Dazzle

No, that's exactly what I'm saying about the defense for Green. There is a "but" after this. Green definitely had to go. There's been about four years of Green that had very mediocre results for the Canucks, minus the bubble. None of them were playoff teams; however, the bubble made the Canucks play a bit better. In addition, after Green got fired, Boudreau immediately saw success with the exact same roster that Green had in another year. (Boudreau struggled in the next year) It should be noted though. Green had defensive coaching in Shaw and Walker. Boudreau didn't in the next year. That may have been a huge reason for the big difference. It doesn't mean that Green was "vindicated". He wasn't vindicated at all, imo. Green at no point could ever maximize the rosters that he had. That much was clear.

He did get scapegoated a lot; however, excusing Green's coaching tenure because of one mediocre season under Boudreau is a bit silly. Boudreau did really well with that same team that Green failed spectacularly with. That's not nothing. Green wasn't a great AHL coach either, for what it's worth. He was just promoted, given his time that he spent with this organization. I think it's beating a dead horse though.

One thing for sure was that Benning's acquisitions never turned out right, even though all of those players were good players in their own right. Yes, even Eriksson. Eriksson was a fantastic player BEFORE he came into the Canucks. I think most people forgot about that. Beagle was a great player, and so was Roussel (injury). For all the things that Benning did right, the players he acquired would even things out, or make it negative. It's such a weird situation.

Not sure why Green still has his defenders. He's been given several different iterations of teams, and not one of them was a winning one. He's not a good coach. There's no ifs and buts about it.

It'd be hilarious if the Canucks traded away their first rounder for Chychurin. It wouldn't be a BAD trade, but it would underscore the shortsightedness of this management team.

Huh? I was never proven wrong with the math. A few posters made some very disingenuous math observations that you didn't even bother to fact check. I maintained that Horvat had improved every year. The points increased, but the games played decrease. This forum is ridiculous.

I totally agree with you here, but you perverted that logic on Horvat by saying he hadn't improved. Just saying. Here, I still have the picture that highlighted the progression of Horvat.

Fans have been disrespecting him.

Tocchet might have some fresh ideas, or maybe it's just a coaching bump. I hope to see what he can do with this team next year.

I'm for team tank, but this game means something for the Canuck players. I'm not going to complain about that.

It's not about emotional. 7.25 vs 8.5 is not that big of a gap lol. It's this clown of a management team that doesn't know how to handle the cap, as well as the personnel.

This right here is what's wrong with our fanbase. It's always somebody else's fault with this fanbase, except ourselves. We can drill on the past over and over, but fail to address or acknowledge the present. Horvat earned the right to market value. 7.25 and 8.50 is not that much of a difference. We just lowballed our former captain.

These couple of games have revealed something - fanbase and organization took him for granted. Horvat gave his heart and soul to this city and team. And what did we do? We made all sorts of excuses to diminish his contributions. Worst of all, him getting 8.5 mill was him apparently "getting greedy" Now NYI fans are cheering for him in a way that fans haven't done before, despite the number of jerseys. Horvat has left us behind - and he isn't going to look back. Management and the fans here have let him down for the last time. We talk about other people at fault (i.e. Benning), but we rarely talk about how we seriously screwed up. We did Horvat dirty.

The trade is honestly not that bad. Definitely not as bad as people keep making it out to be. Guenther could be a good player or not. It's still really too early. I've mentioned before that Benning's worst trade is the Forsling one. We could've used that guy. As for Guenther, we have a plethora of wingers. We don't really NEED him. I'm curious to see how OEL or Garland does in this offseason under this coaching staff. If they come back unproductive, then we can start having this discussion again. Garland is doing pretty good in this short stint.

See, that's the thing, if someone posts something on here that talks about Mike Gillis being a bad GM, I'd really be curious if that person gets the same type of positive reaction. What I'm highlighting is that once a point aligns with people's beliefs, there isn't a complaint even if it's redundant.

Juolevi was highly regarded in the draft, until these injuries and slow development made fans turn on him. Then the revisionist historians came back with absolute lies about how they shoulda drafted Sergachev instead, even though he wasn't ranked top 10 at the time. Hindsight really is 20/20. I bet Detroit still regrets not picking up Hughes.

Fleury was a 1st overall. Busts can happen for any position. And then there are absolute gems that are found in the late rounds, such as Hansen. Prospect development is so crucial for any team. When your team misses so many draft picks, that will probably hurt your prospect pool. It's what happened during the Gillis era. Very poor picks mixed with trades will set a team back.

Horvat has signed team friendly contracts throughout his career. The moment that he signed for market value is when the Canucks fans accuse him of cashing out for money. The entitlement in this city is ridiculous.

None of his video introduces anything new. The prospect being highlighted is just a repeat of the ongoing discussion. What I'm criticizing is that the fuel is just being poured on an ongoing fire, all for the clicks.

To me, his points point to an obvious bias and is not at all objective. It's pretty telling that the posters that think this video is great because it speaks to an audience that agrees with a certain point. However, when he discussed the aftermath of the so-called "panic move" led to the trade of 9th overall (Guenther), who the video maker proceeded to show the goal of Guenther in WJC. Really? We don't know if Guenther will be a footnote in the NHL, but the video maker assumes that Guenther is some cornerstone player who would have helped this team. He's JUST a winger. Doesn't even address organizational need. This seems nothing more than an obvious beating of the horse of points that haven't been discussed to death already.

This is entirely my speculation on this, but I think this was a political tactic. First, the nomination would go to someone undesirable (i.e. Gillis). For all the positive things he is remembered for by this fanbase and the NHL players, it is not a secret that he is not well liked by the owners (and in essence the GMs as well). This is not something he can control. When the next nomination is not as bad as the other person, it would be a palatable choice.

Eklund is such a terrible "source" that he should be banned/censored when mentioned. Remember when he was on Sportsnet as a trade deadline insider. He didn't get a single trade right.

100 percent. Sedins should get much more credit.

More credit should go to the grunts rather than upper management. Also, upper management has been talking about getting teams' reclamation projects within a certain age, which essentially distrusts the prospect development. Yet we have hired way more staff for player development, as seen here. Right now, you see a lot of bureaucracy, which isn't a bad thing, but upper management is NOT taking advantage of the staff. They should be pumping tons of prospects into the system at this point via draft picks.

I didn't mean that this wasn't a good signing. It's the biased opinion (and wrong one) that Buffalo needs to overpay players to stay. That bias was literally just spewed out the other day. This signing should put those bias to rest, but it's not going to.