Eddie Lack offers his opinion on Roberto Luongo

[Moonshinefe]

I bet lack is on top.... If you know what I mean

OK?

Also lol @ Lack's goalie fight comment.

[ckamo]

Players don't tank. Front offices tank.

Agreed.

I don't think any self-respecting pro athlete would try to lose on purpose, but managers and owners are a different story.

Anyway, I'm glad to see Eddie is still trying to keep things light, can't be easy for him to have fans turn on him already.

[PhillipBlunt]

Yeah,it seems the braintrust is ensuring both.

#1 goalie gone.

#1/2 center man on the block.

No secondary scoring traded for (note ghjffbali's post above).

No winger for Kes (as Gillis promised just weeks before).

No D man that can lead this rag-tag bunch up the ice and anchor a PP.

Nada.

Fore!

You make a strong case

[CanucksSayEh]

Go into every fan bases private board on HF, they are all complaining about how their fans are the most bi-polar bandwagoners in the league.

[RyanKeslord17]

Go into every fan bases private board on HF, they are all complaining about how their fans are the most bi-polar bandwagoners in the league.

Blackhawks fans can't be bi-polar.. They just win.

[CanucksSayEh]

Blackhawks fans can't be bi-polar.. They just win.

So, they're Bi-Winning?.............

[Ugli Fruit]

At this point odds are severely against us, wouldn't you prefer a higher pick anyways?

The point is, as supporters, you cheer for the team to WIN. Not lose. A hockey team isn't your bank. There is no investment anywhere, ok? As fans the only "responsibility" is to cheer the team during the games, simple things like that. There is no need wasting your brainpower about "the future" and "the greater good", stuff like that.

[Millerdraft]

I agree with everything except the last sentence.

It was clear that the team had lost a step when Hodgson was dealt for a future prospect.

I believe inexperienced arrogance facilitated the decline we have witnessed in the last 2 years.

My point was Hodgson should've been another chip we used at the 2011 deadline before our run. A package deal could've put us over the top. Heck Colorado was offering Stewart and Craaig Anderson for Schneider... what more could've we acquired had we traded him then?

[brownky]

Amen brother. Anyone with a competitive bone in their body could never ever consider this...

I'm glad Eddie's keeping things light and in check. Really liking how composed he is.

See, I disagree with the top one. I'm a hyper-competitive person in most aspects of my life, but I'm also a supreme pragmatist; the GOAL is to win a Stanley Cup. And at this point, I think the best shot at that cup is to stock the system with the best prospects on the market. Would I love to win the cup this year? Yeah, of course. But realistically, I have to acknowledge that the real powerhouses of both the east AND west are more likely to beat us in a 7 game series than we are to beat them with the roster in the state it's in with injuries, talent, etc. Two of our three "first line" players are injured, our best sparkplug of the year is injured (Santorelli)

So if they pack in the year with the aim for a good series of draft pics (Remember - an early second is "like" a late first rounder.) I'd be okay with that. Now I'd expect a completely different outcome for next year.

[Bure010]

Thia board is for winners; not whiners.

You fail.

we have a 1.8% chance at the playoffs, give it up already and get a reality check.

this team is not making it this year

[-DLC-]

All BUT. And in order TO complete for the Stanley Cup you must first compete for one of the top 8 spots so it isn't an either or, you must do both.

You can slide in on your head ... just have to get there then anything goes. Players are injured, get sick, start to slump, etc. during the Stanley Cup. There are teams that win cups that no one thought would/should, but they do. Everyone thinks there's a guaranteed formula and some rules to follow to get there. Anything goes. Nothing is certain.

I do get people writing off the season...that's ok and more realistic. But there IS that slim chance and I focus on now, as well as the future.

So do you feel that as a result of tanking and getting A top prospect that's a guarantee? That makes everything better and we're in? That's my problem...people talking like there is a formula that ensures you'll win - there's not.

Top picks don't make a team, they can supplement one. And winning makes for a better/more confident team. Remember, some of these players will remain and it's important that they keep the winning mentality, not a pack in the towel because someone else will come and save the day one.

People speak like the "tank" option is a scientific formula that guarantees success. I happen to know it's not and so will take a chance on winning before I sit and wait to win. Because neither one is for sure.

Do I think we're getting in the playoffs?...pretty sure we're not. But there is that all BUT slim chance and I've learned to ride that out. Like I did with the Lions who won the cup when everyone else was jeering them because they couldn't get a win.

What's the point of still watching if they plan on tanking? If I want them to? Shouldn't I/YOU just tune in next year when it all begins? Because this team's not doing anything?

