-
Posts
11,045 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by kilgore
-
The Army and Navy dogs pale in comparison.
-
I agree he is smart enough to know when to buy in and when not to. My point was that he has not "had to" through his rookie years, and so he didn't much. But IMO if he was given the C and all that that responsibility bears, and being raised in a Canadian hockey player environment, he would naturally 'buy in' more; to not just defending himself when he had no choice, but knowing he represents the team as a whole, would not just grab a sweater, but dive right in more. He has that kind of character and intelligence to understand that. I have faith in that. Give him the C
-
I think Bo should be named Captain. Opening night, handed to him by Henrik. Just one caveat. I think Bo checks all the boxes, EXCEPT that he shies away from confrontation. This example is two leaders, (although Vincent hadn't received his C yet here), coming together mutually to make a statement. I searched YouTube for Bo fights and found only two. Maybe he has more. But both were ones where he made a hit that was not appreciated by an opponent who then challenged him, or a team mate did. ie. he had no choice. He's a reluctant fighter. I hate to say this but he's been more of a sweater grabber. One of those players that grabs another sg from the perimeter of the scrum where they hold each others jerseys until its all over. Sorry. but that's what I've seen mostly from him. Now I also don't want a complete hot head as captain. But I think he could be a tad more aggressive in situations where there is some kind of team showdown on the ice. But....As I've stated earlier. I really believe that Bo would step it up, and take on a more physical role when the time came in future, if he has a C on his jersey. Even if its going against his nature, or what Obiwan Henrik has taught him. He'd do it out of a sense of responsibility to the team as its leader. He'd grow into that role, take on that mantel. Linden was even less of a fighter, but he stepped up when he had to. Bo knows.
-
If they DON'T name Bo captain now, after all of this lead up, the whole organization will look like fools. It now goes beyond if Bo would be the perfect captain. The momentum that has been building for him named captain for years now.....allowed to be built by the Canucks, with a lot of help by the local sports media....if it all came crashing down, they'd have a public relations nightmare. It would also be a kick in the nuts for Bo, who I think is strong enough to shrug it off, but an amateur looking move by management. Especially if they just threw it to some unproven new acquisition like Myers or Miller, or a rookie no matter how much promise. I do have reservations about Bo as captain. He checks a lot of boxes, but IMO he shies away from physically engaging when things get heated. In that way, he's not that much different than a Henrik or a Nazzy. The difference is that he was brought up in Canada, and playing North American hockey, and so I have faith he would know when to push himself to be more aggressive and physical when he has to...like in the playoffs. Something Henrik and Nazzy never got. Never had that instilled in them at an early age. I think we'd see another more physical side to Bo if he was made captain. He is smart enough to understand that part of the responsibility as a captain of an NHL team would be to stand up even more for his team mates in any situation. I'm confident that, say, in the playoffs, he'd stand out even more than he does now. Once that mantel of a C is given to him to hold, he'd step it up even more. I think he's holding back a bit now just because of how well he was raised, how good a character he has, doesn't want to presume any authority before it is handed to him as deserving. I now think he'd grow into it and we'd see another level of Bo as captain. Just Do It already.
-
This happens all the time in regular news stories as well. Its because the writer is paid to write the story, and then the high and mighty copy editor decides on the titles of the stories. So, especially for a story buried in a bigger paper like the Toronto Sun, where sports is only one section, and who has copy editors who may not even follow sports themselves, they think its their job to 'jazz it up' with a more sensationalist title. They may not even spend any time reading it.
-
I somewhat share your excitement of a new more physical push back team (in theory) I never liked the 'take the punches and we'll make them pay on the PP' strategy. I don't blame the Sedins, it was their style of play. Up to the GM(s) to sign physical support players, and a coach to embrace a physical approach. But of all three examples why use such a snowflake in the first one to point that out? Mr. I can't fight for my country because of bonespurs. The Sedins were known for their iron man streaks; they may not have won all their wars but always put in 100%. Mr. whine and complain about any criticism calling it fake news At least Henrik stood up and answered questions and accepted criticism when warranted. I get what you are trying to say, but using the biggest snowflake, man-baby with the personality of a bully turtle like Marchand to point that kind of defeats the purpose. Just say ti yourself.
