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

kanucks25

Members
  • Posts

    10,930
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by kanucks25

  1. You had to stretch that really far and it didn't come out in any way clever or funny
  2. The stigma that comes with online dating ("omg what a loser can't even find a partner in real life") is fading, as it should. If you can accept that people online aren't automatically weirdos it's really not that different than looking for someone through any other channel. Yes, you will find a lot of weirdos (my sister shows me all the messages she gets, I still haven't determined if they are funny or disturbing, perhaps both) but you will also find a lot of weirdos in everyday life. I've never tried it myself but I've talked to many who have and the results are mixed, just like they would be through the more traditional channels.
  3. I think you're missing some essential context here because you may have a life unlike some of us on this board. The guy who made the homerun comment is notorious for making hyperbolic statements in an effort to push a certain narrative and is often called out on various types of BS, as in this case. e/ the "hope this helps" is also working to its intended purpose. It's on you for taking the bait
  4. Hilarious how the apologists complain that every thread turns into a "bash Benning" thread yet nobody says anything about these threads that the same 3 people keep spamming. This dude alone has like 3 on the 1st page, all of which essentially say this:
  5. Some believe Benning is overrated when it comes to drafting, so to them, it can be seen as pushing a false narrative if you're claiming that a 6th round pick that hasn't even played a game in the AHL let alone NHL is a home run. I think if you made a poll on any neutral hockey site, it would be pretty lopsided as to how many people think this is currently a homerun draft pick vs how many who don't.
  6. Whatever helps you sleep at night; I'd think laying with strawmen would be more itchy than cozy.
  7. Can I ask who or what at HF hurt you so bad that every post of yours contains some sort of shot towards them? Can I also ask what makes you think you are any better/smarter/more equipped to analyze hockey/the Canucks than anyone on any other platform HF or otherwise?
  8. There's a major difference between trending to be a home run and a home run. It's not nitpicky, you were just wrong lol. Balls go high into the air all the time but if the outfielder catches it at the warning track, it's not a homerun.
  9. Wow, people really got sensitive on this board LOL
  10. We can agree to disagree, I don't wanna derail another thread
  11. Sure. Problem here is that it happened accidentally. And yes, just one Benning thread would suffice. They all break down into the same conversation anyway
  12. Just would like to point out here that being anti-Benning doesn't automatically = impatience. That is all.
  13. I don't know if Horvat is the shutdown type center we need. I think if the organization asked him to be that, he could improve in some areas and do it, but I don't know if that's the best use of his ability/skill-set. I think he's suited pretty perfectly as a 2-way 2C.
  14. I don't know if it's that black and white. There could be other factors, such as: - no other prime GM candidates are available/interested - financial reasons (Aqua doesn't want to pay two GMs for two years) - Aqua has been advised by whoever that we probably aren't going to be legit contenders for the next two years, so might as well have Benning take the fall for that Or perhaps a combination of these things. I'm not saying it's not possible that Aqua is fully behind Benning but, who knows with this franchise, really. I get where you're coming from but I've always been a proponent of keeping cap space open, especially if you're not intending on truly contending, because you never know what opportunities are out there. The Toews trade last year, for example. Or even the Schmidt trade we made, although it's not exactly the same considering we lost Tanev because of it.
  15. I wouldn't be opposed to it given we are replacing that cap with the right player. If it's more 30+ bottom-6ers then please no. If it's someone that is going to be a top-half of the lineup/core player for years to come then for sure I'd look at that. I hope to god Benning doesn't spend assets to clear space just to bolster the lineup in the short-term in an effort to save his job.
  16. Schmidt was not a replacement for Tanev, or at least he shouldn't have been. Schmidt should have been brought in, in addition to keeping Tanev. You know, so we can actually ice a good defense (not that our GM knows anything about that). Cap situation didn't allow for that. We can agree to disagree on what caused that cap situation.
  17. I agree, I'm as tired of it as anyone. But my curse here is to educate, so when someone says something so utterly incorrect, I have no choice.
  18. That's fine. Just expected less childishness from you compared to some others around here.
  19. No, I mean you're upset with how that Eriksson conversation went and you decided to end it with a ridiculous / strawman type retort.
  20. Not the same thing as what we're talking about and you know it, you're just upset.
  21. Wrong side of 30. Already 10 seasons in the league. Had a concussion. There are a lot of miles there. I'm not saying a player with a similar track record couldn't have produced just fine for the first 3-4 years of the deal (which is another problem here) but it's not a "reach" to think that it would turn sour. Again, you're essentially saying just because you didn't think it, it couldn't be. Which is pretty arrogant, to say the least. Seems more like you lacked information, or failed to evaluate it properly. Look up recent trends in the NHL when it comes to prime ages / production by age / etc. if need be.
  22. When EP went down is when Demko went on his crazy run, it's about as simple as that. EP may not be as good as Aho or Barzal (or at least not yet) but he does play the same role they do: 1C that is counted on to be the primary offensive catalyst both 5-on-5 and on the PP. Considering he's just slightly below PPG overall in his career so far, all signs point to be he can play that role just fine.
  23. Wrong side of his prime, injury (including concussion) history. It wasn't a major leap; perhaps you should reevaluate how you evaluate players/free agents instead of claiming that it's not possible for you to be wrong?
×
×
  • Create New...