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

The Lock

Members
  • Posts

    10,143
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by The Lock

  1. Personally, I don't really care what I identify as (I'm probably Libertarian but whatever), but I just have to say with a title claiming "Common Sense", you know what you're reading is about to be as biased as possible to make Libertarians look good. lol Then again, I don't believe in common sense to begin with. They are 2 words purely used to manipulate and nothing more as far as I'm concerned.
  2. I don't think it's a matter of whether we can develop a power forward or not. It's more of a matter of who we've drafted and if they become successful or not, and this is going to be the case with any player. If we look at all 31 teams, some will have power forwards and some won't. It doesn't mean one is more successful at developing power forwards than the other teams. It's all a matter of the players they have acquired one way or another.
  3. I think, at the end of the day, I just want a good team. I don't care if it's all from the draft, or partially pro scouting, or if it's random people picked up off the streets. I don't expect every transaction to be perfect. I don't expect every draft prospect to make it. I don't expect even all of our 1st rounders to make it. If we have a good team in the end, then we are successful. That's it.
  4. I don't really see how either of those questions provide any accurate representation of what's going on. 1. "We are going to make the playoffs". It's kind of hard to ask for historical evidence on this when it's a totally new group of players. A lot of Canuck fans look to the past and I think that's why a lot of Canuck fans get depressed. However, Pittsburgh was bad until Lemieux showed up. If they based everything on the past there, they probably wouldn't even make it to the playoffs with Lemieux (especially when he didn't even shake hands at the deadline). St. Louis, if based on the past, wouldn't have won a cup this year. I could come up with countless examples, but I hope you understand the point. So with "we are going to make the playoffs". How do we even provide historical evidence when history doesn't actually repeat itself. It may seem like it at times, but it doesn't. 2. Jim's pro scouting: what exactly are we supposed to define here? Do players like Goldobin fall into this list? Are we talking about Leivo? If you give a list of all of the players that have been unsuccessful in trades you could be depressed. If you give a list of all of the players that have been successful, you could be happy. If you change the boundaries even slightly of what is successful and what isn't, you could make it look good or bad. So the truth is: he's going to make mistakes. He's also going to have success. If you look at just one or the other, you aren't exactly giving a realistic approach. So you say his pro scouting is atrocious, but then I wonder what you looked at to come up with that result. Did you look at every player acquired? Have you looked at other teams to compare with, both good and bad? It's easy to make claims, but it's a lot harder to actually give an educated claim. That's how I look at things anyway. There are things I know we could have done better, but I've also seen good things happen from the pro scouting, etc. I think one issue that is often failed to look at is our actual situation. If we don't have a lot of assets we can sell, we can't exactly get a lot back.
  5. I can't really say I'm understanding any of what you are saying at all. What does ownership intervention have to do with making the playoffs? Also, what do "ifs" have to do with it? If I have a greasy pizza I might be on the toilet in 2 hours. The world revolves around ifs.
  6. I'm beginning to believe that, with anything you say, the opposite is true. You seem to have that "intuition" about you. lol
  7. Actually, the Boston fanbase is far more tame than the Vancouver fanbase from what I've seen. Probably because their city actually.... win things.... But seriously. Often, they'll be fine with things that a lot of the complainers here would loose their minds about. There's a lot of elitism on these boards with people thinking they know more than they actually do and I'm not talking about homerism.
  8. I fail to see how you'd even know all of this. I realise what you are saying is your opinion and all but you are making a lot of assumptions here. Putting every kid under a single stereotype immediately makes your opinion inaccurate just based on how inaccurate stereotypes generally are. There also seems to be a failure to realise these kids are few and far between in this world which is the very reason why they are paid so much. While I'm sure Marner is having the time of his life playing the game he loves, he would be an utter fool to purely play for a team out of the goodness of his heart without at least getting a fair deal in return. I'm not saying he shouldn't accept a paycut (although that's entire up to him and shouldn't change things if he doesn't), but if his services are getting low balled, he shouldn't be taken advantage of either. If these kids are mere entertainers, then they would easily be replaced. Try replacing Marner. Just try it and tell me how easy it is. All I'm going to say further is it's one thing to be negotiating with a random person about a job, it's a totally different thing when there are only a handful of that kind of employee in the entire world and you only have access to that one player. If you aren't going to let that kid have some say in the financials, say goodbye to your job.
