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

Dazzle

Members
  • Posts

    11,843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Dazzle

  1. I was wrong about Makar. I didn't think he would be this good. Avalanche's future sure is bright. The trade with OTT has been a part of that.
  2. There is as much evidence that Dahlen asked to be traded as there is about your scenario that Dahlen got "misinterpreted". So we don't have "proof". Some of us believe that Benning should get the benefit of the doubt based on reputation alone. He has previously been honest and transparent (as far as we can see). He COULD very much lie about this situation, as much as Linden lied about not being contacted by the Canucks. But it is less likely. Furthermore, JP Barry has a reputation to uphold and it isn't his first rodeo. He very well could have mismanaged this situation, but I think it is less likely. Meanwhile, Dahlen has been traded twice in about two years. Granted, the Canucks probably wanted Dahlen to begin with. I would assume that Pettersson was long in their plans when choosing Dahlen. Do you believe Dahlen or do you believe JP Barry and Benning? IMHO... it should be easy.
  3. I'm aware of "miscommunication", but there was no way that J.P Barry would do something without Dahlen's consent. Dahlen is HIS boss.
  4. J.P Barry is his agent. The same agent as the Sedins, along with many, many big name players. I'm sure Barry did NOT have any 'lost in translation' moment.
  5. Your agent is supposed to represent your interests, but would only go through the process of a trade unless the player says so. Considering he has well-established English speaking agent working for him, you are onto something. Dahlen tried to pull a move on Benning, but it backfired. https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/jonathan-dahlen-denies-demanding-trade-dials-in-on-development-1.23647695 This is J.P Barry we're talking about here. Dahlen, for intents and purposes, is a no-namer compared to his other clients.
  6. Gaudette's a really good prospect. Why the heck are we trading him?
  7. And what about the revelation of information that the US were engaged in illegal surveillance of citizens? Are we just going to disregard it because someone leaked the information?
  8. Time will tell (and it has) that she may end up losing a career in both politics and being a lawyer (at least not in the public sphere). Friends don't let friends go into politics.
  9. Tolerant =/= acceptance. Tolerant meant that you COULD still practice your religion, with some conditions. Such was the case, which was already mentioned in the comment above. The whole point was that in their regions that they controlled, Christians, Muslims AND Jews were in one area.
  10. When you put it this way, my comments certainly reflect a 'hindsight' backslap against Trudeau which I believe I may have been unfair to make. Jody Wilson Raybould, on the surface, seemed like a good hire: Political science Degree and a Law degree. I think it's much easier for observers like me to say "Well, of course she wasn't a good hire, look at this..." She WAS a good hire based on the above qualifications. However, despite her educational backgrounds, she has somehow managed to fracture the political integrity of a party (for better or for worse), made two contradictory statements regarding the incident AND made a recording that was contrary to the ethics of her duties. Trudeau hired the WRONG person for this job. She fumbled big time and the Liberals may very well pay for her mistakes.
  11. I didn't say they were the best people ever. No "empire" has treated ALL subjects under their rule with equality. That isn't what I was talking about. There are good and bad things with an empire - and I merely highlighted only one aspect of it.
  12. Considering she said she released the recording to "protect herself", I highly doubt it. “I said in any other circumstance it would be inappropriate. I was protecting myself. I knew something very dangerous and wrong was going to happen,” Wilson-Raybould said https://globalnews.ca/news/5127098/jody-wilson-raybould-jane-philpott-snc-lavalin/ In another article, she said she was "protecting the Prime Minister". Just another self-serving politician. It's annoying to see people trying to defend her when she herself is unethical to release that recording. Not illegal. Unethical. And it was done in the performance of her duties. She is an unfit politician and arguably an unfit lawyer. Trudeau choosing her could arguably lead to his own downfall. Really dumb decision in hindsight. I don't think Scheer is a good fit either. Get rid of Scheer and Trudeau and stop with this unnecessary political correctness crap. Hire COMPETENT people REGARDLESS of gender or other considerations. Enough of this "have to recruit women because they are a woman". Recruit the BEST person for the job. If she is a woman, she is WELL deserving of that job. That is not sexist. That is equality. On the other hand, Christiya Freeland was a good hire. She is so much smarter than 99 percent of the people that could've done the job.