Just look at Edmonton to see that the recipe you're demanding we follow isn't guaranteed to make a SC winner. Contender even. Look at the past drafts and see if there was a pattern that said the top picks guaranteed a Stanley Cup win.

So you can't just say it and it's true. And, in "hoping" that happens (for that's all you're doing), I'm doing the same for this year. No one's got the surefire way because there isn't one.

[-DLC-]

Also, every single topic is turning into "Tank for the win", so let's get back TO the topic at hand - Eddie/Lu.

[John.Tallhouse]

Florida scratches Luongo tomorrow. He demands trade back to van

Haha after he tweets it of course

[MJDDawg]

We're all but mathematically eliminated from the playoffs anyway. Do you guys really think it's better for this team's longterm competitiveness to win meaningless games down the stretch than to get one of the only 5 truly decent players in this draft?!

I guess if your goal is to squeak into 8th every year then I guess you might call that competing but let's not pretend like this team would've gotten even a sniff at a playoff spot in 2010/2011, let alone a Stanley Cup, had we drafted outside of the top-3 in 1999.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=1999&team=&position=&round=

So what is the goal you want this team competing for, 8th spot or Stanley Cups?

Everyone knows (or ought to know) that championships are won through the draft. It's the bloodline. Everyone knows that there are also cycles in pro sports and unless you "luck out" and draft guys like Lidstrom, Datsyuk & Zetterberg with late round picks you're going to have to do what most teams do, tank (one way or another). If this team doesn't start the cycle soon, and it can be argued that it's three summers too late (ie, the Philadelphia model post 2010 Cup loss), this will be an even longer rebuild than Alberta's.

Why prolong the inevitable? Either way we're not really competitive at the moment anyway. Let's start this cycle already.

Great post.

The Flyers have had 3 tough seasons since that 2010 loss, and after a horrendous start this season, that team of young guns is starting to come together and looks capable of doing some damage in the playoffs, if not this year, then going forward for sure.

It took the Flyers 3 long, tough seasons to get to this point. Much better than the 10 year rebuilds going on in Calgary and Edmonton.

If I can blame MG for one thing, it's that he's committed the one fatal mistake mistake many GM's commit, which is delaying the rebuild with the false belief that with just a tweak here and there, the team could take another run at a Cup.

For all the flack Holmgren has taken over the last three seasons, he's a GM that at least had the balls to make the hard decisions needed to minimize the long term rebuild that we so desperately want to avoid here in Van city.

[Benchsplinters]

Completely agree. Everyone can call me an idiot but I'd rather the Canucks just miss the playoffs than intentionally lose to get a higher draft pick. If teams start to lose on purpose what is the point in playing….No integrity whatsoever!

You go out fighting to the end; professionals never cower down and intentionally lose. Yes you may still fight hard and lose but you can still hold your head high with pride and dignity. You never quit.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

Fans that want the team to tank are probably the worst fans out there...

No team intentionally loses a hockey game... Anyone who has played in sports knows you got out there and try to win every single game you can.

Around 180 people have voted so far in this thread(http://forum.canucks.com/topic/358215-highest-possible-draft-pick-or-run-at-the-playoffs/) and 70% of them want to go for the pick. So your saying all of them are the worst fans out there? Attitudes like the ones in your post is what ruins teams. Without tanking we wouldn't have had the sedins and we wouldn't have kesler as a 41 goal scorer without the sedins and 2011 never happens. If you want to have that type of attitude go cheer for Calgary.

[Millerdraft]

Deb, my problem with your statement is suggesting anyone who doesn't compete to the bitter end has no competitive bone in their body bu this is entirely untrue. Just watch what happens to an NHL team's competitive spirit when they're getting blown out by 4-7 goals in an elimination game with only 5 minutes remaining (look no further than the Canucks in 2010 game #6 vs Chicago). The competitive spirit disappears.

If Dallas continues on the same .568 winning clip, in order for us to make the playoffs, we'd have to go 12-1-0 or 11-0-2. That's with no Daniel Sedin, no Kesler. It's just not gonna happen. The only thing winning meaningless games is doing is hurting our chances at the cream of the crop draft pick. This team is chalk full of players that know how to win hockey games and how to win them in the playoffs (unlike Edmonton). I don't necessarily think this team has to tank it for 5-7 years like Chicago & Pitts did, but this season is certainly a lost season already and the next two drafts after 2014 (McDavid & Chychrun) appear to be uber deep in talent. It might not be the worst thing to capitalize on that, especially since we just had two 1st round picks in a draft said to be as deep as 2003 (just not as high end talent).

