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

Redressing the Balance


alfstonker

Recommended Posts

I read some of the threads and posts on CDC and I just thank God Willie and the team didn't win just 90 points. You know, like a team bringing in new management, new coaching staff and having an ageing core and a ton of injuries (a given at this club apparently) might be expected to do.

Unlike many on here it seems. I remember perfectly well the written expectations of this fanbase at the beginning of the season, a fanbase stunned into reality and humbled by the utter cr-p we were served up last season by a team flogged to death by an out of control tyrant.

However, what actually transpired, despite the "injuryfest" was the re-emergence of a team that could play attractive hockey, good enough to beat the best, a team who despite all the pre-season portents of doom on here (by probably the same malcontents spouting off now) about being fore-arm shivered into oblivion by the Western giants, actually qualified comfortably in their division and achieving a marvellous 5th in the Conference.

Their points total was 101 only 3 short of that team Nashville, many of you guys had been wetting your pants about all season.

So post regular season, let's forget all the above and cue all of a sudden the unrealistic bs of long runs and Stanley Cups. The only team in our way is of course, the team not allowed to get better, the team who obviously have a cr-p coach, the team who are only allowed to have sub standard rookies, the team whose fans don't matter: the Calgary Flames.

The disrespect shown to Calgary was utterly shameful on here, by people who profess to know something about hockey and of course stoked up by the ever malignant and divisive Vancouver media who are never pleased with this team and forever picking at their own scabs of ineptitude.

We all know how it turned out. Bottom line, OUR TEAM wasn't good enough, true we didn't always get the breaks we deserved and some of the refereeing decisions might have been questionable but the bottom line was we just didn't have enough in the tank.

As for the coaching criticism, sure Willie has made some mistakes, so what? We will never know what they were though, so stop kidding yourselves. He also must have done a hell of a lot right, you would think.

What coach doesn't make mistakes, who in the league is perfect? So why jump all over a rookie with your 20/20 hindsight and your "Idiots Pocket Guide on How to Coach in the NHL?"

This rookie outperformed many other more respected, seasoned, coaches along the way to get there, despite horrendous injuries, despite an ageing core, despite transitioning in new players including first season rookies AND he actually got us to the playoffs.

Despite what anyone will tell you, anything other than winning the Cup is just more gate money. We got to the Final in 2011 and we are still reading on these boards just how deficient that team was. Of course, in reality it wasn't, in reality it was one of the best teams this club will ever see but hey, they didn't win the Cup so let's take it out on the City and disrespect them till doomsday.

I realise this is just end of season shooting the breeze, but all this denigrating of the coach, the management and the players is ultimately damaging to our hockey club. Lies, in the form of "opinions" and with the benefit of hindsight are being written and repeated and embellished, many by people who seem to me, to have twisted agendas and will never be happy. (I suspect even if we were to win a Cup)

I have made little secret of my disaffection for many of our fans on here. They seem to exude a self entitled, immature almost conceit, coupled with an ability to be either up in the clouds of fantasy in their unrealistic expectations or a willingness to volunteer to be the cheerful pall bearers of this team's corpse.

We have a good team, a team in transition, we are not Stanley Cup contenders, we are trying to provide a winning environment in which to bring in new blood. That was the goal and that was what was achieved. In fact we achieved more but as is always the case on here, not enough for some.

Frankly, I will be super pleased if we achieve the same position next season, given that we will see a further step up of our transitioning towards building a team which I hope will in 3-4 years be a genuine cup contender under Willie and our new management. Until then I am enjoying every minute of the ride.

I'm sure some people will recognise themselves on here and launch into an offensive, what's new? :)

However I felt it was time to give a voice to all (probably the majority) of the CDC fans who read these disparaging threads and posts and don't recognise the sentiments for being how they feel at all.

IMO most of our fans are happy with the new management, the new coach and our achievements so far during this transition but don't want to risk being attacked for saying so.

This is their reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forever picking at their own scabs of ineptitude. Thats fantastic.

My only problem with this post is that it does what we all do. Paint CDC with a broad brush. There are a lot of varied opinions and as tends to happen in life those who shout the loudest are heard the most. A few discontents and trolls make it look like we are all complaining. Threads that beat up on people tend to attract packs of internet bullies that want to add to the beating.

