The Lock

Nothing you said indicates that he's "wrong" about what he said. You provided different information that does not nullify anything he said. He was talking about safety while you were talking about testing. Sure, there would have been less testing in the timeframe, but that does not make it unsafe if enough standards are in play. The real truth is likely somewhere in the middle; but I'm going to be honest: your attitude shows a lot of arrogance and is not the way to convince anyone effectively. "A thank you is better" wins no argument. It only shows you're unwilling to see the other side.

So, I haven't even formulated an opinion on this. What I HATE is the thread title immediately stating whoever thinks this should be the case is an "idiot". I like to think for myself thanks. I don't need some highly opinionated shmuck telling me how I should think. Come up with a normal title, then convince me, don't tell me what to think otherwise. (And honestly, I don't even care how right or wrong it might be, I just hate how this is presented, anyway /rant)

What would really be handy actually would be a comparison of each team and incumbent over the past 10 years based on size and seeing if the winning team was actually bigger than the incumbent team. Otherwise, just basing it on 1 playoffs is rather meaningless.

It's stawns who 1st started talking about "mainstream media". Aside from that... if you're going to really go into such pedantics as to attack the term "mainstream media", I'd argue there's not much difference mainstream and non-mainstream when you have "media" such as hockeybuzz and just average everyday people writing articles on CanucksArmy. Most of what you've said really is up for debate and not an absolute... unless if you ARE a fake news style Trump supporter and believe in absolutes.

If he wasn't a 4+ mil cap hit, I'd say sure, why not. Problem is he has a 4+ mil cap hit. That's pricey for a 3rd line center who can't take faceoffs well.

The problem there though is you could literally say any player's "clearly available" for the right price. So how "clearly available" was it? Again, that's going to be more bias talking at that point because if anyone claims they know the answer to that, they're full of bs at that point.

Of course you don't agree because you want it to happen probably. lol We can agree at least though that it doesn't mean he's getting traded.

Because mainstream media's about the views first and foremost. Also, rumours are going to have different levels of merit. Just because mainstream media's saying something does not mean it's as prevalent as it may seem. It's likely that media's latching onto the fact that we have a crappy cap situation still and will milk that notion with whatever gets thought of.

I think part of the problem is the notion that "free speech" is supposed to be about there being "no fear of retaliation". If we are to look at being critical of others as being potentially retaliatory, suddenly that whole notion falls flat on its face. If 1 person says something that offends a 2nd person and the 2nd person becomes critical about it and an argument ensues. They're both enacting their free speech; yet, there's retaliatory action taking place and suddenly we're at an impass on what free speech even is.

Anyway my thought on this stuff is this. If we are to go with what "free speech" is supposed to mean. Full disclaimer, I can't say I watched the whole video. 1. Everyone has the right to be critical of everything. 2. Everyone also has the right to be offended by anything. 3. Everyone also has the right to be offended by people who are offended. 4. Everyone also has the right to be offended by the people who are offended at the people who are offended. Might seem silly what I just stated, but my point is that it's a double-edged sword and it's easy to forget that there's more to free speech than just making simple statements. Is someone allowed to say racist things? Yes. Are people allowed to cancel the person who said that racist thing; thus, creating a consequence for that person's action? Also yes. Complaining about people being cancelled, you are using your free speech. The people who are trying to cancel are also using free speech.

You know.. you'd think that would be the case, but think about the random kid who decided to try it anyway. lol

I have to comment on this because it's one of my pet peeves. There is no such thing as "common sense". The entire use of the term "common sense" is to imply that your opinion is right and that only your opinion is right. It's no different than saying "everyone thinks x" which is going to be incorrect since no two minds think exactly the same.\ Opinions are not facts. There is no such thing as common sense.

We can certainly hope it was his lack of mobility. I'd counter argue this with, if we want that extra player during those seasons, why not buy OEL out once we want that useful player rather than buy out OEL now?

Given the cap hit's going up the next couple of years, the chance of contracts going up in general the next couple of years is also pretty high. Therefore, even if he were to stay where he was at in terms of skill, he'd probably still get a higher contract later on. People seem to focus on him "betting on himself" but I think the cap hit going up is also part of it.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. I'm sure you're familiar with that phrase. I'm not going to deny that we're in a bind at the moment and we need to make our moves carefully; however, if we're to just let this team play out and not try and improve the team at all this offseason, we're wasting precious time at this point. We have a core ready to go and what "go" means (ie. a playoff spot or leaving the team) is likely going to depend on how well the team performs the next couple of years. Not only that, but if you just wait an off-season without looking at your options that off-season, you're wasting potential. Could that potential prove to not be good? Sure, but so could waiting and doing nothing. Everything, literally everything is a risk if you think about it. The way I see it, your thinking right now is not unlike the thinking we had last year. We had just got off a solid finish the previous year but missing the playoffs. The core should have been a playoff team under Boudreau with that logic, yes? The major addition we even made was Kuzmenko which theoretically should have added to all of that with an entry level contract. So, while I get wanting to wait an see, I also think we really need to see what we have available with the off-season. I don't want to sit around and not improve our team, just for the sake of the team "having to earn it". It's just a recipe for more of the same in my opinion. We need to be taking risks and making the deals in order to get out of this in my opinion, even if it's to merely give us a greater chance of making the playoffs if we're to have faith in what we have already. You say it's a crime for us to be as bad as we have been. Well let's improve and not just wait for the sake of waiting so that it's not a crime this season coming up as well.

