Down by the River

Even non-contending teams will be interested because Kesler is not a rental. He's got a terrific contract.

After Shero's lowball offer, her probably screwed himself over because a lot of GMs would look at that offer and feel that they could easily provide something better than Sutter+Despres. I still like a Johansen+Dubinsky+1st deal. Dubinsky fills the gap that Kesler left, and his contract runs out around the time I'd be comfortable slotting in BoHo in the 3C position. Hank can still be a 1C but can groom Johansen for the 1C spot. Getting Maata would be pretty nice too though. Has been a while since Canucks have had a top tier D prospect (RIP Bourdon).

I haven't seen a single poster on CDC make this argument, not even close. You're just misrepresenting other people's arguments to make your own look better in comparison.

Fair enough. I guess we're upset about the same issue.

He's done that all game. Hughson has become a shadow of his old self. He used to have a few classic cliche phrases (great save Luongo!), but now he is just one cliche after another. Bob Cole is better.

I don't think he was calling fans ridiculous because they wanted to see Lu play, he is calling fans ridiculous for booing and Luing Lack. Something that is undoubtedly ridiculous.

No, its overly-sensitive Canuck fans like you who are deaf to all positives and over-emphasize a lot of negatives. There are a lot of people to not like on the CBC broadcast, but when the Canucks are bad, you're going to hear more negativity. Stop letting it get you so upset that you become blind to when truths are actually spoken.

Oh shut up DeNiro! Friedman is the one guy on CBC who consistently acts as an impartial journalist. He reported what he heard and then commented on it. I agreed with him. The fans are ridiculous, even if it is just a few of them. Its an outright embarrassment.

Not fair for Lack. Classless fans. Luongo should have started, but place your loyalty with the team, not with particular players. Way to support Lack.

Kassquatch!

I've been negative about a lot of aspects of this game, but these jerseys are some of my absolute favorites.

Bahahah. Laughed loud enough to get my girlfriend's attention. She didn't find the comment as funny as I did.

Fair enough, I haven't read all the opinions in this thread. Maybe some people feel the team is on the right track, and anyone can feel free to debate that side of the argument. However, if we decide that this team is not going in the direction that it should, which is my opinion, then we have to look for answers as to how we got to this position and how we get out of it.

Small minds amongst the people who equate thinking about the state of the franchise with jumping off the bandwagon.

His used of NTCs/NMCs was in bad faith. He did not give players these options because he felt that they had earned them. He gave them these options as a way to (a) get a discount on salary and ( try to attract other FAs. This resulted in a GM who was handcuffed when deals needed to be done to address organizational needs. The dyke couldn't be plugged and now, IMO, the hole is too big. Time to rebuild the dyke instead of just filling a few holes. On the positive, the Canucks still are one of the top teams in both defensive depth and depth in goal: Edler Garrison Hamhuis Bieksa Tanev Stanton Corrado Diaz Weber Not a lot of all-stars, but certainly 5-6 guys who can play a solid 17-20 minutes every night.

Thanks for the advertising plug

As a Canuck fan, there are a few things to feel embarrassed about today. Most embarrassing, at least to me, is that the the team is celebrating the 1994 cup run. We've done that already. Why do it today? Against Ottawa of all teams. Just a sad attempt at trying to hype a game that had no business happening in the first place.

Don't ask Darren Sharper for any.

1. Buffalo needs to showcase Miller with the upcoming TD 2. Their backup, Jonas Enroth, was also returning from Sochi. 3. Nobody is making excuses for Lu, they are explaining the rationale behind Torts' decision. A rationale that seems pretty solid.

The people who didn't find the gold medal game exciting are the same people who watch UFC and are always dissappointed if every fight doesn't end with a knock out. If you appreciate hockey for more than just a run-and-gun style, you would have loved watching the Canadian men play. Maybe it wasn't edge-of-your-seat exciting, but I just loved watching the details of each players game. The breakout passes, the quick sticks, watching Getzlaf and Perry cycling and knowing when to leave the puck for one another. Watching Crosby fire 70 mph passes on his backhand. It was a work of art, but I get that some art isn't appreciated by everyone.

It is not that I don't think Hank is a great player, it is just that Canada's team defence was so dominant that I don't think that Henrik would have made as much of a difference. Playing the US or the Russians, definitely, but not against Canada.

Zetterberg is the only one of those three who could have made a real difference. Hank and Backstrom are great players in their own right, but they would have spent just as much time in their own zone as any other Swedish lineup.

Scoring a lot of goals doesn't always mean dominance. Controlling the pace of play, winning all the battles, not giving up scoring chances, these are signs of dominance to me. Sometimes you can dominate play but run into a hot goaltender. The only poor game in my mind was the game against Norway.

Weren't you just talking about how the Canadian team was not dominant? Crosby was phenomenal the entire tournament.

People who don't feel that Canada dominated this tournament likely don't know anything other than how to count on an abacus. Canada dominated, played their system perfectly throughout the tournament.