As for "why watch meaningless games"? To see where are young players are at. Niklas Jensen. Zack Kassian. They are the future and that's why I watch these pointless games.

[Benchsplinters]

Around 180 people have voted so far in this thread(http://forum.canucks.com/topic/358215-highest-possible-draft-pick-or-run-at-the-playoffs/) and 70% of them want to go for the pick. So your saying all of them are the worst fans out there? Attitudes like the ones in your post is what ruins teams. Without tanking we wouldn't have had the sedins and we wouldn't have kesler as a 41 goal scorer without the sedins and 2011 never happens. If you want to have that type of attitude go cheer for Calgary.

Are you suggesting the team tanked to get the Sedins? They didn't, they were just a bottom dweller team at the time.

You are basing your opinion on the votes of 180 people, 70% of which suggested we purposely lose to get a high draft pick. It is fans like that who make the suggestion and smell up the place. You suggest that is the right thing to do. Losers cheat to win and tanking on purpose is lower than a snakes belly in a wagon wheel rut.

If you support that type of unprofessional conduct then maybe you should go cheer for the Oilers. Look what Edmonton did; three consecutive #1 picks. One has to wonder if the the "coilers" purposely flushed their seasons down the toilet. I certainly don't want to wallow in that mess but you suggest you do. Edmonton are still losers.

[-DLC-]

Deb, my problem with your statement is suggesting anyone who doesn't compete to the bitter end has no competitive bone in their body bu this is entirely untrue. Just watch what happens to an NHL team's competitive spirit when they're getting blown out by 4-7 goals in an elimination game with only 5 minutes remaining (look no further than the Canucks in 2010 game #6 vs Chicago). The competitive spirit disappears.

If Dallas continues on the same .568 winning clip, in order for us to make the playoffs, we'd have to go 12-1-0 or 11-0-2. That's with no Daniel Sedin, no Kesler. It's just not gonna happen. The only thing winning meaningless games is doing is hurting our chances at the cream of the crop draft pick. This team is chalk full of players that know how to win hockey games and how to win them in the playoffs (unlike Edmonton). I don't necessarily think this team has to tank it for 5-7 years like Chicago & Pitts did, but this season is certainly a lost season already and the next two drafts after 2014 (McDavid & Chychrun) appear to be uber deep in talent. It might not be the worst thing to capitalize on that, especially since we just had two 1st round picks in a draft said to be as deep as 2003 (just not as high end talent).

As for "why watch meaningless games"? To see where are young players are at. Niklas Jensen. Zack Kassian. They are the future and that's why I watch these pointless games.

So you don't see how it can negatively impact their overall psyche/mentality if they're on a tanking team? If they're losing vs winning? At critical points in their development, don't you want them being energized and trying to win? Instilling that go for the throat no matter what mentality? Tanking could deteriorate some of the confidence and momentum they've built through finding a bit of success so don't we want them to keep trying? If you're asking the team to tank, they're part of that. So you want to assess their play on a tanking team? That hardly seems fair?

Or you want them sitting beside veterans who say "we've lost anyhow, we don't care"? "It's all about next year, we're throwing in the towel for picks"?

Or are you suggesting we tank, but not everyone? Some keep playing like you mean it but the rest of you don't give it all you've got? That's counter productive in the big picture?

Can't have your cake and eat it too...on this team game if you're calling for the team to tank they drag the young players with them. The impressionable guys who are still finding their groove and how to fit in with the big club.

Or you want THEM to perform but us to tank? Which one are we going for her, now I'm confused.

See the comments after mine...there are two sides/opinions to this story and neither one is more valid/"correct". We are all Canucks.

Catch phrases are just great until you dissect them and look at the big picture. If you're calling for the team to tank for the betterment of the future, you're also including our current young players in that. How they adjust to playing here.

[Millerdraft]

I know it makes logical sense to go for a higher pick if you're going to miss the playoffs anyway, but I'm just not wired that way.

Play your posteriors off every night, leave nothing on the ice and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe it costs you a couple of spots on draft day, but what you gain in self respect will more than compensate, IMHO.

I've been a Canuck fan since day 1, but I can honestly say that I would find it difficult to cheer for a team that deliberately tanked, just to improve their draft prospects.

Well, then it's the GMs job to trade the pieces (Kesler) that will hurt draft position. That way you can bust ass every game and still come up short, yet you can keep your head high because you still gave it your all.