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

canuckistani

Members
  • Posts

    2,769
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by canuckistani

  1. Not very, because they already got a generational talent as 1C and another top-10 guy as 2C. Phil Kessel is good for the Pens, but Phil Kessel is also a waste of a talent buried so far down the lineup or atleast, when he is not on the PP with Crosby/Malkin.
  2. The 'Phil Kessel in Toronto' effect. Having three top-line LWs or in this case, potentially 3 top line RWs if Peterson plays RW (it'd be Boeser, Petterrsson and Lind) while having only 1 top line centre, is a big problem.
  3. Well that poses a problem. A big one for the Canucks. Because if Pettersson is too small to play centre, we end up having 3 top line LWs in the system : Baer, Elias and Dahlen, with only one top level centre (Horvat) between them. Now, one of those 3 LW/potential LWs is going to be wasted on the third line. So it'd seem, we have a very good reason to make Elias stick as a centre-man and if not, trade one of these three to get a top flight centre-man.
  4. Doh. Thank you for the correction. So you are saying that in the NHL, the centre-man needs more muscle strength & size than wingers, because the battle for position in front of the net is more intense in both ends, than by the boards ? ( i am not asking a rhetorical question, i am trying to understand). Do you know if Petterrson is any good at face-offs ? You said you've been watching him, does he take the occasional draws when his regular centre is waved off ?
  5. Because Horvat went to the playoffs in his first/second season and already DID have experience playing in a decent team, which is trying. Tanking, ie, losing with crap strategy is not what the Canucks have done. Either way, Horvat is the exception to the rule, not the standard. Taylor Hall is doing fine in New Jersey *NOW*. When he went, he was struggling, because of the years of losing culture ingrained in him. You are simply passing off your knee-jerk feelings as facts, while having no basis in thinking so.
  6. Can someone please explain to me: 1. Why is Elias not playing centre ? i gathered that was his natural position growing up. 2. Why is it easier for smaller forwards to play centre than winger ? i'd gather your size/reach become more of an issue during board battles,which wingers are more prone to getting into than Centres, no ?
  7. Sorry but that is completely wrong and most likely, spoken like someone who's never been/never tried being a pro sports guy. Losing does ruin development, because losing and losing hard, tends to shake one's confidence. When things persistently don't work, even when you are not to blame, its human competitive nature to start re-evaluating everything- including your strengths and things you do well. Especially in a team sport, where 'doing the right thing' is even more murky. There is a reason why all the Edmonton draft busts aren't exactly improving over time or in their new homes right off the bat. Because confidence,once shattered, is like going into a boxing match wondering how badly you will lose. Really hard to regain. And this is why teams that really do tank, end up stunting their youth's development, ala Edmonton and its 'lost generation'.
  8. Um, with hands like that, if he'd been 190 pounds at draft like Auston matthews, he'd be consensus #1. As for ectomorph vs endomorph frames, tall ectomorphs take time to fill out. I am a 5'7 endomorph, before i became a fat & pudgy mid 30s guy, i attained my sporting muscle mass at age of 17...always hovering around the 150-160 lbs mark. My friend who is 6'4 ectomorph, was a beanpole-ish 160 pound 6'4 dude at 19, ended up filling out to 190 lbs by the time he was 24-25. With his height, i can see Elias topping out in the 180-190 zone if trained properly. Yes, his older brother's weight is a big red flag, but Elias will have top of the line fitness coaches looking to specifically increase his mass, his brother, who was a 6th round draft pick who never came to North America till this season, had far less help. At the end of the day, any fitness coach will tell you, if you are in the 188-190cm zone (6'2-6'3) and don't attain atleast 180 lbs weight, you are doing it wrong/not trying hard enough. Elias will never be the guy who's gonna have a defenceman hanging on to him while he scores a goal, not unless he has exceptional puck possession like Henrik or Daniel Sedin do. And he doesn't need that kind of power either. If he has good enough edge work (which he does) and elite hands (which he also does), he is going to be the 'weave and bob through defensemen' kind of player. Which should provide a VERY GOOD 1-2 punch for the Canucks down the road if he does 'stick at centre'. Horvat is going to be an elite/top end ectomorph centreman with bulk & speed, who 'busts his way into the middle of the ice and creates his own lane'. Elias is going to be a 'weave and bobble till he finds a lane' kind of guy. Thats basically covering two very distinct (and valid) styles of elite top end play and will make us hard to be be defended against.
  9. Sorry for using a double negative. I think we are talking of two different things - you are talking of information control and thus perceptions may not be true, i am simply saying that a non-meritorious reason itself- concealed or otherwise- is detrimental. Ie, going up to a player and saying effectively 'listen, you did good, but you are old, so we are gonna sub in a kid who is worse than you,in your place, because well, he is a kid' is simply not acceptable and also not a way to actually build a meritorious organization.
  10. I think you mis-read that. I specifically said 'none of these are non-performance related issues'. i.e., double negative. 'not non-performance' = ! (! performance) = performance. Ie, they are all performance related issues.
  11. Then none of those reasons are non-performance related. Just because you don't know the ACTUAL reason, doesn't mean the reason itself is not meritorious. I can choose to not disclose an injury to the public and sit out, which makes my sitting out a performance related issue. This does not validate the 'lets sit the performing vet over the underperforming kid, because well, kids need exposure'
  12. I also feel, that his style of defending would be a better fit in the more systematic & physical styles of the western conference, particularly compared to the more coast-to-coast style of the eastern conference. Especially when we consider the difference to probably be the biggest between the respective divisions that he crossed over into.
