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

lmm

Members
  • Posts

    7,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lmm

  1. kinda funny Newsman, that you pick one of my shorter rebuts, clip 60% and then say i am shooting one liners. If you want one liners look to @aGENT for that. this is not my first post in this thread so if you have not been following along you might have trouble with context, but I am not reiterating all of my previous posts. And no, no-one says Jim is mistake free, but they always have an excuse ( get out of jail free card) which I have already covered, so I won't be re-posting. I see above that you wrote a novella in one post followed by a 5 liner, any thinking poster could link the two and understand you are making 2 points, but you cannot give me the same generosity. You require me to repeat myself lest you cannot follow along. Meanwhile @Hutton Wink deduced that I want Gagner back because I am underwhelmed by the deal. Reading comprehension is hard for some of you, especially when you try to make it that way. @Tower102 says Jim's only mistakes are free agent signings like Loui and Gags, if only that were true.
  2. here is what I find funny about those who regularly let Jim off the hook for his mistakes, Jim came in with a kind of "get out of jail free" card because he was cleaning up GMMG's mess and he had Kesler to deal with. So when he makes deals that didn't bring back much it was OK because it was not his mess. Fast forward to the Gagner/Spooner deal and people seem to want to forget that Jim signed Gagner to the bad deal. So to answer your question, I didn't/don't want either Gagner or Spooner. Its just a deal to distance himself from an earlier mistake. And the Nilsson deal is just so much meh, all the players invovled and the 6th which just helps those who like to trumpet the, "he is only 1 draft pick short of where he could be" Yup three 6ths in the home town draft... I can't wait
  3. Your description of narrative describes yourself and many other Canuck/Benning supporters. Jim has completed his best season of trades with the Leivo/Pearson/Schenn deals but that also ignores the Spooner and Nilsson deals as well as the poor trades from seasons past. In what narrative has Jim appeared very capable of making deals,(eg hockey trades) based on history? This is his first season when he didn't "sweeten" every deal with draft picks. The Spooner deal shows how Jim's poor signings transfer to weak trades. Your narrative is no less full of "selective memory" than those who wish Jim fired.
  4. So, Theo what is the goal when you use the term "narrative"? From where I sit it seems a word used to belittle the opinions of others. My thesaurus says, account, chronicle, detail,history, parable, report, statement, story, tale I underlined the ones I think you mean by using the term narrative. Are you making a statement that people are telling tales about Jim's work? The history of Jim's work can be chronicled and detailed and the report will show hits and misses. At some point Jim will be held to account for his decissions, as will the rest of the staff. I wonder if you would rather use the term "fiction" or maybe "lies" but feel saying narrative makes you sound more intelligent
  5. there was a down vote yesterday and NOW I have found a reason to use it
  6. I live in \Victoria , there are a lot of things about this club that might allianate me, but the name Vancouveris not one of them
  7. over all I agree with you. I too refer to the canucks as "my team" but when you mention Brand, that separates them from us. as I said, they are the sellers and we are the buyers, and yes, having a stable brand is good for sales, and colour is part of that. Look at the Kings, it took them 22 years to realise that they are in LA and LA colors (american spelling) are black and silver. The change to black and silver was good for Kings merchandise, but so was Gretzky. So is it colour or product that sells? Vancouver has had 3 basic colour schemes, with many tweeks along the way. Primerily, the current Blue Green White and the 80s-90s Black Orange/Yellow White and then there was that horrible Maroon monstrosity. You can't really say our current colour scheme is different than our original scheme that won nothing. I like the Blue and Green, but I'd be willing to bet that the Canucks could go back to the Maroon Monstrosity, and sell a lot, if Petey, Brock and Quinn started to tear up the league in that garb.
  8. do you work for the canucks? if not it is not our brand. the Canucks are the sellers and we are the buyers. either way I don't see how a colour change hurts the brand. if its looks good it will sell fast
  9. went to the Saturday game the Royals look good in board battles but I think they won 2 face offs all night Fun game , pretty evenly matched back and forth
  10. where would we be if we: didn't fire Mike Sulivan? Didn't trade Bonino + for Sutter? Didn't sign Loui Eriksson? Didn't trade a 2nd for Vey? Traded Tanev after the 6th major injury? Didn't let Hamius walk? Hired Bieksa to teach Virtanen how to fight went back to the flying V?
  11. maybe one year soon boston will win 2 cups and their go to guys will = 100 yo
  12. is it any wonder no one wants to sign here unless the pay is over the top??
  13. what we want is Cam Neeley, what we see is Shawn Mathias
