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

Jester13

Members
  • Posts

    5,817
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Jester13

  1. I'll agree with the idea that I sure wish our guys would all show up every game, as then I feel as though we're a top ten team in the league. The problem is that we still see too many passengers each game. To me, it's unacceptable for our top guys to only show up now and then. Bo especially, as he's supposed to be our leader, yet he's so inconsistent. When he's on, he's in complete beast mode and can be a difference maker. Unfortunately, the majority of games I see him floating around every shift and just going through the motions. This is why I think management has such a tough decision, because it's very hard to determine who does and does not want to be here. They say they want to win, but then they often don't show up to win.
  2. No one here "wants" to get rid of Miller. The reality with our age, cap, trade haul, etc. means we might "have" to get rid of him.
  3. Why? Lysell is extremely unproven so far. His stats aren't that great, are they? I don't see it, but maybe I'm missing something? Garland is a proven NHLer.
  4. Boston would definitely need to add. Debrusk comes with baggage and has been regressing, Lysell is unproven, and Garland is an established point-producing forward who games hard and is signed to a friendly deal for many more years. Plus adding a 3rd? More like Lysell, Debrusk, and a 2nd for Garland.
  5. Hahaha, I just pictured management on the phone: "And while you're at it, throw in a 1st as well, cause eff you."
  6. Agreed. It's also why I highlighted the fact that we're in an Internet forum and not writing academic papers here, or writing for government or the private industry, or anything technical whatsoever. It's an informal forum. Full stop. Rest assured that he's the only one who failed to comprehend your ubiquitous definition of the term within the sporting world.
  7. What about Petey, Garland, Rathbone, and a 1st for both Hughes? Eh? Eh?
  8. An ellipses is used as an omission. In this instance, Provost first agreed with the poster and then omitted information before adding to the conversation, essentially saying to the poster, "I completely hear what you're saying, even agree with it, but...". Do you see the difference? Provost didn't actually say the words, "I hear what you're saying" but rather said it through an omission. This omission is his thoughtful pause. The difference is slight and can be hard for some to comprehend, but it's there. Maybe you can enlighten us as to how he used literally incorrectly? It seems as though you're missing something again here. Also, you have a misplaced comma after "being said", but, please, keep going.
  9. If you're referring to his post above, well, he has you again, as the ellipses was used quite well to portray his thoughtful pause of reflection on the poster's prior response before he provided his further addition to the conversation. It's also important to consider where we are: an Internet forum. This means that writing can be informal and still correct, as the rules are relaxed. But, if you would like to continue critiquing others, I recommend getting your own rebuttals spot on, as you lost when he literally addressed his meaning behind "untouchable", and you lost with the ellipses. I'm more of a word person, but if my math is correct... 1... plus 1... equals, yup, you're 0/2. Wait, you also missed a comma after the word ellipses, so I guess you're 0/3, which means:
  10. Nothing to see here. Rumour likely leaked to light a fire under him. We need his tenacity and points to keep the ball rolling. He's integral to our team.
  11. Maybe Laf comes back in the trade and a larger role on a young, skilled team sees him take strides?
  12. Two things that you're still ignoring to address: 1) The quality of coaching and winning under a new coaching staff yet still the same personnel, and 2) how you've said we'll be a worse team if we trade Miller, all while not even knowing who we get in return and what that difference will be - and let's not forget that this management group also has lots of time to even still make this team better in the offseason, well-before Bo's contract is up. It's a big assumption that simply losing Miller means we're taking such a large step back that it will push Bo to requesting a trade or simply signing elsewhere in FA. Maybe he sees this new management group with a solid vision, with important pieces coming back in trades, and a waaaaay better coaching staff, and all of these things drive him to signing on again with much more hope for making the post season and being contenders with the team that drafted him and made him captain. We simply don't know yet, but to so emphatically claim that he's as good as gone is a hasty one.
  13. You're preaching this without any moves being made yet, and, again, ignoring how well the team has played under Boudreau, even when they're a depleted lineup. Your bias is getting in your way of your reasoning skills.
  14. Don't forget the rest of his quote: “In order to win in this league and to win in the playoffs...not only do your top lines have to score but you have to have that depth in your lineup,” said Horvat when asked what was missing from their lineup. “I think if we can add that we're gonna be really successful.”
  15. I would be shocked if NY gives up on Laf, and even more shocked if they also gave us Schneider and a 1st to go with him for Miller. If we throw in Motte and retain 50% on Miller then they might bite.
  16. You're making some very big assumptions in knowing their thoughts and feelings, especially after the Green/Benning debacle and how much better they are now. Careful, I got laughed at and flamed just for saying that if we had Boudreau to start the year we'd undoubtedly be in the playoffs. You too, watch out for the flamethrowers
  17. You realize players can ask for a trade, ya? He could easily get locked in, and if it doesn't pan out to his liking they can trade him then.
  18. If we had Boudreau to start the season we'd undoubtedly be a playoff team this year.
×
×
  • Create New...