorten careers, Crosby almost lost his before it begun and no way would that ever happen to Gretzky or Hull when they played). Hull talked about Kelly Chase and Twist while in St. Louis. Gretzky wouldn't go to LA without his bodyguard. Roenick said when they signed Probert "it just made everyone on the bench feel two feet taller".
Things have toned down, and are a lot tamer. But that part of the game still matters. Why I was so pissed when we waived Gadj after a super strong camp (he also had the "fight of the year" last season on hockeyfights.com for those that keep up with this sort of thing). Zach Mcewen wasn't hurting us on the fourth line either. Teams need guys like that. It's also why Reaves at 36 just got what was it? A two or 3 year deal.
The pack mentality takes a certain type of guys. Vegas lol, 18 Canadians and two US players on their roster. They sure knew what the heck they were doing when they built that roster.
As players and coaches grew smarter it became unanimously realized that adhering to the old fighting code was detrimental to winning hockey games. Nowadays players just skate away instead of engaging and all of the sudden fighting is borderline useless. Both Gadj and MacEwen are both pretty useless throwbacks who are terrible at using their teammates to create plays. I personally was fine with losing both. MacEwen had an uncanny way of gaining the puck through the neutral zone but so frustratingly individualistic, couldn't pass to his teammates for anything so very one dimensional player in my mind. He had only 1 assist in half of his NHL seasons.
It was no wonder both played on bad hockey teams.
I think Toronto is showing their desperation with Reeves and just taking a wildly hopeful stab that he fixes their weaknesses. I doubt it works myself.
-
6 minutes ago, aGENT said:
Better offensively, yes. A little less face off prowess and PK ability, probably going to require more cap and term than Blueger (unless he "Klingberg's" himself). Which would all probably be more of a roadblock to Raty.
But for the right price (if we had cap), we could easily use both (or Blueger + Sundqvist).
I think I would rather have Blueger than Suter tbh. Sundqvist has size but I'm not sold on us having to upgrade there unless it's a definite upgrade. If the cap space comes then sure but how long is an issue too.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, aGENT said:
Pius Suter is still available as UFA, as is Sundqvist AFAIK.
Hard to say if there are any 3C available via trade... Maybe Goodrow off the Rangers given they're tight to the cap. But so are we now so that makes that a tougher trade now.
Is Suter that much better than Blueger though? I confess I haven't seen him much. 24 points, 5'11", 175 lbs. The key with Blueger is his defensive acumen. I would wonder why they didn't just sign one of these other guys instead though if that was the intention. We already have Aman ... it doesn't seem to be a wise decision to throw $1.9 in random cap at Blueger without a set position to play and already a surplus of players.
-
4 minutes ago, aGENT said:
Yup. By all means if Pesce being available is true, we should certainly be looking hard at it, but no, if we don't address a long term solution for Hughes partner and a better 3C until next year, (maybe even Raty at 3C) it's not the end of the world. No this team isn't probably getting COMPLETELY fixed in this one off season. Hell maybe Pesce even makes it to UFA and we get him here next year, with no asset loss.
And yes, with Myers, Beau, Pearson coming off, we should be able to address some of these things/redeploy that cap more efficiently, and to better fitting pieces.
I think at this point our 2024 first should possibly be on the table for something like that or better. We just need to hope/wait for that winger trade to hopefully happen somehow ... hopefully without giving up anything substantial. What a difference though.
Hughes Pesce
Cole Hronek
Soucy Myers/Johansson/UFA/Woo
D.Petey/Willander/Mynio/Brzustewicz in the pipe ... now that's what a defence and a prospect pipeline looks like Mr. Jimmy. Good/capable players on the big club that compliment each other, and good prospects at each position, with a succession plan that doesn't completely neglect one side of the ice. Finally, this is what it feels like to be whole again.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:
0% as in he is in the 0th percentile. Just like someone had to be the best, someone had to be the worst. It's no secret that he and Karlsson are the worst defenders in the league. Their upside comes from driving offensive play and generating scoring chances. Why does it bother you that much? If you've watched either player this year, you'll be able to tell right away that they don't defend.