-
Former 1040 morning show host Dave Pratt returns to media
kilgore replied to cuporbust's topic in Canucks Talk
Pratt became so annoying in his last stint with Bro Jake, that he became a caricature of himself. Everything opinion was "guaranteed". Every guest pundit was called "brothu". And he was the only commentator that would laugh at his own joke, or put down, BEFORE he even got them out. Some kind of weird defence mechanism and annoying to have to listen to. He has this Trumpian tendency to brag all day about how right he is, and when inevitably he is proven wrong ....again, it doesn't faze him one iota. He just moves on to the next outrageous prediction. The reason why a show was listenable with him on it, like with Donny, was because it was entertaining to listen to a more intelligent witty co-host make him look like the fool he is. Botchford was the best at that, RIP, when he was on as a guest in the morning show. Just destroyed him. -
I agree in the playoffs we need even our offensive stars to be good defensively as well. (I'm looking at you Brock). I wasn't talking playoffs specifically. We have to get there first. But what I was saying was defensive specialists are JUST AS valuable as offensive specialists, all season and post season. By defensive specialists I gave Chara as an example, or Weber, or a Pronger. In that they also have size and intimidation. We haven't really ever had a player like that so its hard to relate. Maybe Myers?....we'll see. And that value is paid for. Obviously those players also have an offensive upside, but primarily they are paid to shut down the best the opposition has as well as keeping pests honest. And yes we need more than 1 or 2 JOATs. I was speaking more about highly effective ones. ie when we had both Kesler and Burrows in the early part of their careers. I think ANY forward who is not a star is a JOAT to some degree, or they won't last long. Its that 'degree' of talent in all those areas that must be determined. Sutter has not proven...to me by my eye test, forget analytics even....to be a high end JOAT. Not a 4.5 million one at least. The "and master at none" is also part of that term. He has been quite mediocre IMO. Not bad, but not great either. Certainly not the "foundational" piece that JB bragged about when he got him and paid him as such. I think above mediocre JOATs are harder to find. I agree there. And I have high hopes for Ferland and Miller. But IMO Sutter does not fall into that high end category. Maybe he'll prove me wrong. He's just not that noticeable out there. scoring goals or hitting, aggressive play. He's good on the PK, but that is really not a rare commodity in the NHL I'm willing to give him another chance. Like I said, with a better supporting cast, and being healthy, I'm sure he'll have a better year. And having him is better than not, for our depth. As long as it doesn't interfere with managing the salary cap. We have a glut of forwards. And he just stands out as one (besides LE) who does not give value for money, including being injury prone, at least after he moved here.
-
I get what your saying. Those players have a place. All I'm saying is a very good offensive player, even if not great defensively is valued more than a Jack of all trades. Just based on what a team will pay them. Right now Boeser is in the midst of landing a new contract with us. He was a respectable -2 last year, but also either he or Petey scored their plus/minus up. I thought Brock at times was atrocious defensively. But he's valued more than a Sutter, even adding in experience. Just like a very good, and large, defence specialist like Chara, is valued more than a JOAT. JOATs are not as difficult to find. But yes, every team needs one or two. They have a place. But a specialist makes more than a general practitioner for a reason. And I'm not saying I'd not want him back here to start the season. I also agree with Borvat in that I want to see him healthy and playing with a full healthy line up. When he doesn't have to take on so much responsibility. With a new crop that can fill those specialist roles, both offensively, and defensively. That's when a JOAT finds a more comfortable pace to play at. I wish him well.
-
I think these analytics back up the eye test on ice. I've always said he's like a Jack of all Trades and Master of None. Which is not a great thing to be @ $4.5 million per season. He not terrible at anything, but he's not very good either. The NHL values players who are masters at one role, and good at one other perhaps. For example, the Sedins, masters at scoring, offence, ragging the puck in the O zone, but not so great defensively, or shoot-outs. Tanev, in his prime at least, fantastic as a defensive defenseman, not so good at offence. That is what is valuable in the NHL. When a coach can rely on a certain player to perform well in a role needed at a certain time in the game. A player like Sutter who never shines in any one area, but rather mediocre, does not add value to the team. He has turned into a very expensive plug. And that is double trouble if he eats up so much cap space. I'll grant his experience being a veteran in the league counts for something in different situations. And there is a bit of a mulligan for injuries taking away his rhythm even when he gets back on ice, but I've learned to never expect much from him on his shift now. He's a place taker, not bad, not good. just taking space. Hopefully Gaudette makes him expendable at the TD...if Brendan can at least be healthy around then.
-
Most liquor stores in Vancouver have it. Maybe you're not from around these here parts?
