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

ABNuck

Members
  • Posts

    1,607
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ABNuck

  1. Sorry, forgot to mention my last bike...GSXR...my wife (mentioned above) loved the Ninjas, but I've been Suzuki my whole life.
  2. This is what my wife had before moving to the US...oddly enough this bike was not permitted in the US as it has too high of a HP to weight ratio. Hard to tell with the exhaust mods but is this the RR version? That's what my wife had, the RR version...I think that's why it was not allowed across the border.
  3. I honestly think that big Lam will have a similar career trajectory as Myers, so that means we would get Buffalo years Myers, not the more recent editions. Oddly enough, Myers best 2 years in the NHL were his rookie and sophomore campaigns, so if we could milk the same production from Mav over the next 2-3 years then we might have all players peaking at just the right time. I know, big longshot, but hey, you gotta shoot your shot right? But as I said, Luneau is my desired pick...I just think Lameroux would be a pretty solid consolation prize, but maybe you've seen more of him than I have so you have a better insight...I'm going mostly off of stats and video that's provided.
  4. You forgot Nemec and Lameroux as draft prospects...Nemec is top 5 will be gone, but Lameroux is late 1st, early second. But my preference would be Luneau...great hockey IQ at both ends of the ice, and great skater...perfect compliment to QH.
  5. Excellent point sir...one of the things I enjoy about these forums is the discussions with reasonable and intelligent fans like aGENT. We are able to each express our point, be them different, and not start tossing daggers...it's quite refreshing! I'm going to go back an upvote the interactions because they were executed with professionalism!
  6. They are just gaining their identity now, and Miller is very much a big part of that identity. If we move Miller, it will be a step backwards, not forwards...we gotta keep moving forward. Again, we will not gain by subtracting in this case, we will only delay AGAIN the compete window (hence the perpetual rebuild comment). Despite what you have negatively analyzed for this team, it's not nearly as bad as what you have stated. Let's look at them one at a time: Overly reliant on Demko...I don't think so. Every good team has a backstop that steals saves and games for them, part of the formula. Lack size and grit...save for Garland, the other 5 top 6 forwards are all 6ft and over. Horvat, Miller and Podz can all play tough and even Garland plays with an edge. Pettersson is soft and Boeser is average. The other 6 forwards are decent sized or play solid, not easy to push around. Now for the D, Hughes and Hunt are the only 2 under 6ft, and both can take the rough stuff no problem. We have players that will step up (OEL, Schenn, Podz, Horvat). Speed...Horvat, Garland and Miller have good speed. Pettersson and Hughes are shifty, other critical players are at least average (granted some players are slow ie/ Chiasson but they aren't critical to the success...they can be replaced cheaply). PK...agree, it has been tough but mostly in the front half of the season, much better now. Depth...agree, but that is not easily fixed. In fact, by trading away at the top end you sacrifice what Miller brings to the table in hopes of some depth in the future, not worth it. Depth will come through the draft and development, not by trading away our valuable players now. Again, we end up in a perpetual cycle if we do that. 3C...100% agree, but read my last post. This is the area we use our $$ to fix this off-season. D structure...somewhat agree but again, keeping the core 4 together (Hughes, OEL, our new RHD from the draft and whomever fills the 2nd pairing slot...hopefully Schenn) and allowing them to build chemistry and learn a working system is still better than tearing it down and starting over. I believe we will be further ahead and keep moving forward if we keep our top 6, improve the D and the bottom 6. It isn't gonna happen in one season. Next year we finish building the team we want, make the playoffs and gain some experience, then in the following year we should be setup to be a top 8 team...anything can happen from there. For the first time in a few years I'm actually optimistic about the core and the direction.
  7. Wash, rinse, repeat. When does the rebuild actually end? When is it sufficient? We can play what if we trade this guy for that guy, what if we draft the next superstar...what if, what if, what if. Sooner or later we gotta build around a core. The best teams, the top tier teams are the ones that stick with their 10 best players and build chemistry with the guys that will be playing the bulk of the minutes. If we keep trading the players that give us an advantage then we'll never get there, we'll be perpetually in rebuild or middling mode. You rarely can replace the point production of one player when it's so high. So unless Pettersson and Boeser suddenly find an extra 15-20 points each and we add a 60 point player somehow (not sure what hat we pull that rabbit out of), why not just stick with the 93 point guy on the best contract in the NHL right now (save for MacKinnon). We can add on to that. The guy we CAN replace is Myers through the draft. He has 17 points so far this year...I'm willing to bet that we can replace those 17 points with a rookie RHD. So we give up nothing offense-wise, we add a big RHD on an ELC for the next 3 years, and we can use Myers 6 mil to keep Boeser and ADD better 3rd line players to compliment what we have now. Next year Luongo's dead cap is gone (we still have Holtby and Virtanen but we net gain 600k). Sutter's is off books and we can buy out Ferland...nets us another couple mil. We already signed Martin for half of what we paid Halak, so there's another 3/4 mil. Our top 6F are Pettersson, Miller, Horvat, Garland, Boeser and I think Podz could step up. Let's say we have an extra 6.5mil next year. Brock gets 1.65 over current salary, that still leaves about 5 mil to bolster the middle 6 with another high end centreman. Our 3rd line would be Pearson, Hoglander and possibly Dickinson or the high end C. Don't forget we will also get an asset for trading Myers. Everyone healthy, good depth, good coaching in a good system, awesome goaltending...this team will be a playoff team next year...I predict in the 10 - 13 range overall.
