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

Baggins

Members
  • Posts

    11,793
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Baggins

  1. I believe the full page just reflected the ridiculous amount of online hatred Jake received after the loss. The online reaction was big enough, and vile enough, to make mainstream national news rather than just the sports segments. Much of it crossed way over the line. No kid deserves that.
  2. The headline was in fact the story. People across Canada did lay the blame for the loss on Jake, making him out as the goat. The headline was fair as it was accurate to what occurred and what the articles were about. The discrepancy is that many believed the headline to reflect what the Province and it's writers believed rather than reading the articles which were quite the opposite.
  3. Don't get me wrong, the articles didn't exonerate Jake from blame, which was fair. He did contribute to the loss. But the public explosion laying full blame on him was unfair and the articles explained why. The headline was just a truthful reflection of what happened across Canada. People love to play the blame game and Jake made himself the easiest target. Many overreacted to the headline, assuming the Province also blamed Jake or agreed with the sentiment, and didn't bother reading the linked articles which were quite the opposite. That aside I often find people here overreact to criticism of our players or team. Often the criticism is actually fair.
  4. Six (1/3) of those goals came on the PP rather than third line. Making his actual third line production decent rather than good. Splitting hairs here.
  5. I disagree completely. They were just reporting what happened online through social media after the loss. There was an explosion of PEOPLE across Canada blaming Jake online for the loss, making him the goat - which is reflected in the headline. Both of the articles (yes I read them) actually defended Jake. The headline reflected public opinion, which was true, not the opinion Province writers. I don't see how that is bottom feeding on their part. Should they have ignored that explosion of online blame because he's a local kid or Canucks draft pick? I wasn't upset about the headline or the linked articles at all. I was upset about the number of people across Canada laying ALL the blame on Jake for the loss.
  6. For me it has nothing to do with where he was drafted. It has to do with wasted talent through lack of effort. Last fall he missed fitness targets. Again. His on ice effort is inconsistent. Again, He goes out clubbing during a pandemic just before going into the playoff bubble. Stupid. He's a 5 year pro now and the same problems exist despite improved production. The defensive side of his game has also improved a little but is it where it should be after 5 years? That same question can be asked of his commitment and effort. Is it where it should be for a five year pro? I preached patience for four years but my patience has run out. Ask any GM if he'd rather have a player that "doesn't hurt the team" or a player that buys in and "makes the team better". Committing to the job is Jake's biggest weakness and the GM will look to replace that with somebody who does buy in and puts in the consistent effort. Jake is on borrowed time as far as I'm concerned. Time will run out if he doesn't get his act together as "doesn't hurt" may be ok for a rebuilding team but when it comes to playoffs those are the first players to be replaced on a team that wants to contend.
  7. Thanks, I didn't know that. I always thought he came in a D-man and was moved up to forward.
  8. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't your "big three" come into the league as d-men and later used as forwards? And as I recall the only reason Burr was used as a d-man was out of necessity due to D injuries within that game. Plus he was on our top PK unit from his first season. Meaning he was already a solid defender.
  9. My reply to that was this (I don't think it's freaking out to question something)? I myself enjoyed employees feedback and would be upfront with them and they appreciated it "Only that Benning said 2 months before BB getting hurt that he wanted another top 6 forward, (when imo it should have been a D man to focus on) Also, wasn't Baer paid $3 Million to be on top 6?, They let him play on their farm team, so it wasn't to protect him from injury The big deal i guess if you call it that is Whether Madden makes it or not, he could have been packaged towards "keeping" a D full time He wanted another top 6 forward, before BB was hurt and he doesn't now? The direction is all over the map, let the public know what the plan is He let it be known he wanted a forward, what is the plan now? The fact Baertschi has cleared waivers several times should be an indication of WHY he's in the minors. Every team in the league has passed on him for free more than once. Benning didn't only say he was looking at adding a top six forward. He also said several times through the season he was looking to upgrade the D. It all comes down to cost versus return what happens and when. Should he not be looking at all options to improve the team? What GM gives his entire plan away publicly? It's always pretty general as plans are rather fluid. Who becomes available at what price can easily cause a GM to alter plans.
  10. Each side gets 90 minutes to present their case. This includes the stat and contract comparisons from each side. The arbitrators has 48 hours to make his decision based on the evidence given by each side.
  11. Where did I say "he doesn't hit"? What I've said is you never know what you'll get from game to game or even shift to shift. His effort is very inconsistent. Nor have I complained he doesn't fight. I just said he's not the guy I'd depend on to have my back. You came up with one instance in five seasons. Wow, he's a warrior. You really need to work on those reading skills Ray.
  12. Myers isn't flashy enough for some. Many here just don't like it when players get paid what they're worth and in some cases, when paid even close to their value. Well liked drafted sometimes get a pass on this. But there's this belief that Vancouver is such a desirable location players should sign well below market value for the privilege to play here. Some will for their own reasons, like Hamhuis, but the expectation seems be be all players should. There was talk at the time Myers did have better offers than Benning made and analysts predicted he'd go for around 7m per with term. I wouldn't call it a great deal, but it certainly isn't awful.
