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

Baggins

Members
  • Posts

    10,667
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Baggins last won the day on June 8 2017

Baggins had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Baggins

  • Birthday June 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Burnaby BC Canada
  • Interests
    Hockey

Recent Profile Visitors

14,786 profile views

Baggins's Achievements

Canucks Franchise Player

Canucks Franchise Player (14/16)

10.3k

Reputation

  1. Not to mention his net presence. Pearson is an excellent complimentary player that does a lot right.
  2. Personally I don't see Juolevi and Gadjovich as mistakes. When players become waiver eligible, and are still fringe players, I don't worry too much about moving on from them. Particularly when there are better options available. Sometimes they can be moved for something and sometimes there's no interest in a trade but they get taken on waivers. This happens to every team with waiver eligible players. Such is life. Many had high expectations last year after the bubble playoffs. It was a disappointing season that had a lot of extenuating circumstances. With the moves this offseason many had high expectations again. But, and it's a big but, there are once again extenuating circumstances that one could expect a slow start. First more than half the team is new. That alone means some time should be allowed for players to learn the system and establish some chemistry. Second, there are only two defenders (Hughes and Myers) that were on last years roster with Hamonic (an expected top 4 d-man) not showing up at all. That's pretty significant. Again, time will be needed for the D to get to know each other and the goalies they work with. Third, Petey hasn't played in quite some time and missed training camp and most of preseason. Cut him some slack. OEL and Garland have certainly been bright spots. But the team as a whole should at least be given 20 games to gel before passing judgement. Everything Benning has done since being hired has made some sense to me. But management and coaching is at the point where some success needs to be seen. How the team does this season, and it's far to early to judge, will absolutely be a factor whether they get another year. I don't think playoff success is needed this year for Benning and company to stick around. But making the playoffs could be make or break for Benning and Green. Even then, Green may be more at risk than Benning as the make up of the roster, and our depth, certainly looks pretty good on paper.
  3. The orca does match the team name by forming a C for Canucks. If that doesn't represent the team name then the Stick in Rink doesn't either. The Flying V doesn't represent the team name or sport. The argument the Orca C doesn't represent the team name also invalidates the Flying V and SiR as NHL logos.
  4. The name Bambi is a girl's name of Italian origin meaning "baby girl". Which makes you wonder why Disney named a male deer Bambi.
  5. Drunk Alf? Which teams logo is stupid and doesn't make sense. Does Dallas having a D in their logo not make sense to you? Does the devilish NJ not make sense for New Jersey to you? Does Calgary using a flaming C not make sense? Does Detroit's Winged wheel not make sense for Motor City? Very few teams have a hockey reference in theirs logos. Very few. In my other post I said our team colors also represent where we play. Nowhere have I said I don't like our current colors. Representing where the team plays is far more common, and makes more sense to me for the franchise, than identifying what sport is being played. It ties the identity to the location. Personally I think representing the team name and where the team plays makes for the best team logos. A hockey refence can be a nice touch, but is not a critical element. Otherwise more than a handful of teams would actually have a hockey reference in their logo.
  6. Nonsense. Look at the leagues primary logos and count the ones with a reference to hockey. Then count the ones with a direct reference to where they play. Where they play wins in a landslide. The score = Where reference - 15, Sport reference - 4. You could add 6 more to the where total due to the team name being chosen to fit where the team plays (Hurricanes, Lightning, Senators and Predators). Obviously a logo representing where the team plays is far more important to NHL teams than indicating the sport played is.
  7. The Orca represents where the team plays. You know, the Orcas permanently off our coast and done in a Haida style. Very pacific northwest and more so because of the uniform colors. The Orca has history with this city. Many teams have logos that represent where their team plays. As a matter of fact there are more NHL logos with a reference to where the team plays than what they play. Ignoring the Orca jersey (and team colors) represents where the team plays doesn't make those facts go away. Plus it forms a 'C' for the team name. Saying a simple 'C' doesn't represent the team name also eliminates the SiR logo. We're not the Vancouver hockey rinks after all. If you don't like the Orca logo just say that. Saying it doesn't makes sense is just nonsense ignoring all the reasons it does make sense. If you count the Flying V as a logo it's the one that makes the least sense. It has no reference to the team name at all. It only refers to where the team plays. The simple truth is this: no matter what the logo or colors are, there will be those that don't like it and want something else. That's nothing more than personal preference. Then there are also those that want change purely for the sake of change. I've been a fan since the Canucks joined the NHL and the Orca was the first logo I truly liked. But I like a logo with a reference to where the team plays.
  8. Good for him. I really do hope he does well. Don't forget Boeser and Sutter were also out to start the season. Mac was rather likeable but the reality is he's a fringe player. I never worry about losing fringe players as it happens all the time with those who haven't established themselves as full time NHL'ers when hitting waiver eligibility. Imo it was more important to keep guys with some PK experience. I thought Petan played quite well in preseason. The problem with Mac is he doesn't really bring much more than fighting. He didn't look out of place, but he didn't exactly impress either.
  9. And MacEwen has been a force playing his 0 games in Philly. Disposal is part of asset management.
  10. We're 4 games in with 13 new players on the active roster. Plus Petey hadn't played in 7 months and we're starting with two key penalty killers out and an expected top four d-man a no show. At least give them 15 to 20 games before brining out the torches and pitchforks.
  11. Actually Gretzky was pretty specific in the areas of Petey's game that reminded him of the he played. Again, this isn't some proclamation that their careers will be the same. It's doing nothing more than comparing particular aspects of a players game.
  12. Some get pretty bent on such comparisons but they are often ignoring any context or limitation of the comparison. I made a Gretzky comparison early on but in just one regard. His shiftiness in stick handling. This isn't some proclamation that he's "the next Gretzky. It's just a comparison to one aspect of a players game. Which is quite valid as there are many aspects to a players game. For example: saying somebody skates like McDavid isn't saying they will have the same production or career. It's simply a comparison to one aspect of the player. Gretzky himself made comparisons on aspects of Petey's game to his own (broader than my own). So are you saying Gretzky is absurd?
  13. Nothing will change period. Did enforcers or scrappers deter Torres, Cook, Dorsett, Edler or any others from throwing big hits or even cheap shots? Nope. Players who play that way don't care if they have to fight. As a matter of fact, even suspensions don't deter players like Torres and Kadri. They all just rinse and repeat regardless of the other teams toughness. That "toughness" just makes some fans feel better about their player taking a big hit. It's never really deterred it though. I don't mind having a few "tough guys" on the team but they need to be able to contribute more than a handful of retaliatory fights per season.
  14. Particularly if your starting point is a team aging out with one player under 27 (Tanev) worth keeping and a farm team with nobody worth looking at. In my 50+ years of following the NHL I've never seen a GM take over a team in that bad of a situation. No matter how you slice it this wasn't going to be a quick rebuild when you need to replace the whole team. You'd need 4 NHL quality hits per draft (including star to elite talent in each draft) to turn that mess around in 5 years.
×
×
  • Create New...