  14. Oh Deb I stand by my second quote not backpedalling on that one at all. I believed then as I do now, It meant sometning to Bieksa, but the Canucks were trying to save face. That is not an indictment of the program that is run independantly of the Canucks and it does not change the fact the Canucks bailed on Kassian argue that one a little harder
  15. You know I really didn't want to go down this road today, and I agree with most of what you said above. And I don't want to oversimplify things and suggest what worked for Daneyko would work for others. I support Mind Check and Lets Talk. I think the problem that I have with this discussion is the oversimplification by some posters who emphatically state, "The Canucks did all they could." I feel they could have done more. I know that you support this team for more than just the sticks and pucks, that you feel they are part of your life and community. You defend them as such, you are doing so above. When you say "baby him through" and "keep under wraps" I agree with you. When you say "... "Tough love... becomes a last resort" I still agree. Where we diverge is that I think "tough love" comes before the trade to Montreal. Facing the adversity of a suspension and stage 2 rehab, and the possibility that ZK does not return an asset, that is "Tough Love" That would make me as proud of "my team" as you are. I felt that way when Brian Burke walked shoulder to shoulder with Todd Bertuzzi into the league office.
  16. I deleted my post because I did not want to defend it, but alas you and 73-3 were too quick for me. Enabling would be the part where we faked a back injury for 1/2 a season to keep things quiet Tough love would have been when we suspended him and made public his rehab (not because making it public is the issue, but because you can not suspend a player without a reason). Making it public is when the Canucks face the embarrassment and deal with the problem. Tough love was carried out by Bergeon and the Canadiens, not the Canucks Ironically, or maybe not, Kassain's rehab was stalled in Vancouver, just like the rebuild, because Jim was not commited to it soon enough Your example is tantamout to saying, "I have a dog that I let run in the street, when it gets hit by a car it will learn never to do that again. I am training my dog." I am not "undermining the program," I am questioning the Canucks sincerety. Jack Kassian provided the Canuck an opportunity to show leadership in this cause, they did not. If you want to see examples of teams dealing with similar problem look at Nashville and Austin Watson or New Jersey and Ken Daneyko here is a snippit In the late 1990s, Daneyko struggled with alcoholism while general manager Lou Lamoriello and Devils owner John McMullen stood by him and checked him into rehab.[6] Daneyko recovered and played every game of New Jersey's successful 2000 playoffs, winning the Bill Masterton Trophy in 2000.
  17. You are missing the part where kassian is an alcoholic and was trending down because of it and where he was in an auto accident in Montreal "the Trade" was not the crucial point in his recovery
  18. the beauty of the Benning can do no wrong crowd is that they claim that he is a great drafter, but every pick not in the top 5 always has a 0.00666 chance of playing in the NHL and therefor is worthless. It is the perfect argument really.
  19. That is the aGENT way there Sugarplum scan through this whole tread, if nothing else they is consistant, and condescending
  20. losing McCann didn't seem so bad when Guber had value, but now that Guber has changed to Pearson the whole series of deals and poor coaching stinks
  21. I agree with Drakrami 100% But the funny thing is that I think the Kesler trade was Jim's best work. Bonino, Sbisa, McCann + the pick that he traded for Dorsett was pretty good value, better than most of his subsequent deals. Trading the 85 pick for Dorsett also ranks as one of his better trades. There was one player drafted after Keegan Iverson to play significant time in the NHL ( Vic Arvidson). So I'll give Jim Thumbs up for that deal too But the deals that saw Bonino, McCann and Sbisa (expansion draft) leave could have helped the Canucks much more than they did. The other issue in this thread is Jim's signings So lets look at the players above and add in Sutter and Gudbranson as they are part of the spin off of these deals Bonino was never signed by Jim but his salary has risen since slipping through Vancouver McCann signed and ELC with Jim but his salary has also risen since These two player value has risen since Jim traded them. Sbisa, Dorsett, Sutter and Gudbranson have all signed their largest contracts with Jim. About + $1 mil over the previous one. That would be fine if they were increasing in value, but they are not. Dorsett was worth his contract but sadly must retire. Sbisa was draft fodder then not resigned by Vegas and took a large pay cut to sign in NYI Sutter likely falls into one of the 2 catagories above, either retires or takes a pay cut Guber's value has probably peaked but maybe he finds new life in Pittsburg, His trade value certainly dropped. I guess we can add in Pearson who looks like a salary dump from Pittsburg and likely takes a cut as well. From where I sit, it seems Jim over pays in assets and then, (possibly because of that has to) over pays in salary, which makes it difficult to trade for value. That is how McCann ( likely the best return from the Kesler trade)+ picks turns into an overpriced Pearson Buy High, Sell Low
×
×
  • Create New...