  8. This again...so which one of the above named players will net us 90+ points next year to replace Miller's lost production? I'm not 100% convinced that all 4 of them combined would give us 90 points. You simply cannot replace Miller's offense. Here's the list of players right around JT in the Stats: Panarin (11.65m), Marner (10.9m), Rantanen (9.25m), P.Kane (10.5m), OVI8 (9.5m) and Stamkos (8.5m). JT makes 5.25m and is locked in for the next year...there quite simply isn't another NHL'er right now that is more efficient $/pt and plays / scores at a first line rate than JT Miller, we have him, everybody else wants him...they can go suck it! Especially a couple of middle 6 forwards or middle pairing d-men. Put it this way, if we had Miko Rantanen on our team, would you trade him? No, you would build around him. We actually have the same point production from a player for 4m less, but you want to trade him? C'mon man.
  9. And that high 1st round pick will hit the 90 point mark right outta the gate like Miller will next year? No? Didn't think so. That would be a HUGE step backwards for a team who's compete window is over the next 2 - 4 years. We simply CANNOT constantly be in rebuild mode, sooner or later you've got to go all in.
  10. Right from minute one of this franchise's existence, the draft lottery gods have not shone favorably on us. Even our most famous (or infamous) #2 / #3 pick arrangement was highly engineered, not something that fell to us. One day we'll get #1 OA, let's just hope it's not in a year when a Nail Yakupov type is touted as the #1...that too would be very Canuckian.
  11. So true this year! This is by far the most messed up draft from positions 5 onward, what you stated is so true, and could clearly benefit the teams picking 10-20 more-so than in other years. We could pick at 15 and get a better player in the end than was picked at 6. Travel restrictions for scouts over the past 12-18 months has absolutely messed up the Central Scouting rankings. Add to that the incomplete Worlds and the scouts just didn't get a chance to see some high prospects in head to head competition against their draft peer group...I would hate to be a head scout right now going off of incomplete data, but then again, every team is handcuffed by the same set of circumstances...it will truly be a bit of a crapshoot after the top 5. Best to stick to a North American scouted skater since our scouts were better equipped to witness their work when going head-to-head against other highly skilled talent...again, just my opinion. When it comes to big RHD's it becomes pretty clear, Jiricek (sure bet) and Nemec (fairly sure bet) will be gone, which leaves us Luneau and Lameroux as the top North American RHD prospects.
  12. No. Keep Miller, trade Myers. Draft RHD = free asset (in trade return for Myers). If you dump Miller you need to replace him. WAY easier to replace a top 4D than a 1st line player, especially your leading scorer. None of the 4 mentioned from Philly will replace Miller, so unless we take a Dman from Philly and draft a 1st line forward, we will be stepping back, and there are no guarantees going forward that we will be able to easily replace Miller's points by going F/A or future draft prospect. Therefore the logical path is to replace the player we can through the draft (Myers...especially if we pick Lameroux), hang on to our most valuable asset and build from there. Addition by addition, not addition by subtraction.
  13. Need RHD for Hughes: Jiricek will be gone...aiming for Luneau (6'2" 190#) or Lameroux (6'7" 200#)
  14. Some additional interesting info...head-to-heads: TUE 26 APR - VGK @ DAL (Definitely sucks as one of them will come away with 2 points) THU 28 APR - LAK @ VAN (Could be our make-break point of the season)
  15. Time to update the ".500" file: In division LAK - 4 games remaining would give them 96 points VGK - 5 games remaining would give them 92 points Wild card NSH - 5 games remaining would give them 98 points DAL - 6 games remaining would give them 97 points If we can run the table on the balance of games (MIN / CGY / SEA / LAK / EDM) we would finish with 97 points So the final standings would be: Pacific Division 1 - CGY 2 - EDM 3 - VAN 97 points ========= 4 - LAK 96 points Western Conf COL / MIN / STL / CGY / EDM in 6 - VAN (by virtue of finishing 3rd in PACDIV) W/C: 7 - NSH 98 points 8 - DAL 97 points ========= 9 - LAK 96 points 10 - VGK 92 points If DAL plays .500 hockey (per the model above) they would finish with an ROW of 42 and we would have an ROW of 40 so they would take the tie-breaker for the final W/C slot in the West should LAK turn it on a bit and still hang on to 3rd. To summarize, our most affirmative shot at making the playoffs is to overtake LAK for 3rd in the West. Our next most affirmative shot would be for DAL to play .500 hockey and for their WINS to come by way of Shootout which, I believe (please correct me if wrong), do not add to their ROW total. Obviously the best shot is if we run the table and LAK crap the bed in conjunction with another team crapping the bed as well, or 2 of the W/C competitors completely forget how to play hockey. Again there's 3 slots up for grabs and 5 teams competing for them, so we need to beat 2. EDIT: I just re-read the tie-breaker scenarios...it's RW's first, then ROW's...so the Dallas scenario does not work the way I presented it, we currently have 2 more RW's than they do so that works in our favour if we do end up tying for the final W/C slot.
