Dazzle

I'll have you know that booze generally doesn't go bad, even after years in the bottle. The only issue is if the bottle was not closed the entire time.

Please, for the love of the Canucks, demote Rathbone. I don't want him wasting his development here when he's making too many mistakes at this level.

Big brains Green. He's gonna keep the same lineup at home, I bet, just because the Canucks won last game

He's a defensive liability :/

Rathbone also let a guy behind him for a breakaway. Bad series of games.

Rathbone has a lot of work to do in the defensive zone, but Green thinks he's NHL calibre. I don't see a point in rushing Rathbone and risking a poor development from him.

Rathbone didn't clear that.

Omg Rathbone again. He's been having some very bad games. Can't believe they slotted in flash instead of gold

5 bucks that Green will play Rathbone next game.

Rathbone to the AHL pls. He is being poorly utilized here and the Canucks need someone who cannot let his man by like that. We need defensive defenseman.

Can we send Rathbone to the AHL already? I don't hate him, but he cannot let a guy like that pass him by.

Imagine benching podkolzin in the game where he gets his first NHL goal. Then imagine healthy scratching him for the next two games. Nice development strategy by Green....

No shots this period. Dunno what Green told them, but we ain't leading by 5 goals. This is the type of Green hockey we play. Our second period is often poorly executed.

Green has a habit of benching his scorers lol.

Of course we give them the first home goal.

Well, two negatives do make a positive!

So if that was the case, why did he demanded to get traded? He didn't even finish the AHL year with the Canucks when he demanded the trade. If that's not impatient, I don't know what is.

He has a lot of flash, but I am not convinced about his defensive zone game. I think Rathbone would've had much better value playing harder minutes in the AHL than used for ~12 mins in a limited role.

I think Rathbone needs one more year in the AHL. If we were to call him up, it's 'only' a 500,000 cap hit.

Erm... I don't think so. The results for VGK were almost instantaneous. With Seattle, it's been lackluster. I mean I think the Canucks are playing lackluster as well, but I think the Canucks can beat Seattle for sure.

I was super excited about the trade as well, and what he could have potentially done with Vancouver. The sense of entitlement he had was a maturity issue. Maybe after a few more years in the SHL has helped him, but I think Player Name (the guy we got from the trade) could potentially be a decent player. He's probably not top 6 material (yet), and his upside might not be that high as Dahlen. That being said, we need stable players who can play up and down the lineup.

So Arizona is doing much worse without OEL in the lineup. If it was him that was the problem, surely the team would be improving by subtracting him, right? Moreover, Chychrun is doing not so good this year. Surely if he was the one who could rise above the mediocrity, it would be him. After all, OEL was purportedly dragging the team down, as argued by 'analytic' people. The anti-OEL analysis is seemingly missing a lot of analytical points in their crusade to support a confirmation bias It's funny how OEL miraculously improves in the offseason, to the point that he's somehow not this plug in Arizona I thought he was aging and in decline??? What I see now is that those same people are now shifting the goal posts to talk about "well maybe he is gonna do fine here; it's his contract" lol. This just illustrates how disingenuous the discussion was. This was about nitpicking. I remember reading the media's comments about Poolman, and seeing how they think the signing was garbage. Lol... They don't actually know what they're talking about, and that's why one should watch the player instead of using numbers to judge a player. Moreover, if you believe the comments, the way he reflects.on himself is a sign of professionalism. He has a lot of things to proud of, but he was also in an environment that he didn't really like. This is the problem about analytics; there are things like motivation that just don't get seen by the numbers. Using analytics (lol) to talk about Poolman is a joke.

That's the thing about this. Dahlen thought way too highly of his game, to the point that he couldn't stand playing in the AHL for a year. And it wasn't just the Canucks who thought he wasn't ready then. The Sharks sent him down as well after the trade. Dahlen could've played with Petey. All he needed to do was suck it up for a year, and have a good training camp the next year. But that didn't happen. It's been several years since he was in the SHL. Maybe these NHL goals are flukes for all we know.

You can backtrack all you want about your comments. You were wrong to judge the player and his contract lmfao. You knew so little about the player, yet I was one of those guys who posted insight into what his strengths and weaknesses were like. I'm not saying we should've jumped on the Poolman bandwagon from the start, but I was the one more willing to give this player time. 2.5 mill and at 4 years really is/was not that big of a deal. Definitely nowhere near the types of contracts that Benning has signed which has handcuffed the team. And when you think about this, this signing is a lot more effective than the Jordie Benn one (no offense to him). 2.5 is fantastic deal for a relatively unproven top 4 defenseman that could at least fill in the depth aspect, and do it well. It was your bias (and ignorance) that betrayed whatever rational capabilities you might have had. Anyway, the season is early, but the Poolman criticism from posters like you look unwarranted. Funny how you still couldn't explain what his game was like, despite being so vocally against this player and the signing.