  9. My main concern with Juolevi I think at this point would not be skill. It would be with his health. I could see him becoming our next Salo basically in terms of injuries, but it's way too early still to completely come to that conclusion at least and we can be hopeful.
  10. Wow a "if you don't agree with me you're delusional" tweet. Either he's desperate for attention or he's delusional in thinking there's one only answer. Who needs freedom of thought since I know it all! lol There are certainly some names on CDC I could namedrop as being pretty much the same mentality but I'll keep my mouth shut.
  11. I actually think the fact that he has been developing steady despite the injuries says a lot. He'd probably be on the team at this point if it wasn't for injuries.
  12. And the exact same thing will be the case with Hughes, and Gaudette. Imagine that!
  13. At least we're safe from any offer sheets that would have come in. This is actually a benefit from Boeser playing less than 10 games at the end of his first year. So to anyone who complained about us signing him and bringing him in at the end of the season like we did: it's benefiting us right now.
  14. You missed the opportunity to double that to 420. Just saying.
  15. I can totally understand where you are coming from. I noticed a pretty significant trend in the NHL though last year especially. Pettersson getting wrestled down behind the net without any retaliation wasn't exactly uncommon around the league. The same thing happened with McDavid and others. I think what's happening nowadays is that coaches are more encouraging teams to retaliate through winning instead of through fights. I don't know if that's what the coaches are actually trying to do or not, but it sure seemed like it. That being said, maybe it was also because there was a lack of sandpaper on the teams affected, but given how many times it seemed to happen over the season, I find it harder and harder to believe that. Hopefully, we don't have to find this out next season, sandpaper or not.
  16. Have a team in Inuvik and advertise having the biggest ice rink in the world. The Arctic Ocean's perfectly safe! I swear!
  17. There's a lot of summer left, not even considering that only a certain number of those contracts will be on the opening night roster counting towards that cap, so even now it's more than 7.5mil in cap space and signing a couple of other contracts might not really have much of an effect on that. (Unless if I am just totally mistaken about how contracts work, which is possible) Also keep in mind there are rumours of Tanev and (more than rumours of) Eriksson being actively shopped.
  18. No. I wouldn't be okay with such an offer sheet as we need cap space to sign our young players later on. I think it would be mismanagement on our part in the long run and this doesn't even take into account all of the picks we would lose.
  19. I don't really think it matters who gets signed first. Cap space is clearly not an issue right now so if one player agrees before the other than sign that player. Why make him wait? I just don't see how that would be fair to Motte. I don't even see how that would be fair to Boeser since then there's the extra pressure to force a resigning. Extreme example: should anyone else Toronto had to sign last year have had to wait until December to sign since they'd have to wait that long for Nylander?
  20. Giving up assets is not the reason why you overpay in free agency. You overpay because there's competition in acquiring that player.
  21. If this was the old school NHL then I'd agree with you. However, times have changed over the past 20 years and I don't think size has anything to do with what's the perfect 4th liner anymore. It's the same with the prototypical stay at home defensemen being ditched for more mobile defensemen. It's all about mobility and the willingness to grind now more than it is size. As far as Motte goes, I'm not going to say he's perfect, but there are a lot 6 foot 5 players aren't perfect 4th line players either.
  22. How nice of that person to have that much faith in Jordan Subban! Oh wait... you mean the other way....
  23. In that case, we should go out of our way to get Ekblad. He's younger and was drafted 1st overall! EDIT: Or Murray!
  24. "3 more inches should mean Myers gets 6.8/6.5 more goals than Guddy...."
×
×
  • Create New...