Baggins

Horvat for Beauvillier, Raty and a 1st comes close. Top 3 picks don't really matter much if you fail to build a team around them. As much as you need stars to win the cup it's team depth that actually gets it done.

I'd rather have Schenn come back and go with Hronek, Bear, and Schenn than have Tanev back. Iwould prefer the physical presence Schenn brings and bear is considerably younger.

The weird thing is when Tanev was here most wanted him gone - to injury prone, doesn't put up enough points, not worth it. As soon as he walks - oh no, we needed Tanev, we're lost without him. The truth is Bear seems to be pretty effective with Hughes and we have Hronek now. Tanev turns 34 next fall. We just don't need him.

I'll just point out something that was obvious to me. They didn't pull their goalie at the beginning of the penalty because they had the man advantage anyway and the two top shorthanded goal scorers in the league were out on the ice. Being down only one goal they could afford to play safe with the one man advantage for the first minute and still pull the goalie for a two man advantage for the second half of the penalty. To me that seemed rather smart.

4 - 2 Nucks Miller

Wait, moving Horvat wasn't a major piece of surgery? Adding Hronek wasn't a major piece of surgery? They never once mentioned a tanking rebuild. It's not needed and would just waste several more years of Petey, Hughes, and Demko while crossing your fingers picks work out. I expect a couple of more moves in the offseason. JR has until next September to perform more "surgery". I prefer patient and well thought out to idiotic panic moves so you can say, "look I did something". So quit whining already, you're not getting a tear down rebuild. They need to build around the high quality core they have, not tear it down and start over from scratch.

So we went from really slim to really slimmer. At 8th we had much better odds of dropping than moving up. All these seasons we've missed the playoffs we haven't moved up once, even with better odds. We have moved down a few times though, which the odds were in favor of happening. Bad odds are bad odds. I just don't worry about it. We draft where we draft.

I never have and never will cheer for my team to lose. Any player on the team not trying to win shouldn't be on the team.

4 - 2 Nucks Miller

Blah, blah, blah. Do you have a crystal ball to decide how it would have played out? The fact remains, we were in the race. Then had a play-in and made the playoffs. You do not have to go back to junior to find Horvat related to playoffs. Which was the entire point of my post. Anything else is irrelevant blah, blah, blah. Here's the simple truth, Bo has always been very thougtful and diplomatic in answering questions. Very vanilla. He did it for years here no matter what or who he was asked about. The question asked didn't require a mention of Vancouver in any way at all. But he went there.

We were 4-5-1 the last 10 games and had recently acquired Toffoli. We were in the playoff race. My point stands, you don't have to go back to junior for Horvat to experience being in the race.

2015 and 2020 ringing any bells?

The Isles are clinging to a playoff spot by 1 point tied with Florida. Odds are they make the playoffs as their last two games are the Caps and Habs. The Pens have the Hawks and Columbus. Florida has the tough finish with TO and the Canes. As much as I believed Horvat really overpriced himself I hoped he made the playoffs when traded. That said, I hope the Isles fall flat on their face and miss the playoffs now. There was no need for Blovat to even mention Vancouver in that manner. For a guy we all considered to be classy, it was rather classless. I don't see how he was done dirty at all. He asked for far too much and was traded as a result. Horvat left Vancouver on pace for a 50 goal season. With two games left he's still 2 short of 40. I don't think he should be casting any stones.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Rathbone is an offseason trade piece. Same with Hoglander. I'd be ok with either added to Myers to move him for a return after his bonus is paid. I see Wolanin as a virtual lock for bottom pair on the left side as thing stand. He has two more years at the league minimum salary. Worst case for him is press box. Two games isn't much but Hirose looks better than Rathbone as well. Then there's that other Pettersson possibly coming, although I think it's more likely he spends another season in the SHL. I think Wolanin will the #3 LD with Brisbois the press box #4 LD. Hirose would be better served to have an AHL season with bigger minutes and callups than sitting in the press box. This of course assumes they don't dip into free agency for a low cost older veteran for LD #3. I could see Juulsen being #3/4 on the right side. But it would sure be nice if Schenn came back on a reasonable deal. But I suspect he may just cash in on a pretty good season.

Do you think Rathbone would clear waivers to be sent to the AHL next season? Personally I think next camp/preseason is Rathbones make it or get traded point.

Dbl post

4 - 3 Flames Toffoli game winner Miller final home goal

I'll never ever root for the Canucks to lose.

Logos tend to become iconic over time. It has more to do the with recognizability of the logo tied to longevity/success of the company. Chicago's isn't bland and boring but is iconic because it's been around so long it's easily recognizable as Chicago Blackawks. I'd argue all of the original 6 logos would be viewed as iconic no matter what they were if as long as they remained largely unchanged. I'd argue Montreal could have gone with a maple leaf with a Fleur-de-lis within it (French-Canadian) as their logo and it would be iconic today because of longevity and success behind the logo. A logo only becomes iconic through longevity and/or success, rather than simplicity. Hence Chicago's being iconic.

I agree the udated SiR was a little better than the original. But it's still a boring logo. Since they started the alt 3rd I've always thought that's where some variety should come from every couple of years.

I said the "vast majority" of the Orca complaints, not you specifically. Yup your design articles love their bland and boring. Seems to me it would make the Blackhawks logo bad. Yet it's among the most popular NHL logos. Weird right? Nobody will ever agree on a "Canucks" logo. That's why it's utterly pointless changing it. Keep the Orca and use the third for variety. I thought they kept the boring SiR as the third far too long.

The skate isn't "overly fussy" with all those colorful strpes to make a boot? I think the Orca logo looks great. Not overboard in it's Haida style, but the inspiration is clearly apparent. Between the Orca and it's style it's perfect tor epresent "where" the team plays. The skate is just busy and hard on the eyes. The vast majority of the dislike for the Orca logo is childish clutching at straws. "Constipated", or "corporate", or "an Orca isn't a Canuck". Must - clutch - straws...

5-3 Nucks Miller

C = Canucks Just as the stick in rink does. Just because some moron in the local media back in the 90s called it corporate logo, now everyone thinks it's a mess lol.The NHL is a business, making every team logo is a corporate logo.