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

lmm

Members
  • Content Count

    4,839
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,491 Gaming the system

About lmm

  • Rank
    Canucks Second-Line

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://lastminutemover.ca
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    saanich
  • Interests
    hochey,soccie, zippgunn'sopinion

Recent Profile Visitors

7,802 profile views
  1. Ok we are basically saying the same thing now. I guess what I should have said is that I don't believe "Intanible " is the correct term. I know it is widely used, yes I have heard it often. But I can list them, and you can list them and I'd be willing to bet our lists are quite similar What I meant was, that I think "intangible" is a mis-nomer I believe "intangible" is a lazy term for "Things that do not have stats" You have just said, "the intangible list is huge", and I agree. So lets stop arguing for a minute and let me ask you this, wha
  2. .Here is a glimmer of preminition 1:00-1:10
  3. Your ranting ability is quite good but it causes problems with your comprehension Fact: Bourdon, Petey, Hoglander + Caufield played in the NHL at 19 years of age Observation: Bourdon played scared Observation: Petey, Hoglander + Caufield did not play scared Observation: Rafferty reminded me of the way Boudon played Observation: you lose focus when you are ranting - Supporting evidense, "Bo is developing inspite of Green, but is riding Petey's coat tails. Which one is it? You can't have both" Question: Is Bo riding Petey's coat tails? Question: Did i say
  4. how many intangables can you name? how do you define intangables? how many intangables can you not name? there were a reasonable number of people who did not have the same difficulty as you with "assuming" that skill was a given there are also a number who require everything spelled out or they get confused this is not news to me, I have friends in both camps I have been told many times that I speak cryticly I am aware that it is a left brain/right brain thing I also assume that people who struggle with this type of conversation also posess skills
  5. Shaw will be interesting He has coached in some bad situations and a lot of one and dones, not his fault the IHL folder after his first year as head coach, (or was it?) Kind of funny we fired Sullivan along with Torts, then hire Torts' next assistant THis seems like an awkward postiion, coming from one bottom feeder to another, and replacing the scapegoat (Brown), and not replacing the D-coach It will be interesting to see if he can fix things from below Green and Baumer or whether he leaves after one season
  6. you are being a fool I was comparing Bourdon to Petey. (both are first round picks) you said "Of Course" because you are ranting Boothe is as relevant as any of the many retreads vancouver has brought in over the years Being a wash up means you deserve another chance in your mind, that is why I brought up Boothe. Green did not develope our Calder trophy winner, he is riding his coat tails Bo Horvat is developing dispite bad coaching, he would be a better player with better coaching
  7. well, why wasn't Petey, Hoglander or Caufield then? there is no "Of Course" about it you are making excusses for your favored players You like Green are willing to give Vesey and Hawryluk more chances based on past performances, you might want to add that Hawryluk is a former 1st rounder too. That is exactly the problem that I have with Green, but you support it, that is where we differ. Sven Baertschi is a former 18 and 15 goal scorer, where is his second chance? (that was rhetorical, don't answer ) David Boothe was a 30 + two time 20 goal scorer this team i
  8. I did like Highmore and would like to see Graovac get a decent shot. I think Grao is a bit of a slow starter, who has had injuries, but is ready to show a little more I think Hawryluk is a poor man's Motte and I don't like Motte enough to accept less I think Highmore could replace Motte Talking about how bad Rafferty played in his one game, Motte played equally poorly in his one game on Petey's wing. Motte is OK at what he does, but I do not love him the way some here do. Chatfrield is no different than Biega, too small to play regular, but a decent fill in, 7-8-9
  9. I just don't see how being pragmatic to a fault, stubborn, un-inventive, un-motivating, while using what players did in the past or their draft position/ cost of acquiry as the go-to measure of who should be playing, is coaching for a new contract If he was getting more than the sum of the parts from his players i could see it, but just sticking with tired vets does not seem like coaching for a new contract. Just like Vesey and Hawryluk, I don't think Green has anything new up his sleeve to offer this club next year. I am willing to bet, if Shaw is not intrim head coach by
  10. I watched Rafferty's game, it was not good. He reminded me of Luc Bourdon in his time here. He looked afraid to make a mistake and thereby afraid to play well. You know who I saw too much of this season was Jace Hawrlyk, Jimmy Vesey and Jalen Chatfield. Its pretty easy to blame management when every player on the bottom 2 lines have career worst years at some point you have to look beyond the players, how did Hawrlyk score more in Ottawa and how did Vesey and Boyd score more in less minutes in Toronto?
  11. Hey Shawn, I often agree with you, but this time it just seems funny. I hear people say things like, " Travis should play player X (Loui, Jake, Rooster) on Petey + Millers line for 10 games then trade him while he is hot" As if every other GM is dumb enough to fall for that tomfoolery. Then you (and others) make a statement like this and I wonder how stupid Jim would need to be to fall for this kind of foolishness? I am no fan of Jim, but there is no way he is not on board with this plan, he signed Travis even after their plan failed, ( I guess knowing that there are enoug
  12. that just sounds so backwards you hope the old head coach and the old assistant coach will listen to the new guy Does that actually make sense to you?
  13. guess it is a matter of where you want to start and where you want to end I do not really believe in intangibles Intangibles is really the same thing we are discussing intangibles are actually tangible, but the list is long, so for brevity a long list of qualities you do or do not want in a player is called intanibles. I'll give you a short list but it could probably go on for 1000 points we are talking defensemen tangible intangibles can they skate backward? do crossovers :left" "right? turn Left? Right? do they get mad ? or wi
  14. Or maybe you are just looking at this argument with a simplistic spin . Did anyone here say we need 18 Dana Murzyns? It might be that some of us are arguing that we need size, without stating the obvious, that the size we need needs skill. We have had our Gudbransons, Virtanens Sestitos and Mathias' It pretty much goes without saying that size needs heart, skill and speed look at the 5 guys I just mentioned 3 had heart but not enough skill and no speed, the other 2 had speed but not enough skill and no heart none of them think the game fast enough Havi
  15. I don't know Amigo is it still considered a trend when teams have icing 6'2" 205+# defensemen for 50 years?
×
×
  • Create New...