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. An interesting few finds - three instrumental versions of some Band Maid songs. I'm posting them with the versions w/vocals for comparative purposes, and in anticipation that they may well be copyright struck (the instrumentals). regards, G.
  2. Not for the weak. Noise music (in one form or another) has been around for quite a while. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_music These guys have been playing since the early 70s(?). They are kind of anonymous here, but they are seen as music gods in Japan. One man's ceiling and all that. regards, G.
  3. I don't recall having previously heard this. It's kinda' good. Thanks for posting. regards, G.
  4. "Sparky"? "Smarmy"? Hey, only my significant other lady friend calls me those sorts of things. regards, G. PS - and waiting for the righteous indignation to continue...
  5. Yeah, but the butterfly can't eat a good burger with that thing... regards, G.
  6. Geez, it didn't take much to bring you out of your shell. I left a couple of obvious mistakes for you to jump on, and you didn't disappoint. regards, G.
  7. 1.) I don't see that "it" can be put all on the shoulders of the goalie, good or bad. Demko doesn't score goals (at least not yet). Demko doesn't win the puck in the corner, nor does he take faceoffs (although with that paddle who knows what kind of success he could have - but getting back into the crease in a timely fashion could be problematic). This is far too simplistic a view of of how a team works (IMO). 2.) I don't recall saying "You" at any point, except in a general sense of the word you. In any event, it was meant in a general manner, rather than a specific. If need be, should the occasion arise I shall endeavour to be clearer. 3.) I don't recall saying "You" at any point, except in a general sense of the word you. In any event, it was meant in a general manner, rather than a specific. If need be, should the occasion arise I shall endeavour to be clearer. 4.) Boredom with this might be the reason. I spent the majority of the last couple of weeks watching curling. That was interesting and fun. Baseball season is coming up, which will be a relief. I think I'll be mostly hanging out in "White Noise" in the future. The conversations are more interesting, and not a constant re-hash of the same ol' crap (Not saying this is "You" - WEGOTTACRUCIFYTHATGUY! - NOWEGOTTACRUCIFYTHISGUYFIRSTANDTHENWECANCRUCIFYTHATGUY!! - NOYOU"REBOTHWRONGIT'SALLBETTMAN"SFAULT!!! - NOOOO,IT'SALLAV'SFAULTHEHATEZTEHYUNGPLAYERZ!!!! and so on). Dman it's getting so dull to be around here. regards, G.
  8. Just to be a nitpicker, I make that 12 points for the Canucks in their last 10 games (Feb.23 - Mar.15) to only 8 points for Montreal in their last 10 games (Feb.25 - Mar.15). and 10 points for Calgary in their last 10 games (Feb..24 - Mar.15). This being said, I'm sure that you are correct, and that the Canucks will fail miserably in their attempts to reach the playoffs. Montreal and Calgary will win all of the games they have in hand so those points will sink this team's chances. Gosh darn it! Don't you just hate it when the other team automatically wins games? Oh well, baseball season starts in April. Don't you go spoiling the results for this upcoming season... regards, G,
  9. The Canucks win a close one, and it's only because of their goalie. Canucks win going away, and it's only because the other team's goalie had an off night. The Canucks lose a close one, and it's because they aren't a good team. The Canucks lose going away and it's because they aren't a very good team. This seems to be the position of a number of folks around here. I guess it makes things simple. Anyhoo, it's early. I need breakfast. Let's go have some Eggs Benedict. regards, G.
  10. The things one can drag out of one's memory. regards, G.
  11. There's a lot of assumptions here. Okay, so let's say your trade for Ekholm happens. The Canucks have him for one season. Nice, but not great for term, for what was moved out. The Canucks' cap goes up by around $2.75+ million for next year (Ekholm in, Gaudette out). I don't see how you can include Pearson being moved at the TDL as part of the "+" for your cap calculations savings of $11+ million since he would be a UFA for next season (and probably gone) regardless of any trade. Further, I'm not as optimistic as some who say that the Canucks could get as high as a 2nd for Pearson, assuming he is traded. I'd assume a 3rd at most, but yeah, a 2nd would be great... just one more 2nd for Benning to "give away like candy". Ekholm being here for one year might put pressure on Edler to sign a hometown discount contract with Vancouver,, but I suspect he was already going in that direction. I'm not suggesting that Edler would demand/get $6 million per and term, however I also would be surprised if he signed for substantially less than something around $4 million, and maybe two years at most (35+ contract concerns). Edler could also just go somewhere else, likely for more money (if that was an issue for him), or, perhaps he just hangs 'em up (much to the dismay of people on both sides of the "How do you feel about Alex Edler?" question). In any event, you do not take the possibility of Edler re-signing here in your calculations when showing pairings, assuming these reflect next season rather than the remainder of the current season. (Your "hometown discount" comment suggests that you are thinking of next season.) I've speculated that Myers would be left exposed in the draft, and he might well be taken were that to happen. Others suggest that age (31?) and contract term would perhaps give Seattle pause, and they would perhaps prefer someone else from the Canucks roster. If they did pass on Myers, what then the cap? To re-cap: If Myers is still here then we're looking at his $6 million still being here, so the $11 million in savings is down to $5 million. Pearson's $3.75 million is not applicable, so we are left with $1.25 million, of which, almost $1 million is taken up by Gaudette's contract moved out to Nashville (pre-RFA ). Add on Ekholm's $3.75 million for next year, and possibly an Edler "hometown discount" of (let's be generous) $3 million which is not considered, for a -$6.75 million. regards, G.
