.png.756a9ada1eb34a3c08ae730fcca20a8c.png)
.png.fbb382d159ca9ef9a17f0f3f647e8605.png)
Patel Bure
-
Posts
3,904 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Patel Bure
-
-
3 minutes ago, Odjick 4 Premier said:
Even if trading him rebuilds the right side of the defence and brings in a young 3C ?
I’d only consider moving Horvat for a very elite prospect (ie Noah Dobson, Braden Schneider, etc.).
I was seriously contemplating the idea of moving both Horvat and Miller about 8-10 days ago but I’ve had a change of heart. I want the Canucks to continue competing hard with their current core players under Bruce Boudreau, and set the tone for next year. If the Canucks are still struggling by the time the 2023 trade deadline rolls around, THEN we explore options for moving Horvat et al.
Keep the core for now and let’s see how we do with Boudreau.
-
2
-
-
This is the one rare moment where I will agree with Thomas Drance.
Joe Sakic is arguably the best GM in the game right now (Yzerman being the other), and McFarland has had the opportunity to work alongside Sakic since 2015.
If MacFarland has learned well from Sakic, then we could be in extremely good hands.
-
A big hell no to moving Horvat.
-
3
-
-
12 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:
Have I mentioned that I effing love Boudreau already?
This guy could be a godsend for us.
WHY WASN'T GREEN DOING THIS KIND OF STUFF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:
You should probably be more gracious in defeat. It's a really bad look my dude.
#trollolololol
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:
True, but you can manipulate numbers to all kinds of spins. You could say we're 3/4 in our last four, you could say we're 4-6 in our last ten, you could say we're 5-15 in our last fifteen. And on and on.
You can only play the teams in front of you, you're right. Boudreau's brought a lot of optimism and positivity, we looked better last night. Right. Things can improve, things can shape up. Right.
But skepticism is absolutely still warranted, and our missing out is still the most realistic and likely result. One can simultaneously have hope for the future, while still have low expectations for the remainder of the season. A lot of folks who veer along that way of thinking can be deemed "negative", and maybe some are, but I don't think it's so cut and try. Not that I'm lumping you in with any of that of course. Some folks get off on being right about things always being $&!#, but there are also a lot of folks who'd happily be wrong if things exceed expectations.
I hear ya.
When you’ve been struggling and you’re trying to pick yourself off the mat however, you try and build on any positive that’s out there. So for us, the Canucks should absolutely be trying to draw inspiration from their 3 out of 4 stretch while feeling good about their new style of hockey that they implemented against the Kings. If they defeat the Bruins in the next game, then they absolutely have a right to start feeling positive about possibly clawing back.
-
2 hours ago, BlakeQuinnAndEggs said:
To be fair a lot of users have been around longer than their account says.
Many around here have had multiple accounts
If you want to talk old school, I’ve been around since the rival.com days of 2000. Was also a part of the now defunct Canuckscentral.com
-
1 minute ago, Coconuts said:
Sure, but when you consider the context we beat two of the very few teams lower than us in the standings and won during our new coach's debut. Wins? Yes. Positive? Yes. Impressive? Not when you consider the context.
3/4 ain't cut and dry.
You can only play the teams in front of you. 3 of 4 is still 3 of 4. The Kings are also a middle of the road team and we saw a lot of positives from last night. Yes it’s *way* too early to be talking about the playoffs, but Boudreau’s plan of “winning” each week also made a lot of sense. Lots of short term goals and then the big picture can shape up.
-
3 hours ago, JohnTavares said:
I joined the board in 2006. You probably weren't even alive yet.
Go do your homework bud. Mommy's calling.
So.....why did you choose to use “JohnTavares” as your handle nick as a self proclaimed Canucks fan? Please explain yourself. 15 year olds like myself am interested to hear your explanation.
-
2 hours ago, JayDangles said:
Not negative, just realistic. The first sentence in the OP basically starts with "I know we only won 1 game". Yet somehow we are talking playoffs? there are 31 other teams that have also won at least 1 game and given our record we have less chance of making the playoffs than 28 of them.
As someone else said, lets get to .500 then we can start talking about playoff chances. jeepers peopleWith respect to the OP, we’ve won 3 of our last 4 games.
-
3 hours ago, kanucks25 said:
I rather cheer on my team than cheer against my fellow fans.
With respect, that really remains to be seen. Even the other day, you mentioned that “to the victor goes the spoils”.......implying that you were somehow “victorious” because you predicted that the Canucks would fail. You felt compelled to say “I told you so” to those that dared to support both Benning and the Canucks. With all due respect, your behavior heavily infers that you would rather cheer against your fellow fans than cheer on your team. In this respect, you are absolutely no different than HFCanucks, Thomas Drance, JD Burke, and any other members of our toxic media and their minions (HFCanucks).
-
1
-
-
What about the assistant GM’s in Colorado (MacFarland) or Carolina?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:
Weisbrod - a corporate rat.
Interesting, in the Aqauman presser where he tried to dispel the meddling rumour ? Not sure, how the topic got brought up but it seems to be something Aquman wanted to clarify; perhaps, he or someone close are roaming, the various blog sites to get a feel for the fans ?
