Sandro17

You hit the nail on the head. Benning is a scout by nature, that's his strength and always has been. Its obvious that his trades and signings haven't panned out as well as everyone has hoped. In other words, he tends to gain value for the team by doing great draft day only for him to subsequently lose value in trades and signings. This pattern causes us to stagnate as a team. Instead, why not make trades that allows Benning to play on the field that he's a master at and acquire picks? That way, he can eventually increase the teams value over time.

Man I miss those two so much.

IMO, keep Demko and either trade/ let Marky go. Allow Demko to grow with the team. It's pretty clear that his potential extremely high. I think we get more value on our returns if we trade Marky and keep Demko. Remember, we have a cap crunch to deal with and our teams is perhaps 2 or 3 years away from hitting its peak (Might even be more).

You'll have to assume Seattle wants Marky though.

I'm glad you bumped this thread. It deserves this kind of attention.

Hello no! This is the new Burrows thread.

We've pretty much won the cup at this point.

Myers and Hughes. Also, with the amount of space the Dmen have been given recently, I'm not too worried. Besides, there is no harm in trying and it might even give Hughes a better chance to catch up to Makar. Edit: Yeah or we can place a forward there.

Its hard to say whether this is a slump or not. Afterall, most of our wins have been against weaker teams. What would I do if I were in Travis Greens shoes? Tell the power play to start taking slap shots from the point more often. I can't believe we haven't been doing this despite how often the point is open. Opposing teams have figured out our power play and are simply collapsing in front of the net and stopping cross ice passes. This forces us to pass the puck up to a D man and the D man then passes to the wing in hopes that the winger attains a good shooting lane. This is done often because cross ice passes are closed. On the other side of the equation, it is also done easily because the point is wide open. This begs the question as to why we wouldn't start shooting from the point to start threatening the opposition with slap shots from the blue line. If so, the opposition would be much more apt to start opening up those shooting lanes later on once the opposition tries switching tactics and starts trying to pressure our D men. I have no idea why Travis hasn't made this adjustment yet and I've been waiting for this adjustment for the past 2 or 3 weeks.

Win the draft lotto. We need one lotto win badly if we want to keep up with the Avs in the future. We need to wait out the buy outs and bad contracts anyways. Attaining high quality rookies would help us with our rebuild and keep us afloat for next season.

So I was looking at our core as compared to Colorado's and I realized that we'll probably be bitter rivals for years to come. We may not be in the same division, but within our conference, there isn't another team that I can see as scary as theirs. Chicago is going to have to rebuild, Edmonton has no depth, and I don't think anyone else is rising as fast as we are. In a few years we'll be a powerhouse, but so will Colorado. I see both our cores as time bombs waiting to explode. Lets look at our core compared to theirs: Hughes vs Makar Horvat vs Landeskog Boeser vs Rantanen Petterson vs Mackinnon We might have an edge in goal tending though but I see tough times ahead against in our near future than anyone else out there. Having said that, I'm sure were all in for some major excitement and an amazingly bitter but fun rivalry.

This thread will never get old. It should be an internet legend someday. You know, one of those "Hey computer, whats a legendary thread" Computer: "Burrows? Do we really need him?"

Take him at the waiver. Trade him for the 10th overall pick at the draft...again

Babcock straight up. Honestly, this guy has far more experience in coaching than Green and has a proven track record for winning. You can't go wrong with him. But what about the Maple Leafs? If Babcock were so good wouldnt the Leafs be doing good right now? The answer is no. If you're missing your attention to detail and motivation to play while Mike Babcock is coaching you, the problem isn't Mike Babcock, the problem is the players.