  13. Actually, this is not that unprecedented. The oppression of people based on race often depends on who's in power. For example, the current Middle East may oppress people like Yemenis, but the Ottoman Empire (Muslim empire) was TOLERANT of different religions (Christianity, Muslim and Jewish), so different people lived in ruled areas in harmony. It's when people get plotted against each other that race becomes an issue again. Israelis vs Palestinians - probably wouldn't have been an issue if Palestine wasn't cut up to "fix" the wrongs of war, while displacing thousands of people who were already living there. Yugoslavia (before it collapsed) had race issues long ago, but there was a time when it lived in relative harmony. That leader was Josip Broz (Tito). He ruled with an iron fist and made sure it didn't happen. Then after he died, the Serbs hunted down Croatians and Bosnians, while the Bosnians hunted down the other people. So I don't think we'll ever see the end of racism. It's just too "easy" to blame it on race or ethnic background. People are so easily manipulated, it's not even funny. Look at how bad Trump is as a leader. He's convinced one of the most educated population of people to blame it on Mexico - and immigration. It's bordering on "racist" ideology.
  14. Maybe if he bought one album, but didn't buy the newer ones (for whatever reason), it's possible that he might have missed the news. Why are you skeptical about him not having an album?
  15. You are not revealing anything new. There is an apparent discrepancy between Benning and Dahlen. Some people speculate that Dahlen demanded a trade (to posture) a call up but it backfired on him. Of course he is not going to say he demanded a trade. Benning traded for him and didn't even hang onto him for one year. I suspect Benning found Dahlen's attitude to be poor/entitled or he was given poor advice. Think about it: why would the canucks break up Dahlen/Pettersson knowing full well their chemistry and friendship?
  16. Let's remove party glasses for a bit. JWR is a lawyer by trade that did something unethical with regards to her performance of her duties. Liberal or not, she has no business serving Canadians. She KNEW better - but she did it anyway. This is not some Gandhi non-violent protest. This was meant to protect herself (as she readily describes). Forget that she's a woman and a First nations person. None of that is a factor in why she has proven herself incompetent. And I maintain that JT deserves responsibility for hiring her in the first place. She screwed the pooch for her political career - and possibly her personal one. But, at the same time, I feel like this chaos makes Canadian politics so interesting. It's like watching a car crash. Still waiting for VanGnome to whiteknight JWR.
  17. I wonder if it's Philpott. She claims to say that there's allegedly more info from JWR and about how there's "more to the story", but didn't elaborate.
  18. Nowhere did I say she was doing something illegal. As you already stated in this post, what she did was unethical, ESPECIALLY given the fact that she is supposed to know the law. Congrats on reading comprehension. You totally demonstrated your ineptness here.
  19. You shouldn't. What she did was flat out unethical. As a lawyer, she should have known this before spilling the beans to the media. She lost her nerve in the political arena. And that is on JT for picking her.
  20. Oldnews, I feel like you are trying way too hard to defend Gudbranson's stint here. You just get so triggered whenever someone denigrates Gudbranson, whether it is justified or not. I could go the route of trolling you, but that would be immature and not my objective. For the record, I am not going to bother answering your last post to me because I feel you have missed my point and/or I didn't express it clearly. Either way, I am going to start fresh with this post. Schenn is NOT perfect. His inability to tie up Cogliano's stick last game led to multiple whacks, the last of which ended up in the back of the net. I'm also fairly confident based on the rest of your post that you can find plenty of examples of him 'failing' to do his job. This is the so-called eye test which I am far more comfortable with. The number of times that Schenn is ABLE to successfully get the puck out, especially under pressure, is notable to me. I don't know where/how to access this, analytic wise, but I have seen that he generally does a good job of spinning away from forecheckers. If you can point me in the direction of where to look this up, I'm all ears. No player is perfect. Every player has his strengths and weaknesses. We can't just cherry pick on 'bad moments' of players; we have to see the bigger picture. Gudbranson has done some good things for the team. He's a good team guy, he brings a physical presence and he is a relatively good skater. However, his style of play has NOT been the right fit for this team (no need to go into details; Gudbranson himself said he was not happy with his own play). Gudbranson's salary is much higher than Schenn's. If we are going to be comparing performance, salary should be at the very least be mentioned. Is Gudbranson truly worth 4 million? I'm not saying he is worthless. I'm saying that if Schenn can do a big chunk of what Gudbranson allegedly does, that is already saying something. The fact that Gudbranson is doing well in Pittsburgh speaks volumes about how this team has been utilized (this falls on the coaching) or it could mean that Pittsburgh has better depth to hide him in. Both points may very well be true, but does not explain why Pearson did poorly there. I don't exactly buy your argument that Schenn has done 'worse' than Gudbranson for the same job. Your perception is just as biased as other people who think Gudbranson is trash.