  13. Six of his 18 did come on the PP. He is an enigma though. His poor work ethic is what's holding him back. From missed fitness targets to on ice inconsistency, it speaks volumes about his work ethic. How good could he be if he actually found the drive to be "that guy"? Horvat is where he is because of drive and commitment. He works hard to be "that guy". That drive is why Bo is a top six and a leader and it's what Jake is completely lacking to be truly valuable to the team. Those lacking commitment quickly become the expendable as a team approaches contender status. You want drive and commitment from your players. Particularly in the playoffs.
  14. My first thought exactly. The only time you get a UFA on a reasonable deal is if you're in the chase for a cup and the player wants in on it, or a player really wants to go to a team for personal reasons. In both situations the player is willing to leave money on the table to get what he desires. Both situations are relatively rare. Hamhuis took less to come here as a UFA because he's from BC and the Canucks were in a good position to compete for the cup. Double incentive to take less than market value. Those types of deals don't come around often from the open market. Most high end UFA's want their payday and security (term) and go to the team willing to offer it. They may take a slightly lower offer for a better situation but they still get their big payday. I honestly think the term those bottom six UFA's were signed to was by design and the team is simply further ahead of where Benning & Co thought we'd be. Those UFA's were brought in as role models for our young guys to learn from. I've always believed young players can learn as much, if not more, from the veterans they play with as they can the coaches. The better those veterans are at their given role the better the example for young players to learn from.
  15. Oh Bert frustrated me at times as did Naslund. Neither was particularly defensive minded. Bert frustrated me with how physical he could be in the O zone and yet passive in the D zone. Their defensive effort was often inconsistent although Naslund eventual started putting in a little more effort. But Crow was more of an offensive coach than two way back then. Unfortunately Jake isn't in their class of production, nor can I see him achieving that level. He may score goals but I think he lacks the creativity and vision to produce 30+ assists. How did Willie send him backwards? His message was exactly what Green's has been. Hard on the forecheck, hard on the backcheck, finish checks, and do it it consistently. You do that and the scoring will come. Henrik, "These young guys need to understand this is a job now. Whether it's practice or a game they need to show up ready to work". Henrik's words after Jake showed up to practice so hungover he had to leave the ice. When Bo was on a scoreless streak Henrik had a skate and chat with him about scoreless streaks. He scored that next game. You can only help those willing to help themselves. Those who listen and learn are helping themselves. After Bo's first season one of the offseason goals he was told to work on was his skating. Bo didn't just home and skate a little more, he hired a speed skating coach. The next season his improvement blew us away. Commitment and effort. Jake can't even hit fitness marks in the offseason. You hit the nail on the head - in junior he never had to work at it. Which I've pointed out a few times myself. After 5 years he still doesn't seem to want to put in the work. He's lacking in both maturity and drive.
  16. Must have missed that. I don't recall ever seeing him step up for a team mate. Guess I missed his "one time" event. You outed me gooood! Good to know he's kept up tempo "a few times" in five years. What a keeper. I "hate" the fact he has all the tools to be a very good player and the lacks the determination and commitment to fully utilize the tools. As I said, I preached patience his first four years, this year my patience has run out. He's too lazy to become what the very good player he could be. I'm not even sure he'd see being traded as a wake up call as Miller did.
  17. When has Jake ever "kept up the tempo"? That's his whole problem. Nor have I seen him defend anybody but himself. You underestimate his level of lazy. I'd depend far more on Miller or Horvat to defend a team mate than put my trust in Jake. Players that don't put in the effort are expendable.
  18. I wasn't shocked he signed elsewhere, but was hoping he would re-sign here. What shocked me was the money and term he got from Montreal. I expected him to get better than that here never mind the open market. But his agent and the Habs GM are lifelong friends. Two former Habs fired him as their agent because they believed he was looking out for the GM's interest rather than theirs. So who knows what his agent told him. One way of looking at the Toffoli trade is the cost of that playoff experience. With Boeser out I doubt me make the play in without Toffoli. I didn't think the cost was that steep myself.
  19. Well frankly I don't think Jake is the guy that helps win championships because of his inconsistent effort. He lacks the commitment. I can appreciate both types of players (finesse or physical) and believe a balance is best.
  20. I'd be happy with a draft pick. Hopefully that coming from me doesn't give you a heart attack. lol
  21. Why is he unwilling to "make the effort" to achieve that? I see it as earning it through effort while you see it as give to me and then I'll make an effort. Honestly, which seems more realistic in the real world? I hope his lazy butt get traded, After five years of preaching patience mine has run out.
  22. Or is it he just disappears after scoring?
  23. It seems the only thing that matters to you is scoring. If Jake was on pace for 20 goals, what use is he the other 60 games, if that all he provides? There's more to the game than producing. Even players who do produce can do more harm than good. You keep going on about what others don't provide, but what they do provide is consistency in their game. Don't confuse effort with result. With Jake you never know what effort you will get. That's a problem.
  24. Are you refuting Benning started with a barren prospect pool?
  25. Eriksson was up and down the lineup and often a healthy scratch. Both during the season and the playoffs. But with him you know what you'll get from game to game. Btw, it was mentioned in the playoffs, after Toffoli was injured, that when Eriksson was on Bo's line shots for went up and shots against when down compared to the other replacements. Eriksson doesn't bring much offensively but he doesn't hurt a line. The difference between Motte's TOTAL ice time and Jakes is Motte's PK time. Even strength plus PP (offensive ice time) there was little difference in the playoffs between the two and Jake had PP time Motte didn't. as I've previously shown. If you want more ice time, or a bigger role, you need to make the most of the time you get. You need to show you deserve more.
×
×
  • Create New...