-
Posts
10,143 -
Joined
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by The Lock
-
Withj OEL though, I think this is one of those things that's easy to say should happen, but to actually bring it every game on a team that's perpetually bad each year... that's a rather tall order over such a long period of time, especially when you're literally the captain of the team. I also think comparing Loui's situation to OEL isn't really a fair comparison. OEL never had problems staying in the lineup unlike Loui. OEL also is still a good player when not at his best (which ironically shows how bad of a contract Loui had for us) and was still an integral part of the Arizona team unlike Loui. So if we're talking about standards, OEL's standards were and are much higher than Loui in my opinion.
-
Been really impressed with OEL/Garland so far...
The Lock replied to The Listening's topic in Canucks Talk
I'm going to straight up say I can see a scenario where Garland becomes our next beloved Burrows. Like he gives off those vibes extremely well. We need someone to post a "Garland do we need him?" thread. -
A lot of our players get overrated though. I actually kind of fear for players like Podkolzin at the moment and the expectations on him. This fanbase has no patence to just let a player show what he will become, but I guess when does any fanbase have that patience? That being said, I don't think Gaudette's a career AHL'er if he learns to not be so cocky about where he thinks he should be in the NHL. That being said, Chicago is also not the deepest team out there at the moment (while our offense is clearly stacked) so he'll probably have his chance to either prove it or lose it.
-
I actually feel like we're approaching that "tough but honest" area in Vancouver. We might not be at the same level the Red Wings were during their time, but we have a lot of hard workers on the team now that clearly make things tough for the opponent. I really think this is something that should help us come playoff time a lot. If we already have the drive with some of our players, I can imagine that drive being contagious.
-
It's not your opinions that make people "hate". From what I've observed, it's your demeanour. You have an arrogance about you and this very post I quoted shows that arrogance. I don't expect you to care about this (although I challenge you to surprise me in caring), but since you seem to think it's about your opinions, I want to point out that it's not as I've seen others be very effective in expressing their opinions againt Green or Benning without creating as much controversy. Social skills can be learned afterall but arrogance WILL impeed social skills.
-
Arizona didn't have a 1st round draft pick due to the scouting incident that lost them a couple of 1st round draft picks. They did this trade so they could get back in the 1st round along with getting rid of, what could be thought of as baggage for them in a sub-performing OEL. Because the players they got from us all only have a year left, they could afford doing such a trade. OEL being a long term 7mil cap hit risk would have lowered the value coming to us. So effectively, we get some cap relief and a couple of players we wanted. Arizona gets a 1st round pick and rid of a long term cap issue.
-
So are we supposed to take everything you say as a joke then? Or do you just expect everyone to be a mind reader and know when you make a joke or not. Remember this is a forum: sarcasm can't be read without really expressing that it's sarcasm in some way. But hey, if you want no one to take you seriously ever, I can do that.
-
I don't really see the point in going after Chychrun's -3 when he's on a bad team and it's so early in the season. He's basically the piece Arizona is working around and this is effectively the starting point of Arizona's rebuild. Arizona's going to be a bad team and good players are going to be in the minuses as a result. So far this trade is looking good for us, but it's way to early to think about Guenthier and Chychrun shouldn't even be in this conversation to begin with in my opinion. Basically it so far looks like Arizona did us a solid, so would it hurt to at least have the descency to respect that?
-
Anyway, I've had enough of people not taking this pandemic seriously and prolonging this whole thing as a result. It gets a little much when you see death all around you while also seeing people acting like they're above everyone else. To anyone wondering why they get so much backlash about their views, just look at the death that's happened rather than pretending this whole thing is nothing.
-
This should still be pinned so long as there's a pandemic. Once there is not a pandemic then I'd agree that this shouldn't be pinned anymore, but this relies heavily on people getting vaccinated otherwise this pandemic will be prolongated. I realise some of you people who don't believe in this discussion would be against this, but that shouldn't matter as clearly people are still dying from this pandemic. Sorry for putting the lives of others above unpinning a topic on a discussion board?