I think in general the group on CDC is very supportive of the Canucks. People have varying opinions on how to ultimately get where we want to go. Same is true for GMs and hockey management types. It certainly is reasonable to look at winning teams and see that they often dropped to the bottom as part of their climb back to the top. LA, Chicago, Pittsburgh (though how is that working now) etc.

This is also a team that in its history has only ever had one true number 1 centre in Henrik (and really his window near the top of the league was only a couple of years and he never got that much respect around the league). We have never had a real top notch dominant defender with Ohlund really being the only one who came close before the eye injury. It is understandable that the fans want to see that. It seems particularly unfair when we look at Edmonton who has had Gretzky and Messier and is gifted so many first overalls including the next great one. Canucks fans not only want the championship team they want their superstar as the closest they had was Bure who demanded his way out of town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my first post, and it is the first topic I have seen in a long time worthy of a first time post. I had wanted to comment on the amount of negativity that the fans and media bring to this team. Still unsure as to which one is in the driver seat there. I get so tired of hearing how the team would just be better if the Sedin twins were our second line. If they play less minutes then the other lines, are they still the top line? The fact is they can play less minutes and out score the other players. When Naslund and Bert. were around they were considered the top line even when the twins had started to out produce with less time. They are two world class players that we as fans are lucky to get to watch on a regular basis. They were both in the top 15 scorers this year ahead of a lot of big names. In Pittsburgh the penguins haven't done much lately, must be time to send Malkin and Crosby to the Ahl, It's just that there contracts are so big! The twins get shat on regularly by there own fans, if it were the flames fans I would understand but...

If the fans keep it up they will chase them away too, as Kesler said they (players) have feelings too. Oh and don't forget to chase away Bieksa going down with the boat. At the end of the season questions when the reporter was grilling about if he or Hamhuis would wave their no trades, all while trying to ram it down their throats that a youth movement is needed to compete.

The true fans will stick it out, and hopefully as some of the seats become available they will get louder as well. I live 5 hours away and do not make a lot of money but still bring my family out for a couple of games every year, Had my game 7 tickets the moment they were released. When we go to the games my family will try to start chants the whole time, I have a 3 and 5 year old that give it their all. Other then the time Manny came back from his eye injury (game 2 Stanley cup final), the loudest cheer I was at a game for was when the crowd cheered when Lou got pulled against Anaheim, (it's just the contract) I felt sick to my stomach. And after reading posts like I pay this much for a ticket, I can cheer if I want then. Can't understand why he would have wanted out.

I lived in Calgary for 5 years and every time the Canucks came I had tickets. The stadium was over half Canucks fans, and at the time those were some of the only sell outs there (at the time they were talking about where the Flames should be relocated). We all cheered as loud as we could, trying to make a statement and it probably didn't hurt the Canucks players to hear the cheers.

It's not that we lost to the flames it's how we lost. I remember when the Canucks were up 2 games on the Red Wings and Cloutier let a goal in from center ice. Then we lost 4 straight, they won the cup. That was a $&!#ty way to loose, but the fans were still their and it seemed that every team we played went on to win the cup or play for it, that in itself was enough for me to know our team gave them a good run, who ever it happened to be. What about 04 when the Canucks tie with seconds left, with Jovo in the box, only to loose with Jovo still in the box.

To me it seems that most of the Canuck fans cheered more when we were the underdogs, but after 2011 that all changed, we were expected to win. Number one in almost every category, yet they lost. With a little help I might add, I don't know if ever speed bagin' a players head isn't a penalty (no matter what Don Cherry says), or Thomas choppin' for fire wood in front of the net. If only the Canucks had thought of getting Colin Cambells son, (does Bettman have a son?). But had the Canucks one against all odds, and almost did, don't you think there would be a couple more teams with more skill, not just big bodies.

The 94' team holds a special place in my heart as does 2011, but all of the years are special to me.

PS

Love seeing the talented youth, Good job Trev, JB and Willy,

Keep doing your job and I will keep doing mine.

GO CANUCKS GO.

GO CANUCKS GO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said.

This part, especially connected:

We have a good team, a team in transition, we are not Stanley Cup contenders, we are trying to provide a winning environment in which to bring in new blood. That was the goal and that was what was achieved. In fact we achieved more but as is always the case on here, not enough for some.

Frankly, I will be super pleased if we achieve the same position next season, given that we will see a further step up of our transitioning towards building a team which I hope will in 3-4 years be a genuine cup contender under Willie and our new management. Until then I am enjoying every minute of the ride.

