Dazzle
-
Posts
11,843 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Dazzle
-
-
So once again, we are badly outshot. What gives?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Attila Umbrus said:
....I don’t even know what that means lol
Listen I get that no one is a fan of losing Gaudette for this guy. But I honestly do like his overall game better than Gauds.
Too many times I’ve watched gauds just float around out of position. Then score a goal here and there and Celly! Hard. That’s about it. Him and Jake both frustrate me to no end. Good shot and can score goals here and there, but there is the rest of the game to play away from the net, and they both concern me with their lack of awareness in that department.
This is my opinion of course but it’s just my overall feeling when watching and evaluating players. I get that people disagree, I’m ok with that. But don’t call me bonkers just because I think the way I do. I see what I see and am willing to discuss it, others will see what they see and I’m willing to listen and learn if possible if the point is solid. I don’t want to say “I’ve been watching hockey for 30 years” as that’s not much of an argument. But what I do know is I’ve watched a ton of junior, ECHL, AHL, and nhl games all live and in person. I love hockey, I travel for work and am on the road. I catch games live where I can...I guess not since COVID tho lol. Anyways this is where I form my opinions from. Not just out of thin air.
Honestly I think we should have had both Jake and gauds brought up thru the AHL. We fast tracked both of them and I do think we hurt their growth.
I hope gauds gets a chance to gel and become a better player in Chicago. But he ain’t ours anymore so I’m focusing on Highmore to see what he brings to the table. I guess I’m an ‘intangibles’ guy, and there is a lot to like in that department with Highmore.
I like the fact that people slept on Motte at the beginning, and then he gradually became a fan favourite. Now I'm not saying that will necessarily happen with Highmore, but people should be looking at how much better of a fit Highmore is for the team. He plays hard. He forechecks well. He makes the safe plays (most of the time). Gaudette lacks the consistency like Goldobin. If Goldobin's game wasn't good enough to justify a roster, why would Gaudette have a spot?
-
1
-
2
-
-
42 minutes ago, cuporbust said:
Lol. Thanks tips . If it wasn't obvious I was kidding , I'm not the goof
Even as a joke, threatening a head of state is extremely poor taste. We don't do this $&!#, even if it's a leader that has royally &^@#ed up.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, 73 Percent said:
Did gaudette get a point tonight? Asking for a friend.
No, he did not. He had one SOG and wasn't on the ice for any goals.
-
10 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:
Benning should be replaced. End of story.
This has been the case for quite some time now.
Hope this helps.
Do you ever have any fresh takes? Could you recommend any good replacements?
I noticed that you've consistently been making excuses for Green. Or am I mistaken? I don't think he'll survive the GM change, but I'm just guessing. -
Our defensive systems is akin to a dump truck fire.
-
-
How many goddamn PP's do the Oilers get tonight? Funny how one doesn't slip through for the Canucks. But the Oilers have gotten away with a few too many penalties.
-
1
-
-
Ugh... Green's team getting outshot again.
-
2 minutes ago, Raspberries said:
cause Edmonton is losing.
Edmonton is the new Toronto.
-
Reffing is so $&!# tonight.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:
The Highmore hit wasnt high. The Schmidt hit was garbage for sure.
But the Mac hipcheck right after the Highmore hit (which I loved cause I am old) was also classic interference. Its happened both ways.
Elbow to head. Maybe you're seeing something different.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:
The momentum was starting to shift before that. The oilers started controlling the offensive zone and got some good chances.
There were a number of missed calls leading up to the momentum changes. Everything adds up.
Highmore - high hit.
Schmidt - high hit And interference.
That goal should not have counted.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 minute ago, DS4quality said:Rathbone is the only defenseman I've seen use the glass to get the puck out. Why is it such a hard concept
He hasn't been tampered by Baumgartner.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
3 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:
Canucks are going to lose this aren't they
I'm calling it. Oilers will score in the first 2 mins of the 2nd period. Probably the first 40 seconds...
-
Oilers given the momentum with those stupid PPs. Several missed calls favouring Canucks. Garbage reffing.
-
24 minutes ago, oldnews said:
May 6th....could the Canucks be "mathematically eliminated" tonight? Or will it take another night or two?
February 8th - the first of Provost's "how many games before elimination?" thread lol...... 3 months / 32 games ago.
February 18th - v2.0 of the "practically if not mathematically eliminated" p.e. threads.
To answer the first question - that was game 16 - tonight's is game 48....so it's that hard thing called "math" - but that's (at least) 32 games later....
Second thread - started at game 20 = tonight's is 28 games later....
That's including, of course such minor obstacles like a teamwide Covid outbreak, the loss of 3 of 4 centers...you know....those excuses, excuses kinda things.
For perspective - the Habs have 4 games remaining in the season - and have not eliminated this team yet..... certainly solid grounds for the OP to be in here chirping...
My personal 'feeling' is that there were 3 virtual breaking points for the season...
The first was the pair of back to back losses to Wpg - games 36 and 37 - just before the outbreak...
The second was the outbreak itself - that 'felt' like absolute curtains - and I think has subsequently proven to be fatal to this season.
The third was after the pair of return to play victories vs Toronto - when they suffered their first loss this season vs Ottawa.