I know they are both very offensively orientated, aren't overly currently committed to defence, and Karlsson plays like a 4th forward at times. I don't need a number to tell me that though and not sure how I should interpret a 0% or what that says to anyone. I'm also not sure they are the worst defenders in the league either. I would rather have one of them than Myers, Bear, or Stillman. Is there a number that tells you when they are good at defending or should a person just base all hockey decisions on the higher WAR # through comparison between two players?
It doesn't really bother me all that much I just find them so useless they're misleading and silly. Kind of a crutch for people that don't watch or don't have the experience to interpret/describe what they're seeing. I won't comment on them any more though.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:
Ignorant people on Twitter making sexist comments about this. Ugh.
LaCombe is a respected, up and coming skating and skills coach in the hockey world. And she’s also an accomplished former player. She’s worked with NHL players, including some big names (like Bobby Ryan). Having her at this camp is a good get for the organization. She knows her stuff and she’ll help these young players.
Kudos to the Canucks for bringing her in as a guest coach.
I haven't seen these comments but that's disgusting. I'd love to see these clowns out there on skates and then have this conversation. Kudos indeed!
-
1
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:
F Yeah
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, aGENT said:
I mean we've had NHL level D men...our biggest problem has been how ill fitting they were, how redundant their skill sets were etc. Good players =/= good team.
It's like the people that keep suggesting we add Dumba... good player or not, he simply doesn't represent a skill set/tool box that we need. He'd be another, redundant skill set, small D that we don't have a partner for to get the most out of him, or the players already on the roster. He's an older, broken down version of Hronek, whom we already have.
I get the "Cole/Soucy playing above their ideal ability" comments/concerns, but it's ignoring what the existing, very good players in Hughes/Hronek actually need for complementary partners. And this wasn't likely getting fixed all in one offseason here. Sure ideally we trade for a Pesce or similar, and eventually bump Cole and Soucy down a pair. That'd be a hell of a lot closer to a contending D than what we've been playing with, or even the improvements they've made so far this offseason. But complaining about the improvements is letting perfection be the enemy of good IMO.
Good post all around but I think the big takeaway is where you mention that our needs were probably not all getting fixed in one year. We've addressed some major size concerns, PK concerns, and compatibility issues. Now it's time to see how improved we are, how effective these moves are and what the next steps should be. I'm pretty much happy even if they don't do anything else all summer. I've always been of the stance that our true contention begins once Myers is gone and his money redeployed ... so this year is a good test run for next year where we should be close to icing our best team in probably a decade in 2024/25. Imo we have this year and next offseason to fill that top RD spot beside QH, and to fill the 3C moving forward.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:
I don't mind an "organic" fight, where guys who hack and whack and clutch and grab on each other in the corners and on the walls finally say, "f**k this, you're being an a-hole, let's go". What I do mind are fighting for the sake of fighting (ie. staged fights) hoping to "turn the momentum", as well as those people that pick a fight for any perceived slight (such as when a teammate is legally laid out - ie. clean hit or hit for their own stupidity/inattention). No guarantees that your selfish action will turn the momentum, you risk getting an instigator penalty and possibly being thrown out, and you cause your team to be short on personnel if the refs choose to assess the extra penalty to you.
You won't be contributing from the penalty box, no matter how people try to spin it, because unless you're on the ice, you're not going to be scoring or preventing scoring. You also won't be protecting anyone from the penalty box - or worse, from the press box if you get a multi-game suspension.
If you want a real deterrent, get your fellow teammates to play harder and tougher; learn how to take a hit, and even better, learn how to dish one. Legally, of course. And score when you've got the man advantage. Or even when you don't - the socre is the only part of the game that matters in the end.
Couldn't agree more. Natural fights that break out are good for the game, they add entertainment and keep everyone honest. I absolutely detest fighting because someone made a good hit. It's cowardice to the extreme in my books. One has to look no further than the playoffs when fighting completely disappears. It's not a helpful tool towards winning games.