The fact of the matter is that this team is still so young and still trying to build its identity. We had a fast start true, but in cold streaks who do we believe we are. Lets be real here, This is Boesers 3rd year, Pettersons 2nd, Hughes' 1st and Horvat has only been named captain this year alone. He's only been captain for like 1/4 a season and he's still probably getting into the nuances of this position. Oh and did I mention Markstrom just lost a family member? Our core is still going through its growing pains. Can we really expect a team this young to know exactly how to react to a cold streak like this right off the bat? This is still a learning process from a team that is trying to understand itself and what makes it tick. It would be difficult to have top of the line success under these circumstances.

Agreed. The team is looking too stagnant out there.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

When I saw them I though "Damn those black jerseys make us look intimidating" Then I thought "But the Orca looks so cool" Then I realized "Wait...why not both?" IMO black jersey with an awesome Orca on it. It doesn't have to be a neon yellow, it could be a neon blue. Intimidating + Cool logo = Awesome

It might be because of multiple sociological factors which could range from a difference of todays values or even just a disconnect from Canadian history. Lets look at my case for example. My parents are FIlipino and my high school and grade school years were spent in the Philippines. When I moved to Canada, my history lessons were based on Philippine history (For obvious reasons). Therefore, remembrance day doesn't hit me as hard as I am not nearly as aware of Canadian history as others who may have grown up in Canada their whole lives. In fact, the only Canadian history course I've ever taken was in college. This may be the case of many new Canadians as well, however in the end, I do believe Cherry makes a point because even though I do not share a genetic heritage with the fallen soldiers of Canada, they have given me a better life here nonetheless and therefore deserve respect. THEY DIED FOR PEOPLE WHO WANTED A BETTER LIFE HERE TOO EVEN IF NATIONALLY MY ANCESTORS WEREN'T EVEN CANADIAN. Having said that, it is also a matter of globalization. As the world gets smaller and smaller, the lines between nations get more and more blurred as we come to understand that we are all human beings in the end sharing the same planet, not just a species trying to divy up land based on race (And thank goodness for that). Considering this, the value of extreme national patriotism gets weaker as a result of the idea that all human beings ought to share the same planet, the idea of "My country vs your country" is slowly becoming a thing of the past.

I feel the same way.

I'm having a hard time understanding why Don Cherry's remarks are considered extremely divisive. His points go like this: 1. Canadians should pay respect to fallen soldiers of Canada by wearing the poppy 2. New Canadians (or immigrants) don't wear the poppy 3. New Canadians (Yes even immigrants) should the wear the poppy as well because fallen soldiers have helped them have a better life in Canada Basically all he said was new Canadians should also wear the poppy in memory of Canadian soldiers. Perhaps the insulting remark here is that he comes across as though immigrants are not grateful? If I'm missing something, please tell me. Note: I am Filipino and I'm honestly not insulted at all Edit: In fact it makes me want to wear a poppy in respect.

Well I was thinking he would and should win considering he won the cup. Then I realized that the Calder is awarded for the best rookie in the NHL REGULAR SEASON. So no Elias beats him out in that regard. Besides, I'd like to see what Petterson can do at the age of 24. I mean, I bet he'd be a better asset by then that Binnington would have been.

He still appears to make low percentage plays at times (Makes poor angle shots as compared to a pass), his hockey IQ could use some work. However, he's starting to look more noticeable on the ice (Although its only been a few games) . Having said that, He's still the physical beast he was projected to be with an amazing shot, tremendous speed and boy can he hit. He has clearly improved. Unfortunately, this new level of game play has only been noticeable from a small portion of games and so we have a small sample size to work with. Will he maintain this consistency to eventually become a top 6 forward is anyone's guess based off of his historical tendency to drink and party (Not sure if this has improved in that aspect). Considering this, when he's on his game, he currently looks like he's a fringe top 6 forward who could improve to a consistent top 6 forward. He still possesses still the raw physical talent to eventually become a first line player assuming his hockey IQ goes up. Altogether, he's showing that he can fit into the second line when he's playing well and goes down to the third when he's playing average. We can expect him to improve though.

I agree. I would love to be proven wrong more by Jake

Hughsain Bolt...he's lightning fast