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

Master 112

Members
  • Posts

    18,239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Master 112

  1. x-Pettersson-Kakko sounds delicious. Both control the puck so well in the offensive zone; they use stick-handling, agility and finesse to open up passing + shooting lanes and are so good at movement and cycling. They have great vision and hockey IQs on top of all their physical and technical attributes. Kakko also has an element of physicality he employs when protecting the puck, doing board-work, etc., which I think would work very with Petey's style and own strengths along the boards and in the corners. They're both elite playmakers who don't make the mistake of passing too much--they shoot and score and are good at these things. They're tricky players who can outwit and outskill defenders on the regular. In the land of implausible possibilities, us drafting Kakko this year is one of my favourites. Playing together--especially if scoring doesn't decline again--the two could easily become 100-point players in a few years. Think of a Datsyuk-Forsberg line because that's what ur getting. We could also--as I think his Liigga team has been trying to do--develop him as a centre and run EP, KK and Bo down the middle. I'm salivating. I pray for KK but would be willing to settle for Hughes or Byram. Bowen in particular would go a long way to helping our defensive corps, and I've always been a fan of building from the net out. I'm not convinced, aside from Hughes, that we have even one defensive prospect who is likely to become a #1 or #2 defenceman at the NHL level. Woo is promising but unproven (and likely doesn't have 1st-pairing potential on a contender), Juolevi could still become a reliable #4 guy and possible PP specialist but also might not even reach that, Rathbone isn't gonna save us but could become serviceable depending on the role he's assigned... I mean, we finally have a player who could be the #1 defencemen this team has never had, but why not get greedy and go for another? I really think teams in the running for a championship should ideally have a few #1-2 guys on the blue line. There are only 6 defensive slots, defencemen have higher TOI than forwards, and I think, for these reasons, defensive upgrades tend to have more value for a team than upgrades on offence. A team's depth runs down the lineup much more quickly when adding an elite dman than when adding a forward; look at what happened with the Habs (check Price's numbers) when Weber returned from injury this season. He pushed their worst d-man out of the lineup, allowed for the coach to put together better pairings that considered the 6 defender's individual strengths and weaknesses and chemistry with their colleagues, and the team immediately became much better. Byram absolutely has top-pairing upside. His numbers are fantastic, and he's not playing on a particularly good team. He's scored more in his draft year than Woo in his d+1 without Woo's benefit of playing with multiple 100-point players. People argue that it's best to draft the BPA (which could very well be Byram if he's available when we're picking), but I think there are good arguments to draft based on positional need depending on the exact situation/context. long rambling post and we're probably getting none of the players it mentions lol, sorry
  2. I agree with you, but I don't think third party videos of 9/11 are exactly the same as the one filmed by Tarrant. His was a first-person video (i.e filmed by himself) wherein he cracks jokes, plays genocidal meme music on the drive there, references other dumb internet stuff, and turns the camera to his own face before going into the building, doing everything he really could to make clear that he was committing the atrocity to help his own racist-political agenda and increase tensions between majorities and minorities, seemingly also--despite stating otherwise--wanting to enjoy the notoriety his disgusting act would earn him. He posted it jointly with his manifesto, in which presents his deranged view of the world with hopes of influencing people to subscribe to the white supremacist idiocy he prescribed himself, obviously wishing/hoping/expecting to be seen by history as someone who furthered a 'great' cause he was apparently stupid enough to sincerely believe in. There's absolutely a better argument for banning the publishing of a video made by the perpetrator for the purposes of glamorizing his terrorism and the deaths of innocent Muslims, encouraging others to commit similar acts and engendering the conditions for his genocidal belief system becoming more popular/prominent within the free Western world, and putting his name in the newspapers and newscasts... than there is for banning videos taken by people who had nothing to do with the tragedy that occurred during an event much more important on the world scale than this one. Perhaps a better approach than banning the video outright would have been to restrict its access but allow people to view it for the purposes of scholarship and journalism. Maybe this is what they want to do? (The video still should be available, imo, so we're in agreement--just think there are nuances here that weren't being acknowledged.)
  3. I'm not sure I understand the question, but do you not think one's media consumption can contribute to the radicalization process? This guy was a poster on 8chan's political board, for what it's worth, and cited right-wing figures/public speakers as inspirations for his attack. On 8ch, he would've read news articles, mainly from right-wing sources, commentating on immigration and other issues, likely without supplying argumemtative merit/integrity while having falsities within their words. He would have been in an echo-chamber for racist, xenophobic and (at times) antisocial beliefs and expressions. It feels like a lot of people go to those boards and end up getting brainwashed by all the dumb memes they don't recognize as satire. Is this guy one of them? Are you saying we shouldn't conjecture as to how someone gets to the point where they're acting out with such despicable violence? I think it's important to consider how these people become themselves, and since this guy just wrote a 70-page manifesto ranting about the reproductive rates of white populations as stacked up against the rates of other ethnicities, maybe giving some thought to the idea of shoddy, unethical journalism and bad reporting practices influencing his actions would be prudent? Tarrant has a very right-wing and confused view of the world that caused him to straight-up murder 50+ people he didn't even know. This is a theme among perpetrators of mass violence. Do you not think we should maybe, idk, research or investigate? e: honestly, I think you're taking SC's charge against bad media as an attack on the whole of the right side of the political spectrum, which I don't think is correctly interpreting him.
  4. He wrote a manifesto detailing his motivations for the attack and published it online before acting. It was always inherently political.
  5. anyway, this Tarrant guy is genuinely unintelligent. the dude has the eloquence of my toaster.
  6. wow might as well just start calling people invalids & undesireables at this point
  7. Old School Runescape I've had a love for this game for a long time; I started playing a little later than a lot of people, after the wilderness was already removed and value restrictions were put on trades to combat real-world trading. My parents bought me membership for one of my birthdays, but the transaction didn't go through or smth, and after a couple of weeks, they banned my account because of it. I was heartbroken. The game wasn't heading anywhere good, anyway, and so I stopped playing for a long time and only came back to it once F2P was instated in Old School. I've had a few different accounts recently, and lately I've been getting into the Ultimate Iron Man stuff... there's so much content that's essentially not worth doing if one has a normal account.
  8. This team could make a run next year if we acquire the right pieces.