I mean, if you want, we could have not signed Kuzmenko last year. Was he a "bandaid" since you seem to imply any major signings a bandaid. Do you think he's not worth his new contract? Myers was signed by Benning in 2019... 4 years ago. Last time I checked Benning was not with the organization anymore. You're complaining about something that happened 4 years ago now by not even the current GM. Look, I get the frustration of underachieving, but if your answer is to not sign anyone in fear of it being a bandaid?... that's your fear talking above logic. If you want us to achieve you have to make the proper moves. Not making moves = continued underachieving.

Well based on this logic, perhaps this team hasn't "earned" the ability to keep players like Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, etc as well? Might as well just throw in a bunch of lesser players and have them "earn it" before they're allowed having a star player in the lineup, heaven forbid we get a player to better our lineup in the meantime!

I've expressed disapproval of big buyouts in other threads in the past and I'll continue to do so here. An OEL buyout at this point would just be another move similar to the trade that brought OEL here in the 1st place minus the fact that we don't get anything out of it in return outside of immediate cap space. It's not saving us money so much as it is moving the money down the road, making it harder for us long term in my opinion. In the best case scenario, we would have a cup contender (or at least a playoff team) if we are to take what we're being promised by management with an ounce of seriousness. If we bought out OEL right now, that's almost a 5mil cap hit for the years 2025-27. That's only 2mil in savings per year during those 2 seasons: https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-calculator/oliver-ekman-larsson So imagine having a 5 mil cap hit that doesn't give us anything during the years when we should have a good team. Not a good look.

I like Acciari despite him going by the wayside a bit since his Boston days.

I felt like I read and had way too many conversations with people who seemed to almost expect him to come here. Just goes to show that just because we have a number of Russian players does not mean every Russian player in the league suddenly magically wants to migrate to here. Imagine that. lol

The main issue I'd have with that is then we're paying over a 4mil cap hit for a 3rd line center that may or may not be good at faceoffs. Is that really a good use of cap when we're gradually going to need more of it if we're going to turn things around? Perhaps if we didn't have contracts like OEL's in the books we could afford to try that, but I'm hesitant otherwise.

I agree that it makes not sense to give up on the core at the moment. It's just if more of this continues to the point where it looks less and less like we have a good team, it's going to get harder and harder to be able to have faith in the core as a fan. While it makes no sense now, it might make sense at some point. Truth is, we don't know what this team will be like even a year from now. We can hope that it's a good team, but we really don't know as of yet. I'm not going to dispute the odds that you're mentioning, but we also need to consider the fact that we are talking about odds. The blanket statement here is that there "no guarantee"; however, what does that really mean in the end? There's no guarantee a rebuild will work. There's no guarantee our core will be good enough right now. You could literally put "there's no guarantee" on almost any statement and it would be true. And believe me when I say I've used that very statement before myself, but the problem with that way of thinking is it really doesn't amount to much of a point if it could be used on anything. As far as narrowmindedness goes, you have to consider even from a business standpoint what makes sense. A rebuild, historically, can lead to a higher chance of making the playoffs later on. Again, no guarantee, but you just have to look at the odds to really see that there's a better chance of things had we done a rebuild and not just a retool last decade. Again, no guarantee, but we're not looking for a guarantee. We're looking for a better chance, or a better odds, of it happening. Obviously though, the past is here and gone and we can yell at clouds all we want about what didn't happen to no avail. My main concern I guess is that we end up with the longest drought of not having a good team we've ever had. I'm hoping I'm wrong and I'm hoping you're right.

Definately agree on next season being extremely important for us. I would argue that, if we don't make the playoffs next season again, the question of whether we need a full rebuild will be real. Unfortunately, even if it proved to be the sound course of action, I don't have a lot of faith that it would happen due to the "narrow-mindedness" that the Acquilinis seem to possess in constantly wanting a "retool" instead. Like imagine if the ownership has given the actual nod on rebuilding. Even from a business standpoint, imagine how much more money they probably would have made by now with what would likely be a better team.

Until we have a more stable season where we're not having a dismal start followed by a "good" last leg, I'm rather hesitant on determining if we have a defense that can be the playoffs or not. I want to know what we consistently have and I don't think we've seen that yet. I'm hoping next season we have at least a decent start. Unfortunately, none of what happened near the end of the season amounts to anything come the beginning of next season given than you have a few months of no playing and likely some roster changes. It's basically a clean slate and up to us in October to not mess it up again.

I'm pretty sure if he wasn't resigned, now THAT would have been the shocker. lol I actually like Seattle's way of doing things so far much more than I've liked Vegas' moves (even if Vegas is in the SCF at the time of this post).