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

Everybody Loves Raymond (except Jim)...Merged


Bite me Burr

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if you were going to reply. You have sat here through this whole topic telling people to not be personal, to not make childish remarks etc...

And then I say something you don't like and you tell me I am embarrassing myself. What did you say earlier? Stay classy?

Instead of just saying hay, here is some evidence that he is quick , you have to get on your high horse, and make a personal comment about me embarrassing myself, and as if I was some moron because I disagree or part of that group arguing before. I was not, and I posted a respectful post, and you decided to crawl from out of the latrine and stink up my post.

I never said he was slow. I said he wasn't that quick. "THAT" being the word I want you to focus on. I said that he had good speed, but he is not THAT quick... ie compared to Kesler and Hansen etc, he is about the same speed..perhaps a touch faster, but in the case of Kesler, he is more skilled, and in the case of Hansen, tougher, and he hits more, so his perhaps SLIGHT advantage in speed over other players is not enough to hold his place for that alone.

Yea, show me a few highlights. Yep those parts that are recorded and put on youtube. If the lowlights made the reel at the end of the game I would have millions of examples of him falling down , and fumbling the puck etc... I never bagged the guy, I said he is a decent player, but not a top 6 you want on your cup winning team, not a bottom 6 you want starting on your cup winning team. He is a good depth player, but at 2.5 mil that gets pricey.

Raymond is a perimeter player who does not use his speed effectively enough to be a consistent scorer, and we can get players better suited to the bottom 6 role that help us more than he does at that cost. I liked Raymond when he made the team, I rooted for him because I want fast skilled players on this team. The fact is , he isn't consistent enough to warrant his spot. And picking a few examples from the thousands of shifts his had doesn't change that.

But thanks for trying to insult me while I am trying to have a civilised debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were wondering when I was going to reply ..........really? Is that why you posted that "cockeyed" evaluation. Just to troll me?

Well I did reply. And all I can say if you don't want to embarrass yourself then don't post an evaluation that more than half the team would love as some kind of condemnation.

He's fast. Very fast in fact. Many of his goals are breakaways. Why split hairs? He has won the fastest player award on numerous occasions.

He is excellent on the forecheck and had to be good on the back check considering his line mates.

He has a lot of skill.

He has a very good wrister, probably one of the best in the team.

He helps others to play. He had great chemistry with Schroeder AND Hansen until it was broken up.

"In the case of Kesler he is more skilled" Maybe, but remind me what Kesler draws for a salary again?

Hansen may hit more, when he feels like it.........how many hits did he have in the playoffs? In any case neither he nor Kesler seem to have outperformed Raymond in the playoffs. I thought that then and I think the stats confirm it.

Raymond.. 2012-2013 CANUCKS 4 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 9

11.1

Hansen... 2012-2013 CANUCKS 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 9 0.0

Kesler... 2012-2013 CANUCKS 4 2 0 2 -2 0 1 0 0 13 15.4

I apologies for saying you were embarrassing yourself. Put it down to fatigue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I didn't miss the point you just mistook two words for being the same thing. Never been a pom pom guy for Raymond actually and I've said for quite some time it was time for AV to go.

I get it you screwed up and need to try to lump me into some category but you screwed that up as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try not embarrass yourself , I said IF you were going to reply, not WHEN, I was replying to DEB , I wasn't talking to you... So I wasn't even talking to you, let alone trying to TROLL you.

And your EXTREME reacting to my thoughts that Raymond is a DECENT player, just not a top 6 on a cup winning team , is quite extraordinary...

You tell other people to be classy, but you attack me and my post that wasn't talking to you, and then cant read a simple sentence in your blind rage at someone having the audacity to say that the golden child isn't as good as you think , but expect other people to give you the courtesy you don't give me? LOL

Go have a drink and chill, your embarrassing yourself.

*edit* and none of the examples you gave up there of him scoring have nothing to do with how fast he is or isnt. The first he was pinching and was already behind the D man , thats it, and the second, well... he got the puck all alone, and scored.. thats it... speed had nothing to do with that either, in fact the second was a goal the tender would have wanted to have back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop splitting hairs mate. Now you ARE embarrassing yourself. Happy now? What is it with you people did Raymond steal your puppy?

Some people haven't the class to accept an apology........so be it.

It must be sad always having to support an argument about what someone doesn't do. Especially when more than half of the team were doing less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, Canucks are (or should we say "were" one of the best teams in the league)

The thread was talking about how Raymond was useless and we need an upgrade

Guys like Baggins then stood up and said he is a "capable" 2nd liner and defended him.

Moreover he went further and compared him to a bunch of good players.

Now the same guys are whining that MG put in a bunch of crappy forwards.

Now that we look back, anyway you dice it was pretty dumb

But then, you want to squabble between word choice of "good" and "capable"?

The message is still the same, those guys STILL wanted Raymond on the 2nd line and thought he was actually comparable to guys like Hodgson, Marchand, Booth. And I would deem those guys as "good" 2nd liners. So if they are arguing Raymond is comparable to them, the argument would be that Raymond is ALSO "good" unless they think all the comparables are just "capable" 2nd liners as well...

lol pick the right battles my friend.. this one is clearly not it...

we got sidetracked...

difference between good and capable is NOT the scope of the argument

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You made an entire point that Baggins said Raymond was good and then posted a quote where he said capable. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. Accept it and move on my friend instead of making a bigger deal out of something that only serves to show some immature need to not be wrong while trying to point fingers at others. There's more to an argument than one side saying he's the best and one side saying he sucks. Big ol grey area in between those things which is right where "capable" lands.

We get it you don't understand that what Baggins and others did while defending him didn't mean they were saying he was the bestest and that there weren't upgrades. They were just arguing with a bunch of mouth breathers who don't understand the concept of a middle ground when it comes to judging a player.

You're lumping so many things together to try to make a point it's almost laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL you want some comedy?

That's YOU arguing that he is a good 2nd liner. Hey wait a sec... aren't you the guy that's crying that MG hasn't done enough because our group of forwards suck?

And you were comparing Raymond to guys like Marchand and Hodgson? lol

IRONIC...

The thread "Raymond? Do We Really Want Him?" has the usual Canuck pom pom fans out...

/topic/322690-raymond-do-we-really-want-him/page__st__390#entry10416561">http://forum.canucks...0#entry10416561

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...