     

    Panarin-Pettersson-Kakko

    Baerschi-J. Hughes-Boeser

    Goldobin-Horvat-Roussel

    Motte-Guadette-Virtanen

     

    Q. Hughes-Karlsson

    Edler-Stetcher

    Hutton-Tanev

     

    Prime Dominik Hasek

    Cloutier

    1. Show previous comments  3 more
    2. Pears

      Pears

      No love for Canuck legend Marik Malik?

    3. Ghostsof1915

      Ghostsof1915

      You're setting yourself up for disappointment.

       

    4. smithers joe

      smithers joe

      i’ld be happy to have as our corp pieces

      ................ pettersson...boeser

      sturm.......horvat.................

      roussel...gaudette..............

      ...............beagle...motte

      edler...hughes

      hutton...stecher

      juolevi...tanev.

       

      markstrom...demko.

       

  9. Elias "No Points For" Pettersson /s

  10. Just a note: in order to strengthen my scum game, I will be posting in all future games as 'Agnes'.
  11. Dearest @Aladeen, I hope this letter greets you well. I have received yours dated the 18th of February, and I am beginning to write after my second reading of it, sipping on a drink of tea, slouched forward comfortably in my study. It is about 7:30 in the evening as I write, and the frosted glass of my window wears now a dark tint, the area outside growing dimmer as the sun reclines behind the smoke and skyscrapers, setting a somber mood to an event of much joy: reading words of yours again, finally. How long, my eternal darling, has it been since I last saw you, when you were running down the platform and the whistles of the train drowned our utterances from the world and each other? We made gestures instead. You smiled, but I saw your tears, and they stung me. Did I truly abandon you? I am sorry; I am sorry. New York is a place of more wonder than even the cinemas told us; I find, every day, something to awe over, something to fawn about... and there's opportunity and oh-so-much of it. I wanted to become an actress; you know I did. And I tried, failing. And so I'm a journalist today, writing articles about film and entertainment for the newspapers. I much want to do the politics, but they hold my womanhood against me--they still don't recognize that I can think. I wish all men had your politics. If they did, I would have my voice. I still march forward and continue to fight for the equality prescribed by our feminist leaders, doing my part, in my own small way. One day--and you know I'm a dreamer--one day I hope to have my own newsprint. We'll see if it does become. I have kept in touch with Dorothy, writing her frequently these past several years. She's doing well and has found partnership with--if you remember him--Ernest Vandermoore, the one who's the second son of that nasty man who ran the mill, the same one who wouldn't hire you out of prejudice. But Ernest is nice, not like his patrilineage. I always believed the holy word not to hold a parent's sin against their child, and I know you do, too. Treat Ernest well if ever you do meet him. Sometimes I miss the farm, and I miss the people even more. But my life now is beyond what I could have dreamed up falling asleep in the hay-bales as I so often did when I was young and when I was with you. Do write more; we've only touched the top of what we have to tell one another. Yours, Agnes
×
×
  • Create New...