-
Both drinking and driving and not getting vaccinated potentially kill others along with potentially killing yourself. The very fact that you need to question this honestly makes me wonder how in your own world you must be to not realise this. It doesn't matter if one is punishable and the other isn't when they both literally kill people in both cases. If anything, by your logic, not getting vaccinated should then BE a punishable offense if we really want to go down the path you are going with this. Screw the social norms? How about screw the people who don't give a **** about the lives of others and putting "going against the social norms and the government above people's abilities to even live". Seriously, I've been trying to be reasonable with you in all of this, but if you want to completely lose my respect, you're starting to actually do just that with with this whole pretending not to realise how drinking and driving and not getting vaccinated are similar. This isn't you not getting it. This is you ignoring it because you don't believe people should have to get vaccinated. What challange do you have? For me to be for killing people? No thanks. I'm not a sadist. I've thought long and hard on this and I firmly believe the only people who should not get vaccinated are the people who would literally die from getting the vaccine. Everyone else not getting vaccinated is being selfish and reckless in my opinion.
-
[Extension] Charlie McAvoy 8 years
The Lock replied to flat land fish's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Personally, I'm fine with shorter contracts since it means less money per contract until a player is in his prime, meaning we have a better chance to win in the meantime. I should also mention that I'm fine with having more negotiations as a result. While some of those negotiations might take until the season starts, they still got signed in the end and that's what matters. (It also probably doesn't help that I'm haunted by the Luongo contract and see how other long contracts fail miserably later on) -
So you're not okay with people drinking and driving but you are still okay with unvaccinated people killing potentially millions by prolonging getting rid of the virus.... The only reason why you think this is a "strawman argument" is because it goes against what you are saying; yet, you are showing yourself to be a major hypocrite here. I'll be completely honest: your logic here baffles me. I don't understand people like you. I think either you know what your saying is wrong but are afraid of being wrong or you just don't want to believe the inaction of not getting vaccinated kills others when it's clearly proven that it does.
-
We might have to agree to disagree on this then, since I think what we deem as being "tough teams" is likely fundamentally different. I personally don't see 1 tough guy on a team as meaning a team is a "tough team". I look at it more as a toughness by group. Perhaps that's our difference? So sure, there's Maroon on St. Louis or Tampa Bay, for example, but that one guy alone's not going to make the team hard to play against.
-
I'm not saying no team that won the cup was tough. I'm saying I don't see the correlation between toughness and actually winning. For example, if you look at that St. Louiis team, it was a deep team. If someone got injured, it didn't seem to matter. Same with Tampa Bay. These teams also played against a "tough" Dallas during their runs and Dallas had more momentum than a "tough Vegas" due to us making them crap their pants the series prior through a hot Demko. Basically, Maroon says hi.... but he's not the reason why they won the cup, nor is Wilson the reason why Washington won the cup. Sure, those pieces would have helped, but do these teams not win without them if they still had the same momentum and luck?
-
[Extension] Charlie McAvoy 8 years
The Lock replied to flat land fish's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Okay, then what is your opinion of Hughes' contract? -
[Extension] Charlie McAvoy 8 years
The Lock replied to flat land fish's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Rasmus Dahlin's contract thread when you claimed that Hughes contract would be not what we'd expect. Then you claimed that people didn't expect it to be as high as it was. -
Come playoffs, determination, momentum, less injuries, a hot goalie, and pure luck's what's going to win a cup. Toughness don't mean much if any of those are in the other teams' favour. Just look at the most recent teams who have won a cup. Tampa was a completely different team than St. Louis. St. Louis was a completely different team than Pittsburgh. Perhaps just as important, look at the teams who made it to the finals but were exited. There are so many teams who have made the finals that were rather unexpected. We see "tough teams" exited in the 1st round. I just don't see the correlation between toughness and winning the cup. There's just too many other factors for this to be the case.
-
[Extension] Charlie McAvoy 8 years
The Lock replied to flat land fish's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
I'm pretty sure you would complain if we did an 8 year year with Pettersson or Hughes since they'd have a higher cap hit up front. In fact, you already kind of have when you talked about the money of Hughes' 6 year deal. It would have been higher if it were 8 years. Must... Be... Nice...to... complain... about.... everything... (although I'm sure you love the extra attention right?)