RUPERTKBD
Members-
Posts
40,451 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
44
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by RUPERTKBD
-
I'm constantly surprised who don't seem to grasp those rather simple facts. I think it stems from viewing the two teams through the lens of an underdog team, that got hot at the right time and exceeded expectations....and a dominant team that failed to meet expectations. You can see right in this very debate.....people are willing to cite the '94 injury situation, but it gets sloughed off for the 2011 squad, even though it was far worse...
-
The '94 team was relatively healthy. The walking wounded on the 2011 team included Hank, Kes, Ehrhoff, Bieksa and Raymond. They were playing without their top LD and their best faceoff guy..... Meanwhile they were facing a goaltender with .115 GAA and a .967 SV% ...... In comparison, Mike Richter threw up a decent .213 GAA and a respectable SV% of .911 The '94 Canucks were a good team that got hot at the right time and went on a deep run. The 2011 Canucks were a great team that were too beat up to close the deal. Breaking it down to "This game 7 was closer than that game 7" is a poor way to compare the two teams, IMHO....
-
It was a fraction late, but my problem with it was that the suspension was completely out of line with the standard that had been set for the same infraction up to that point. The NHL saw Horton doing the bacon with the biggest audience in both countries watching and decided they had to make an example of AR. They claimed that they were "setting a new standard" at the time, (a ridiculous decision in the final few games of the season, IMO) but they scrapped it part way through the following season, after GMs started voicing their displeasure over their players being held to that same standard.... As I said earlier: Scapegoat.
-
I agree. The other thing that confuses me is all this talk of "we should have gotten a RHD instead".....My question is "why"? If we got a defender instead of AB, maybe it would improve the team's play defensively. (I doubt it but, maybe...) What good does that do? It certainly doesn't put the Canucks in the playoffs. All it does is potentially worsen our draft position. Or, if you're saying we should have demanded a D prospect instead of Raty, again, why? We just traded away our top center. Are you saying we don't need a center prospect? I don't know.....it seems to me that a lot of people are pissed off with management because of the piss poor job they've done so far and they're bound and determined to call this move another mistake. Persoanlly, I think a player with not much term + a pick + a good prospect is more than fair return for a player that everyone knew we had to trade.....
-
I'm on team tank, so I'm good with this deal. Would I prefer that Canucks had signed Bo in the offseason and were trading Miller right now? Sure, but that isn't what happened. As I see it, we got a player on a short term, a prospect with a lot of upside and a first round pick in a good draft. That's a pretty decent return for a pending FA whom everyone on the planet knew we had to trade. As far as getting a RHD "Instead". why? Are we looking for a guy who will improve the team's defensively play right now? Not me. I want at least a shot at Bedard. This team is nowhere close to contending, so I see zero point in trying to acquire a defender to rescue this season. We've got draft capital now. We can use that and find a defender who will come into his own a few years down the road.... I still think this management team has sucked balls.....but I think this was as good as they could have done....and I'm down with it.
-
Speaking of crap, anyone else notice that Jesus is spending big on a PR campaign.... Pedophile priests (and the coverup that followed)....Residential Schools....book bans....I guess JC does need to clean up his image a bit. Still, I think that using football fans as your target audience is preaching to the choir....