  21. Gudbranson has turned out better than what people have said he is/was. It's well within reason to make an argument that Gudbranson was misused by Vancouver. It's another to say that Gudbranson has had the better career than Schenn. 5-06 Kelowna Rockets WHL 60 3 8 11 86 1 12 0 0 0 14 2006-07 Kelowna Rockets WHL 72 2 27 29 139 -10 -- -- -- -- -- 2007-08 Kelowna Rockets WHL 57 7 21 28 100 5 7 2 2 4 6 2008-09 Toronto Maple Leafs NHL 70 2 12 14 71 -12 -- -- -- -- -- 2009-10 Toronto Maple Leafs NHL 79 5 12 17 50 2 -- -- -- -- -- 2010-11 Toronto Maple Leafs NHL 82 5 17 22 34 -7 -- -- -- -- -- 2011-12 Toronto Maple Leafs NHL 79 2 20 22 62 -6 -- -- -- -- -- 2012-13 Philadelphia Flyers NHL 47 3 8 11 34 3 -- -- -- -- -- 2013-14 Philadelphia Flyers NHL 79 4 8 12 58 0 7 1 0 1 0 2014-15 Philadelphia Flyers NHL 58 3 11 14 18 -2 -- -- -- -- -- 2015-16 Philadelphia Flyers NHL 29 2 3 5 30 -7 -- -- -- -- -- 2015-16 Los Angeles Kings NHL 43 2 9 11 52 5 5 1 1 2 6 2016-17 Arizona Coyotes NHL 78 1 7 8 85 -9 -- -- -- -- -- 2017-18 Arizona Coyotes NHL 64 1 6 7 35 -12 -- -- -- -- -- 2018-19 Anaheim Ducks* NHL 8 0 0 0 7 -6 2018-19 San Diego Gulls* AHL 22 2 8 10 9 8 2018-19 Utica Comets* AHL 7 1 4 5 4 3 2018-19 Vancouver Canucks NHL 14 0 2 2 4 -4 and Gudbranson 2011-12 20 FLA NHL 72 2 6 8 -19 78 2 0 0 0 5 1 0 76 2.6 166 1022 14:12 0 0 73 154 3 17 2012-13 21 FLA NHL 32 0 4 4 -22 47 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 49 0.0 94 600 18:45 0 0 32 80 2 16 2013-14 22 FLA NHL 65 3 6 9 -7 114 3 0 0 0 5 1 0 92 3.3 209 1169 17:59 0 0 91 158 14 19 2014-15 23 FLA NHL 76 4 9 13 -4 58 4 0 0 0 5 4 0 110 3.6 229 1414 18:36 0 0 75 212 6 33 2015-16 24 FLA NHL 64 2 7 9 3 49 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 73 2.7 156 1287 20:07 0 0 73 150 11 28 2016-17 25 VAN NHL 30 1 5 6 -14 18 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 40 2.5 88 610 20:20 0 0 44 66 4 23 2017-18 26 VAN NHL 52 2 3 5 -7 35 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 53 3.8 129 958 18:25 0 0 81 126 5 28 2018-19 27 TOT NHL 72 2 8 10 -20 87 2 0 0 1 7 0 1 90 2.2 175 1315 18:16 0 0 80 170 9 30 2018-19 27 VAN NHL 57 2 6 8 -27 83 2 0 0 1 6 0 0 72 2.8 141 1025 17:59 0 0 60 132 7 24 2018-19 27 PIT NHL 15 0 2 2 7 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 18 0.0 34 290 With all due respect, what you should have said is "comparing Schenn to Gudbranson isn't all that fair to Gudbranson". Schenn has BY FAR the superior stats - aside from more experience in the NHL. He is far more established than Gudbranson is. I really do think you're showing your biasness here towards Gudbranson. Schenn has definitely outperformed Gudbranson in almost every aspect (albeit short stint) here that Gudbranson couldn't do in the two years.
  22. Totally true. CDC lost their marbles when we passed up Nichuskin over Horvat. Fast forward many years later, the people who lost their marbles over that draft have become suspicious silent. If I was really bored, I'd go back in time and find those posters. They're probably ones that praise Horvat now...
  23. The one blemish that he has in his career at least in recent memory was that brutal hit he did on Max Pacioretty. That was an awful hit and he should've been liable for that. Instead, the NHL decides to make the curved glass to absolve him of responsibility.
×
×
  • Create New...