Making hard hits, finishing your checks, and pushing back is what helps winning, not a couple goons dancing on skates.
-
2
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, kloubek said:
With Pearson being ready for camp, I feel it's we'd be better off moving one of our top-six capable wingers in return for a true 3C who can do it all - then move Blueger down to the 4th. And personally, I believe we'd be best off selling high on Beauvillier to make that happen:
Kuz Petey Mik
Garland Miller Boeser
PDG Colton/Sturm Podz
Hoglander Blueger Joshua
Studnika, Dries, Aman
Hughes Soucy
Cole HronekHirose/Wolanin Myers
I'm not necessarily saying we should be actually acquiring either Colton or Sturm - only that those are the kind of guys I think we should be generally targeting.
Yeah that's the hope. A real possibility our glut of wingers are untradeable without a sweetener. If that's the case I'm happy to roll with Blueger. Who out there is even available ... I'm not seeing a real viable path to getting a better 3C. Sturm is quite good at face-offs as well but is he that much better than Blueger? 26 points and a bigger body ... is that really that much of an upgrade. I think I would almost prefer Blueger and his defensive acumen. Seems a bit redundant.
Colton has already been signed by someone hasn't he? I would say at this point we have made some significant upgrades ... maybe it's time to chill and see how the year goes before trying to do too much and end up trying to undo things we just did.
-
14 hours ago, Bob.Loblaw said:
He's started a cult of haters
I think this one accurately reflects the type of player Klingberg is. The extreme numbers always do.
O% defence from a defenceman that played 67 games in the NHL? Yeah right. I know Klingberg isn't the best but this chart tells hockey people absolutely nothing except maybe this player is not as good as some of his peers. Maybe ... I guess possibly, it's pretty generically useless.
Obviously the method is horribly flawed and lacking in any relevant description of the player except to maybe for 5 year old. But why would a 5 year old that doesn't understand hockey be looking at a JFresh card in the first place? Why don't you explain to us in detail everything this tells us about Klingberg and how you read this card? Like a lot of these flawed advanced stats they attempt to take really simplistic stats (which aren't even gathered uniformly) and try to bend them into something else. Most of these numbers don't actually measure what they are represented to. Like high danger chances they count everything in close or to the sides of the net, or when the goalie moves from side to side. However lots of those chances are not high danger in reality.
-
1 hour ago, kloubek said:
Yeah, I agree. He may benefit from more ice time, but I think he was signed more for his PK ability than his offensive ability. Which would have been great as a 4th line C, but not so much a 3rd line C. And if he doesn't produce in that position, I really don't know who we'd end up putting as 3c. Joshua may be more effective as a winger, and he's not really 3rd line material. Aman I'm not sold on (at all). Maybe they went with a stop-gap for this year, and are expecting Raty to develop well enough to slot into the 3C next year? Not really sure what the plan is....
I think with Blueger, we have enough guys that can cover the spot. I am willing to go with Teddy and play the third line as a shutdown line. Lines 1 and 2 can play a lot and suck up all the offensive opportunities. We can always hope we dump a winger for a better 3C but I think the team is basically set now. Vast improvement over Dries, or Studnicka. We will also have Raty in the wings.
-
1
-
Cheers!
then yes
It was no wonder both played on bad hockey teams.
Obviously the method is horribly flawed and lacking in any relevant description of the player except to maybe for 5 year old. But why would a 5 year old that doesn't understand hockey be looking at a JFresh card in the first place?
[Signing] Canucks sign Carson Soucy
in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Posted
Exactly, I love a feel good story too and a great kid like Burroughs. However the choice between these two guys is blatantly obvious. One guy is struggling just to have NHL relevancy and we saw it for 48 games last year. He shouldn't even be getting top 6 minutes with a team who has playoff aspirations. He is lucky SJ is going full tank and he got some long-term security.