  12. From what I make of the quote from Kekalainen, it sounds like he's talking about a 1C, not a potential 3C (ie Gaudette),, but I could be wrong. regards, G.
  13. Well, it's nice that you are finally catching up! I've mentioned the schedule as a (partial) reason for the team's slow start perhaps as long ago as early February. Is it the only reason? Of course not, and you'd have to be pretty simple to try and parade that around as the single reason for the poorer results early on... but it sure as hell didn't help. I suppose it's just a coincidence that the Canucks are showing better results with more time to practice, and more down time between games while other teams who are now catching up in games played are showing signs of withering. One thing about this which you may like is that you can use the "schedule excuse" for the remainder of the season should the Canucks have too much success. regards, G.
  14. Yeah, Monday morning and the birds are chirping, and ... these guys are getting an early start on the day. regards, G.
  15. I had considered that very thing, but chose not to include it in my previous response. A possible answer to that point is, "What if Benn is interested more in location than in money?" Hamonic is an example of a guy who is interested in being here (or at least in Western Canada - BC or Alberta), for family reasons and the like, and was willing to take less money to facilitate that goal. I don't recall that he was interested in being in the USA west coast. I figure (assume) that Benn has a similar thought, location over money. Another thing to consider, I'm also assuming that Benn actually wouldn't be offered a *huge* amount of money/term over what he might otherwise get (certainly under a million raise, and perhaps 2 years?). The reason for this would be that the team also has to consider that Benn might not/would not be selected in the draft, and then they would have to pay up for the length of that contract. Acquiring a guy who already has a set term (1 year) and a lower cap hit (somewhere down near NHL minimum) is perhaps a safer option which might be able to be picked up for a lower pick/prospect. Now, what I've put forward are assumptions, but are they any less valid than assumptions that Benn will be offered and then accept lots of money and term? regards, G.
  16. Yeah, it certainly had its charm... for the time. Someone recorded over 9 hours of gameplay. Yeesh! regards, G.
  17. If I did have to select two out of the three to protect, then I would have to go with Lind and Virtanen. My previous comments on this subject were given with the thought that Seattle would take Myers as an experienced d-man etc. Looking at this, and having a full break down with cap considerations being brought into play is an interesting change up. I still wouldn't discount Myers being selected. His cap hit is high, but he has a good term on his deal which I would think would be attractive to a new team. For forwards, I assumed Gaudette and Virtanen as being on the protected list, mostly because of an NHL track record, their NHL potential which is still being developed, and the assumed likelihood that should they be traded, they would bring back a better return than any of the other unprotected forwards. I was uncomfortable leaving Lind off the protected list, but my thoughts were that Myers would (probably) be selected, and Lind's AHL "anonymity" would protect him. Maybe not. regards, G.
  18. Yup, my mistake. I was thinking along an incorrect path for the Chicago example. Need more sleep and breakfast. regards, G. Edit: I think I figured where I went wrong. When I first thought of this, it was pre-Seabrook retirement. At that time, Chicago would still have to leave one of De Haan or Murphy unprotected for the ED, and my brain (on some level) hadn't caught up with current events. Meh, stuff happens. I do still believe that the plan is sound, just gotta find a team willing to give up an extra d-man who qualifies. They are out there.
  19. @Ghostsof1915 Did you notice this fairly rare concert footage of Band Maid at Sakura Con in 2016? It sounds terrible for what the band is like today: bad miking, the mix was... "live" (to be kind), Miku is still learning guitar, and Saiki's voice is showing that she really did need to go in for surgery. However, one can see the future unfolding: ... and there's a copyright strike. Oh well. See how long this one lasts... regards, G.
×
×
  • Create New...