-
Do You Have Confidence In The Canucks Front Office..?
kilgore replied to Honky Cat's topic in Canucks Talk
Don't mean to pile on here, but ...seriously? How would that work exactly? You'd, as a GM, have to have giant balls to pull that off. Creating a team of "role" players, and just hope you land a Pettersson or a Boeser to top off your teams requirements, at the exact right time. All the while trading picks away to build that team of role players in anticipation, and thus cutting down your chances of landing that Pettersson quality player to complete the plan. Meanwhile your cap is all topped up on competent, but average players, who's play only deteriorates as their contracts go on. And compounding a "rebuild" like that would be if an owner meddled and demanded the GM keep trying out new batches of free agents every year in order to earn him some playoff revenue. "Role" players make up the majority of the league. Some quality ones can even be snagged off the waiver wire from a team having cap issues themselves. JB landed Beagle, and Rousell last summer, and Myers, Benn, and Ferland this summer. It ain't that difficult to find them when you need them. Another problem that will develop if you fill your cap with older role player contracts too early, and commit that cap for years ahead, is not being able to add that really special final piece when you REALLY need it. -
If Loui Eriksson stays what can make you come to terms with it?
kilgore replied to JM_'s topic in Canucks Talk
-
Great expectations can lead to bitter disappointment
kilgore replied to BrockBoester's topic in Canucks Talk
I can see it going all one way or all the other. I just have a feeling it could go very badly, especially if injuries pile up....again. Or we will surprise a lot of pundits and easily make the playoffs. It all comes down to (injuries aside) that oft scoffed at thing called "chemistry". We have a new influx of FA, adding to our last years crop of FA. We are witnessing with the BC Lions just how bad you can be with a lot of changes in the roster. That it takes time for players to gel as a team. Now sometimes they do very quickly, sometimes it takes more time for new D pairing to know each other for instance. And then how soon they adapt to coach Green's system. But if the team chemistry attains that equilibrium solubility - if new D pairings and line combinations click quickly together so Green doesn't have to immediately start juggling, we could have a very good year. . . . -
If Loui Eriksson stays what can make you come to terms with it?
kilgore replied to JM_'s topic in Canucks Talk
Retire, now. Why go through another embarrassing year Louie? Save Canucks 6 mil cap, and save some face for yourself. You can live on the 27 mill you've "earned" here can't you? -
If you like a dark beer, this is a very smooth, fine bubbles, brew. St Ambroise Oatmeal Stout
-
This I did a true shotgun last year on one of his goals for the heck of it. Took me back, haven't tried that for years. But I forgot about how committed you must be once that hole is punched. Its either going down the gullet or onto the floor. And wasting beer is a crime. I say we all make a pact, if Jake reaches 20 goals, we all do it together, for sure, on here! Have a cold can ready at 19. Whether its beer or root beer.
-
Great expectations can lead to bitter disappointment
kilgore replied to BrockBoester's topic in Canucks Talk
Its tougher than I would think in answering the first question. We have gotten conditioned now to accept our position at the bottom of the league, and that playoffs are some kind of luxury, and simply seeing improvements on the team is great. But this season is different. I think we have to make the playoffs or JB is gone. The cap is topped up, and we've spent a #1 pick for it. I see the case for keeping him around still even we miss again, but unless it is because of massive injury troubles, the Aquilini's and a lot of fans won't want him back. Green still will have some rope left. The Tram will be back in all his glasnost glory. "No Utica...and I be captain! Be best!" -
Actually you are not wrong. All would be forgiven. Heck, we'll probably retire his jersey. . .
-
Do You Have Confidence In The Canucks Front Office..?
kilgore replied to Honky Cat's topic in Canucks Talk
Whatever results of that poll, our team is now in the best position, and has the most balanced and talented roster its ever had since JB took over. I also think a more wider public poll like that will naturally bring out more downers who don't watch a lot of games and only look at the score sheet after a game. That said, I lol at those that give JB blind praise and complete confidence, 10/10 etc.. Usually on the first couple of pages on a thread topic on JB. Anyone who disagrees is given a confused smilie face. It suits them, they must be confused. I think you HAVE to have some criticism somewhere for a GM who's team was the worst in the league for the last 4 years. How could you not? I'm not surprised at all seeing those numbers. While I admire the positivity, its just not realistic to have complete confidence in this management team going forward. I hope, I pray, things will all work out peachy. I have to believe. I have no choice. We are a team that has been a cellar dweller for four years, yet are maxed out on the cap, and if we don't do significantly better in the next two years, we will be royally ******. Because then it will be more of the same old...team full of untradable underperforming assets, no cap room for that 'missing piece', and also missing out on a first rounder, (and third). Add to that missing a lot draft picks, as a second tier, we could have been acquiring for players that never panned out or have never lived up to the hype, all in a feckless attempt to squeeze into the playoffs each year. And, we will be wasting our triangle of death - Petey, Flow, and the mighty Quinn's peak years perhaps. We needed a GM (and an owner who knew to step back) who recognized, after the 2016 season, when we did not repeat landing