  13. Well, no cup run is guaranteed until it happens. But most observers would say that Florida has a better shot at winning the cup in the next 5 years than we do. Their 'new core' is more experienced and better formed. Huberdau, Trocheck, Bjugstad, Ekblad are better than their young counterparts in Vancouver and most observers would say that Florida's future is way more secure than Vancouver's at this point. Remember, they too can acquire UFAs to pad their core, just like we do. Also, why would it make me question a professional sportsman's character, when they want more money/go where the money is ? That is exactly what professional means and i respect anyone who wants the best financial reward for their thousands of hours in the trade. This is where Florida does have an advantage over anywhere else, give top end players effectively save 15-20% of their income. 15-20% of 5 million is enough money to buy you a house anywhere not named Vancouver or Toronto or Montreal....
  14. Because Florida does have a few things going for it that we don't : 1. They are 'closer' to finishing their rebuild than we are and thus are 'closer' to the cup than we are 2. No state personal income tax in Florida, so his dollars will go further.
  15. This is why Jim needs to be on the button with Guddy negotiations. Ideally, begin in a month and wrap up in January. If Tallon indeed is manipulating the scene behind the curtains, Jim would have plenty of time and opportunity to out him to the NHL for breaking the unethical conduct rule of negotiating with another team's player before the contract is up. I do feel that his comparables are Willie Mitchell, Hjalmarsson (though Hjalmarsson is better at moving the puck than Guddy is), but we have to take inflation into account. The contract that Willie had in Florida for 4.5 million, is now worth 5 million IMO.
  16. Indeed. I suppose anyone on 6 or more year deals have a perpetual risk of being 'one hit/knee blow-out from being a deadweight' risk to their teams.
  17. Why do you think that, given that regardless of who signs him,he isn't getting north of 6 million to make it a 'cap hell/high risk even if performance declines a wee bit' kinda scenarios and his age is favourable to a 8 year deal ? (i.e., the deal wouldn't extend clearly into his twilight years)
  18. Back to Guddy. I am wondering, what type of term would be a good deal for Erik. He is 25 years old, will be 26 in January. As such, given that he is not a puck moving defenceman, i feel that the entire range of 'term' is an option right now: even if we gave him 8 years, barring injuries, I'd not expect much decline of performance even with a 34 year old, who's job is board-work, crease-clearance and such. I bring this up,because its clear that Guddy doesn't just want money, he also wants term. Perhaps we can lower his money expectation by giving him max term ? Ideal would be a 8 year, 32 million deal (4 mil/year) but I'd be happy with a 8 year, 36 mil deal as well. What do people think ?
  19. I'd prefer not having a party-animal happy-go-lucky brash kid in the team, especially given that he is a 'homeboy' and 'homeboys' are high risk in getting 'too comfortable'. In anycase, i'd refer something similar to : Dahlen- Pettersson- Boeser Baer-Bo-Virtanen as our top two lines in a coupe of years. if Lind develops well, replace Baer with Virt on the Left side and give Lind the rightie spot. Getting Evander is just asking for trouble.
  20. Never said that. But he is 1 of 12 forwards. You can argue, over the course of the season, he is in the top-six even, in terms of 'total value to the team'. Sure. But Guddy is more important to the team. he is 1 of 6 defenceman and easily in the top 4 defencemen in our lineup. Its not a knock on Durable Derek, its simply i prefer a defenceman doesn't fight, unless he is literally in Beiga's position ( 7th D, occasional call-up guy). They are too valuable, even mid-game, to be worth the risk. Ideally, i'd like Gagner to be our pugilist, given that he hardly serves a purpose on ice with or without the puck. But asking him to be our pugilist is like asking Gandhi to run Auschwitz. Not. Gonna. Happen.
  21. Erik should be our physical presence on the blue-line but he is too valuable to serve fighting majors/break his hand. I suggest we let Dorsett handle the pugilism angle, as he is more 'dispensable' than Erik is to the team. A vital cog in the machinery should not be the one who fights.
  22. But but but... ANAL TICKS.... i mean...err..ANALYTICS!
  23. Which is why no team tries to tank unless they are literally dismal and are runaway the bottom of the barrel. Because its a tough job, balancing the exposure given to kids and keeping the vets motivated, invested and trusting in the organization.
  24. There is nothing wrong with giving kids a little bit of exposure once you miss the playoffs. But you still can't take out performing players- vets or otherwise- out of the lineup and be held credible. Your players won't play well for you, will create dressing room politics, friction etc. the moment you shy away from professional meritocracy enough to raise serious ethical eyebrows. Sure, a little bit of straying, for future talent development sake, is ok. But bench a guy who is closing in 50 points, so your team can tank for a better draft pick ? Nothing could be as damaging to a player's confidence and trust. As i said, this is not NHL2016. Its real life. You cant pick and choose when to be a sleaze ball cheater and when to be an organization with integrity. You are either one or the other.
  25. What you are calling tanking, i call it 'things not working out'. Arizona won't be the first or the last team to horribly overrate their goaltender. Yes, yes it is. Because Edmonton for last six years (except the last year) and Arizona for the last two years should show what a disaster it is, to have a team full of all kids. This is not the 1980s. Make a team full of young talent = you end up breaking most of the talent. A proper rebuild, is how we are doing it. Good mix of vets and juniors, nobody is being rushed. To deliberately underperform, in your profession, is fraud. You simply cant say you want players with good character, who displays the lowest character trait of a profession- to deliberately underperform.
×
×
  • Create New...