I believe Aqua when he said that. Guys like Thomas Drance and JD Burke are cancers and menaces to the Canucks hockey community and they were the ones that started the "meddling ownership" nonsense. My only beef with the Aqua's is that when Gillis wanted to start the rebuild in 2012 and sell our top players while their values were high, ownership told Gillis that they didn't support his vision.
-
- Popular Post
Just now, EddieVedder said:Yea man. I dont know why but when i saw walker back there i just felt like this team was in good hands. When i saw the clips of rj, smyl and the sedins you just knew the direction of organization would change for the better.
You need good character guys to lead you. I liked benning but Something about weisbroad just put me off.
Weisbrod always came across as a bit of a snake in the grass to me. Was never sold on Weisbrod.
But man - I'm just listening to the Bruce boudreau introductory press conference right now and man!...........what a breath of fresh air. So personable and forthcoming. I'm getting a really good feeling about this guy.
-
2
-
3
-
- Popular Post
One low key happy moment for me is seeing Scott Walker back with us.
Loved him as a player when he played for us during the 90's.
-
6
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
32 minutes ago, PunjabiCanucks said:
Now I know we just won 1 game and I know it doesn't mean a whole lot just yet.
Bruce Boudreau mentioned winning 2 of 3 games a week as a positive sign to making it into the playoffs....
In recent history the minimum amount of points needed have ranged from 87 to 97 points, with an average of 92.6 points or a 0.565 point percentage.
----
Currently we have 20 points over 26 games, meaning we need ideally 73 points over the last 56 games. Equivalent to a .652 point percentage or for example 35 - 18 - 3 record
Almost a 2 wins for 1 loss as Bruce mentioned... now is it possible. Ideally we should aim for the higher end, trying to win divisional games as they are 4 point nights and against the Central division incase of a wild card race.
St. Louis Blue's did a complete turn around to make the playoffs and win the cup. Now I'm not saying we win the cup, but are playoffs feasible?
What are your predictions for point percentage for the last 56 games this season.
Currently 9 teams of the 32 have played .652 point percentage hockey over the first 22-26 games. Can we pull it off? Or is to game over?
Personally, as much as I hope and pray unless we improve our PK and PP drastically we miss the playoffs...
Just doing the math, I think a 35-18-3 record over these next 56 games would require us to win 5 out of every 8 games on average I believe. Nucks should just focus on playing high quality hockey one game at a time and not worry about the standings for now.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Angry Goose said:
thank you so much for your informative contribution
He’s a troll from HFCanucks who is basically only here to tell Benning supporters that “they told us so” (with regards to the Canucks falling this season). The truly funny thing is that outside of our PK, they got every single reason wrong as to why we would struggle this season. Respond to humor him but take what he says with a massive grain of salt. Him, @AV.and @JohnTavares are only here to start trouble.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, kanucks25 said:
Wow look at all these haters in this thread. So negative.
Would have been interesting to see what your response would have been had Benning still been the GM. :-/.
In all seriousness, I agree with most others in this thread that it’s just one game so far. Let’s get back to .500 and then go from there. Typically, teams that make the playoffs are about 9-10 games over .500. The Canucks should focus on playing high quality hockey night in night out and Atleast set the tone and infrastructure for next season in a worst case scenario.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:
Go right ahead.. it's a team that took 8 years to build and your best hope is it can claw back to .500? You're right. BENNING BUILT THIS TEAM. Lol
Just curious - which team and GM do you idolize in terms of a team that “rebuilt the right way” and became an elite team in record time? Go Ahead....reveal this team to us.
After that, I would like you to do a playoff history search on said team and see how long it took for said team to become really good.
I think this will be a good exercise and learning experience for you.
-
2
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:
He's only 63 so he may be able to handle it...
And he might not have to take the blue pill like Neo either.
-
1
-
-
Love your analysis in this thread. I also love the Podkolzin-Pettersson-Garland line that Boudreau threw and can’t fathom as to why Green didn’t put these guys together much earlier. Just mind boggling.
I didn’t watch tonight’s game but I’m hoping that we see Miller and Horvat play together at some point with Hoglander and Boeser rotating on that right side (preferably Boeser as I think Hoglander would find a way to still be useful on a 3rd line).
-
2 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:
Bruce is such a gem
I remember watching this at the time & being blown away (when 'behind the scenes' type shows were in their infancy)
Now I can't stop laughing, he's just blunt in a very honest & endearing way. Its so awesome.
Lets go Bruce! The kick in the pants we need!
BRUCE THERE IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:
Not a woman but tbh Boudreau could get me for what he did to this team
You and me both brother. :-p
-
1
-
-
Seriously wondering if 66 year Boudreau could get any woman he wants tonight in Vancouver for breathing some life back into this team.
-
1
-
Playoffs? [DISCUSSION]
in Canucks Talk
Posted
Only joined here last year but I was posting on other forums before joining this one (ie HFCanucks, Canuckscorner, Canuckscentral).