  16. Seriously? Luke Schenn says "Yo!" What is it that we want? A team of goons? The best prototypical "pushback" player is the guy that also contribute in other ways. To win we need offensively focused players, not goons. So we're trying to make the playoffs...we're pushing as hard as we can. We're 6-0-1 in our past 7 games, winning by a combined score of 34-14 including a couple of wins against teams we're chasing...what more do you people want? Based on how we've played since BB took over, it's obvious that it was the system, not the players. We are 75% of the way to being a serious contender and some of you want to just blow it up and start over. Just enjoy what we have, why do some of you have to try to destroy the entertainment of this sport...it's just entertainment! I venture to guess that most who have these "expert" opinions about the best way to "fix" the Canucks have never coached other than their own kid's team and play hockey with their buddies on Thursday night at 11pm.
  17. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in Dallas, we shall fight on the ice and in the corners, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the dressing room, we shall defend our Arena, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the power-play, we shall fight on the penalty-kill, we shall fight in the attacking zone and in the defensive zone, we shall fight in the creases; we shall never surrender!
  18. For sure...that was crazy! Man do they suck! Well, here's hoping we can pull this off...I'd love for us to at least get one round of experience for the team, still pick between 16-20 to see if we can land the big RHD at the draft, and hopefully get rid of Myers contract so we can re-sign Boeser and Miller. I like Myers, but he reached his peak a few years ago in the Peg. Let grab another young Dman, pair him with QH and let the whole core peak together at the same time...kind of a group climax if you will...
  19. Dude, that's like saying "look, the teams with more wins seem to have more points"! No kidding. I was stating that the goal differential seems to be an interesting stat in that one of the teams, the one hanging on to 3rd in the PACDIV (and what will probably ultimately be 8th in the Western Conference) has a negative +/- while two teams that are climbing fast right now have a positive one. Of course a better ROW will mean the team is more likely to be higher in the standings, not much interesting there bud
  20. Interesting STAT: All teams in the playoffs in the East have a positive goal differential, all teams that missed in the East have negative goal differential (makes sense) There are 8 teams in the west that have a positive and 8 teams that are negative...seems like a pretty natural stat to divide the top 8 from the bottom 8. Here's the interesting part, the LAK have a negative goal diff (-5 right now) but are clinging on to that 3rd "guaranteed" slot in the PACDIV. 2 teams below them (VGK +22 and US +13) are positive, and both climbing fast. I honestly think, based on where teams are and where they seem to be headed, that the CNTDIV will place 5 teams in the playoffs, and the PACDIV will only place 3...so it will basically be LAK, VGK and US fighting for 3rd in the Pacific. Of the 5 teams fighting for the 3 last playoff spots in the West, LAK (4-5-1) and NSH (5-4-1), the teams currently holding 2 of those spots, have the worst records over the past 10 games...and the 3 teams trying to catch them have a better record over the past 10...this is gonna be a close one folks.
  21. Hmmm, I dunno...seems like addition by subtraction. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to have DJ in our lineup, but the other 2 RHD I mentioned could turn out to be almost as good, and we get to keep Miller for his offensive side role. If you delete Miller and his points just to shore up the D, then you might still lose a bunch of games cause you can't score. We need both to compete in the next 2 years. Pickup the RHD to pair with QH Dump Myers for a 2nd Use the extra 6mil capspace to re-sign Miller and Boeser. Gives us both the D and the O needed to compete.
  22. Yup, agree. We're most likely picking around 15 instead of playing a round of PO hockey...would be nice for character building, but a nice big RHD would be nice too!
  23. And as mentioned, an LAK collapse also helps us to finish 3rd in PACDIV so there's that possibility as well...and as I stated, it might well be our best shot.
  24. 4-0-1...4-3-1 left for my prediction. I am now hoping that I am grossly wrong and we go something like 6-1-1 and finish with 95 points. If the clubs above us play .500 hockey then final standing would be: IN DIV: LA - 95 points (this might actually be our best shot...our ROW would be better) W/C: NSH - 98 points / DAL - 97 points / VGK - 93 points...basically it wouldn't matter if we only pass VGK as NSH & DAL would take the other W/C slots. So as mentioned above, I think our best realistic shot is if LAK play .500 or worse (they are 4-4-2 in their last 10) and we take 3rd in PACDIV. It's weird that WPG could actually go on a bit of a run, finish with 96 points (6th in CTLDIV) and the PACDIV 3rd place team (LAK or us) would get in with 95 points...sometimes the NHL is weird.
×
×
  • Create New...