a playoff spot, that that was THE TIME to start the tear down. And in a way such as the Rangers announced it, in no uncertain terms. Don't insult the intelligence of Canucks fans. While we still had a few tradable vets. (instead of piling in more of them) Making it clear to the NTC players we were going to move their friends and team mates, and get younger, and they had to be fine with that or wave. Would that have been fair to the Sedins? Maybe not, but this is a business, it should have been approached like that. Maybe JB would have risked being fired, like Trevor, but that was the choice made. It feels like this season, more than the past seasons, that we have a NEW team. Pettersson is no longer the newbie. Quinn will be a big part. Brock will only get better barring more injury woes. We have a good goalie tandem. Myers will solidify the back end and bring some more size. Ferland addresses some grittiness missing. Benn is an improvement on Hutton. I only wish we could have retained Schenn as a seventh. He was cheap, big and nasty. (like my last gf) I hope it works. Benning is pushing all the chips he can forward into the pot. And adding chips borrowed from the house for future repayment on top of it. There is no plan B. It has to work. And it will. dammit! If it doesn't, guaranteed that JB won't be here next year, and some other poor shclep will have to clean up another Canucklehead mess. I don't want to look backwards but these dang rating JB threads pop up I can't help but be honest, based on past seasons. Is this out of 5? I can't find anywhere what is it out of. I assume its out of 5. If so, here's how I'd rank management: Roster building: 2.6 This summers acquisitions bump it over the median for me. Otherwise below average. Cap management: 2.2 Its all in for Jim. Risky Business. Draft/development: two way different areas which should be split up: Draft: 4.0 Petey Brock and Quinn, and hopefully Tryamkin make up for the misses. and Gaudette is a glass half full. Development: 2.0 Utica has not been good for most of our top prospects, with some jumping ship, which, with our relatively bare cupboards we cannot afford. Trading: 1.8 Including a rating for losing players for nothing plus overpaying and over-terming and over valuing the acquisitions we did make. Free agency: 1.5 Based on the last few seasons work. Optimism is up for the latest shift of newbies, but not proven yet. Vision: 2.0 This is the easiest to mark. There hasn’t been any clear vision during JB’s reign. That or the vision JB had did not materialize. And I'm being generous. -
I think we still have not seen the best from Travis. He has not had the personnel. His first years he had to try and win with a declining top six, whether it was to give the twins one more shot or not. Burdened with Eriksson and other underperforming and injury prone contracts through the years. Not knowing if he should develop the young guys or go for that eighth spot. Now its pretty clear we are definatley shooting for the playoffs, and have a solid more physical veteran support group, plus a few legit young stars with at least some NHL playing experience. Green has paid his dues, and I'm excited to see what he can do with less confusing mandate, and a more balanced team roster.
-
Can I just say...every hockey board needs an Apollo. To remind us how lucky we are. I appreciate this board. Before I joined I found one of the smaller private boards, and was on that for a few years. But it was full of a small clique where abusing newbies and insulting those outside their circle was the greatest sport. The moderator/owner did nothing about it. On that board all I heard was how CDC was so beneath them, full of bandwagoners that knew nothing about hockey. So I never even tried it for years. But when the rudeness and bullying got too much I decided to give this board a try anyways, hoping the moderation was better. And its been great, overall. A shoutout to the mods, Deb, and the rest of them too. Even though early on I got a warning or two (he he). Its great to have this place, even if just to vent frustration. I take nothing personal, and find more times than nought I am agreeing with someone I disagreed with in some other thread, and vica versa. Its all good! No one in here do I regard as a bandwagon jumper. Why would anyone spend their time here posting if they were? Hopefully I would also love to cheer with everyone here when they win the Cup!
-
If Loui Eriksson stays what can make you come to terms with it?
kilgore replied to JM_'s topic in Canucks Talk
Just to have an improvement over every other year here. To move up from the "little things" to the "medium things" is fine by me. Snap out of the Vrbata like pouting, as indicated in his interview where he's sore about not playing top minutes, like he was meant to when he signed. And put your nose to grindstone, and work even harder. Even if its just to salvage your reputation, or to work towards your next contract (somewhere else). I'd be stoked if he performed so well, that he'd be looked upon as enough of an asset for a team to take him off our hands at the TD, or even next Summer. -
Meh...I think its just a natural progression of a mix of fan approval/disappointment at different times in a teams progress. The fact that we've been stalling in the basement for 4 years naturally will bring fans to question the moves of management. And that we've been stalling not because we have been playing our prospects, but because free agent signings and trades for our precious draft picks have not panned out well, as far as getting into the playoffs. Getting value or even anything for the players we end up dropping doesn't help either. I think fans have every right to be skeptical. But I also think as fans we are hopeful before any season. I was last year at this time as well. And I am stoked about this season as well. Criticism of management will naturally decline as and if the team starts to have a consistent winning record again. Simple as that. We are only human. At least most of us.