At that point they still held the gap in points in games in hand - an unrealistic run at that point could have/would have gotten them back in the thick of the race...
But of course, to do so they'd have had to go on a run with three centers out of the lineup, with 7 or 8 replacement players in the lineup every night / with the state of the team's health - and playing an absurd amount of compacted scheduled games down the stretch.
Still though - they've lost 7 of 8 and still are not 'mathematically eliminated' yet.
One thing is for certainthough - they were nowhere near "mathematically eliminated" - no matter what deluded qualifier one used - on Feb 18th.
Exactly. I loved how he tried to equate the words "highly unlikely" and "now out of reach" as being the same thing. They're not. It was wayyyy too early to call the Canucks out. The end result wasn't a matter of him being right, lol. Mathematically eliminated is basically the proper equivalent to "out of reach".
How funny how he had to ignore the main definition of it to twist the argument to go his way. And he just said I was being dishonest in the other post. Lol.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, nzan said:
Put Goals In
He will do plenty of that!
-
2 hours ago, Provost said:
ummm... because we are 6th worst by winning percentage and then Seattle is added in ahead of us as per the expansion agreement?
It is listed right on the site showing the column of winning % in order.
Math?Cool. I get that you feel victimized whenever I reply to your posts, so you accused me in the other thread of "stalking" or "following" you, but when you do it, it's not?
3 hours ago, Provost said:Still stalking me because you are salty about looking foolish about the playoffs being out of reach? Maybe go take a walk and find some joy in your life.
For the record, I don't care whether or not you reply. I just wanted to call you on your blatant hypocrisy. Hilarious.
-
2 hours ago, Provost said:
What do the Sedins have to do with the league giving the Rangers a fine? Did they make Dolan's approach to this more successful? It is a nonsense connection to try to make as they literally have nothing to do with each other, nor does it have anything to do with what I posted.
It is exceedingly silly to demand someone address random unrelated things as a counterpoint to non-existent logic on your part.
..as for how supported my position is. Did Parros get fired? Did they decide to suspend Wilson retroactively? I mean objective reality is that Dolan's tactics didn't work, which was my "take".
I know objective reality isn't your strong suit, hence how salty you are about looking silly by insisting that we were actually making the playoffs regardless of the math.
No, actually, it's not. When you go into the real world, when someone fails to uphold their duties, asking for their head is a REAL consequence. I have no idea what kind of strawman you were making there, but my argument is very simple. It's no surprise that you can't even comprehend basic English. Countless times I run into your posts, and I love engaging with you because you're so easy to pick off.
No, Parros didn't get fired. Your position was that you could handle things behind the scenes, right? Well I told you that "working from behind the scenes" clearly hasn't worked out, and I cited the Sedins as a localized example.It seems no position will be a "right" one, yet you have identified a position as being "right". THAT is what is unsupported.
-
1 minute ago, Provost said:
Still stalking me because you are salty about looking foolish about the playoffs being out of reach? Maybe go take a walk and find some joy in your life.
Nope. The fact that you think I'm stalking you just shows how ignorant you are. I can post wherever I damn please. I don't put you on ignore because your takes are sometimes good, but often pretty dumb.
Here is another take from you that is unsupported - and I doubt you'll address how the Sedins were treated over the years, even though the Canucks took the classy approach.
It would help if you paid attention to hockey the past decade - you should take your own advice though
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Provost said:
Seems pretty predictable. The way they went about it was really poor in my opinion.
Have a fiery interview and call the lack of suspension bull$&!# and that you had made those feelings clear to the league, and that all you care about is the health and safety of your players.
Then take your small fine for saying that and move on... It serves the optics purpose of standing up for your players and your private discussions with the league are more likely to result in tangible action (like putting someone else in charge of player safety).
If anyone remotely thought that publicly calling out someone personally like that was going to result in Bettman doing anything but pushing back hard... they haven't paid attention the last couple of decades.Seemed to work well with how the Sedins were treated over the years. /sar
Or even for the Canucks players for that matter.
-
Does anyone know how and why Tankathon lists us as 7th?
It seems most of the sims I've done put us around 7th. A freaking one percent chance Dallas got first overall in one sim, and Arizona (forfeited first round pick) also.
I know there's more games to go, so maybe we will fall more in the standings when those are completed.
-
2 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:
I can't believe I am going to agree with @wallstreetamigo but he is right. We as fans love this kind of statement but it is totally counter productive when the target can target you back ten fold without any repercussion.
The league can in theory make the rangers forfeit their first round pick this year over this statement and the rangers will have zero recourse to it. The fanbase would throw a tantrum but as history showed again and again, the fans will come back and it will mostly hurt the rangers anyways so it is like a bonus for the league. They should have just left the statement at they are disappointed and do not agree with the DoPS decision.
Nah. The NHL won't do that. They took away and gave back New Jersey's first round pick when NJ blatantly circumvented the cap system.
It's clear that NHL has double standards with how they treat teams.Lehner speaking out had no repercussions. Miller didn't either. But I strongly believe that the next player who speaks up against the NHL will be given a walloping.
-
1
-
[Report] Canucks recall Will Lockwood
in Canucks Talk
Posted
Green is the one making the daily roster decisions...