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

Gollumpus

Members
  • Posts

    7,291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Gollumpus

  1. Have we heard anything about whether or not Pearson wants to be traded this year? regards, G.
  2. This makes it sound like how I've heard some stand-up comedians work on their delivery as they are learning their craft. My two-bits worth, I've rarely had to speak in front of large crowds (groups of 500+ on the spur of the moment), but when I was put on the spot, I used my "amateur status" as a shield, and I spoke in a manner which demanded attention (but not aggressively so, if that makes sense). Smaller groups felt far more intimidating. As you did, I made it light and informative. Getting the crowd to like you is half the battle. regards, G.
  3. I've assumed that, more often than not, these extra players are included to "balance" (not the right word) the number of contracts which one team has with relation to the 50 contract limit, as much as it has to do with the cap. There usually seems to be a couple of contract wiggle room with each team. I currently see Calgary is at 46 contracts (Toffoli in, Pitlick out) while Montreal is at 48. Perhaps Calgary's desire to include Pitlick in the trade is in part due to their plans to be active at the TDL, so having more roster spots available would be advantageous in getting some additional depth. Pitlick doesn't really hurt Montreal's cap this year (with Toffoli being moved), and he may not e signed for next year, and (I'm assuming) Montreal isn't going to be all that active in bringing in lots of contracts at the TDL, without a corresponding number going out. regards, G.
  4. Ekman-Larsson has a full NMC for the entire length of his contract. Myers has a M-NTC for the entire length of his contract. Pearson has a full NTC for the first year of his contract, a M-NTC for the second year, and no trade protection in his final year. regards, G.
  5. Just a reminder, Pearson has a full NTC for this season, so any trade would require his agreement. regards, G.
  6. Well, it depends on who you are speaking about. Some folks around here have a short memory span.... btw, what did I have for lunch today? regards, G.
  7. I keep getting the above mixed up with this: regards, G.
  8. Yup. In MLB if you are getting a hit once in every three at bats, there's a case that you should be in Cooperstown when you hang 'em up. Granted, there's a better case to be made if a lot of those hits were home runs. regards, G.
  9. Kind of like how George Burns was Jack Benny's kryptonite when it came to laughter, Akane is to Misa... so there are lots of wings being handed out when they are about. This being said, if the distribution was based on Akane's smiles, then there would be an infinitely long backorder (especially when she is drumming).. Case in point, during the filming of "Gion-cho" Misa has a "cooing" part (starting at 0:24, and transfers to a finish with a shot of Misa, Akane and Kanami). During the filming of that sequence, Akane let out a rather substantial fart, which crushed Misa, but left Kanami rather un-phased (0:23 - 0:28). This segment used to be easier to find, but a lot of Band-Maid history is being erased from many parts of the interwebz. regards, G.
  10. The more veteran players were (probably?) kept because they were veteran players, and veterans (supposedly) bring more to the table than rookies. We've seen what has become of the team's now former prospects, and they haven't shone all that brightly in their new circumstances. Have the veteran replacements really been all that much better for what they should be able to do for the team? I doubt any believe that they would provide much/any offense, but rather that they would be reliable defensive players, who would chip in a few points, and also provide a bit of physicality when needed. It would seem that they were (somewhat) successful in chipping in a few points, but their success with everything else is questionable. Numbers aren't the real issue here, it's the loss of potential in letting go of Gadjovich and MacEwen. *Maybe* they turn out to be something more than what they were while they were here under the former system... or maybe they won't. Maybe they would have shown a bit more under the new coach and systems. I suspect that they would have brought a bit more energy to the building. It's not like they would cost any more than the guys who were kept, yes? And if the new coach/management decided that they weren't needed here, then they could be waived, and everyone could get on with their lives. regards, G.
  11. Speaking of top-5 favourite rockers: regards, G.
  12. Small mistake of putting the wrong name to the other guy's stats. Easy to see what happened, and no big deal. regards, G.
×
×
  • Create New...