You get it, in a big picture way...unlike some of the "WE WANT IT ALL AND WE WANT IT NOW" trade all the playerz types.

There is a mix of people here and, with that, a wide array of opinions on what should/shouldn't be done. But I'm of the steady, focused approach that doesn't hit the panic button or "react"...that sticks to the plan and makes methodical decisions that keep with that (plan). Not knee jerk reactions.

We did as well as expected...some half hearted showings but they seemed to adjust and had the ability to bounce back to form, which speaks of the fact that they still can.

And to "tank"...what WOULD that teach the young'uns beside it being ok to choose to lose?? Also, how do you attract players if that's your mindset? You have to have a team you believe in (to some degree) in order to have those you wish to bring in also do the same.

Transitional period is on...it won't be an explosion of change that some expect and are screaming for, but a gradual, over time deal as we infuse youth into the lineup. Some people tend to want a hero...one guy who will be a game changer and they're few and far between. And pretty hard to determine with any certainty.

Let me state that I'm open to whatever moves the management makes....my connection to the players is one that has the underlying theme "they could be gone" and I'd accept that if the powers that be decide that's the best way to go. But, until then, I'm on board with this team because they are "in the mix" and that's more than we've had through some really dreary days as fans in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice job Alf. Nothing to disagree with.

I would like to gaze into my crystal ball and comment a little on expectations for the next few years.

Ya the Canucks are transitioning from one core to the next and how long it will take is anybody's guess. I think that Canuck management realized that this core had peaked out in 2011 when they failed to make a serious run in 2012. At that time, it was also clear that teams like LA, St Louis and Anaheim were seriously on the rise again and had passed the Canucks by. At this point, I think that management started to focus more energy on drafting and development.

There are some hopeful prospects in the system from the 2011 draft looking forward (Jensen, Grenier, Corrado). 2012 was the Gaunce, Hutton year and 2013 and 2014 saw 2 first round picks from each of those years (2013 Horvat, Shinkaruk, 2014 Virtanen, McCann). Additionally, Benning has been attempting to make up for years of bad drafting by adding players in the 21-25 year old age range in order to speed up his plan.

The Linden-Benning regime is clearly employing a draft and develop strategy which quite frankly, if done right will result in a good team for a long period of time. In the past, management and ownership has not been stable enough to do this in a meaningful way. If strategy changes, then the gains that have been achieved before are invariably lost.

To my point, I think that the Canucks will carry on at a similar level as they performed this year until the prospects that Benning has brought in to develop start to have an impact. When Horvat is 25 we will see a very different Canuck team. I think that we'll see improvement before then but at that time we will see the 5 first round picks taken in 3 years all playing and having an impact (Gaunce, Horvat, Shinkaruk, Virtanen, McCann) and the young, exciting team that has been promised, will be on the ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only half way through reading and had to post this... Get out of my head Alf!! Everything you are saying I have been thinking but I couldn't get through my rage to put it so eloquently. I'm very proud of our whole organization this season and very excited for the future.

Thx for the post bud :)

Edit: people need to realize the "Stanley cup or bust" mentality is stupid... 29 teams lose every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If our scouting staff can prove they've changed for the better, and can make our >15 picks work out then I think this transition will pay off.

If they don't. And the best prospect we have to show for ourselves is Virtanen when the Sedins retire, winning culture be damned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alf you really donned you internet tough guy hat for this one.

I am not sure who you are talking about that was losing water over Nashville, I had them and StL as most likely upsets in the 1st round.

While I can live with rookie mistakes by the Coach and management team I still see a disturbing pattern that goes all the way back in Canuck history.

It was Dave Nonis that coined the phrase "Team Toughness" and the Canucks have been getting beaten up when it matters ever since.

Benning was supposed to build through the draft, but has already traded 2 of his first 3 second rounders. Look at Canuck history, more seconds traded than have made serious NHL contributions. And where are most of the great PMDs drafted? the second round.

1999-2001 and 1979-82 no seconds, you need to go back to the Pat Quinn era to find a time when seconds had an impact on this team. That is 25 years and 5 regimes ago.

And there are people like you whose futures-so-bright attitude brings out the worst in the rest of us. Remember when the Canucks did use their seconds on Sauve, Rahimi and Ellington and fans like you were posting about how bright our future D was looking?

I am not here to say "blow it up, or fire the coach and manager" but until Jim starts bringing better players, not just different ones, I say the jury is out on this management team.

It all looks too familiar to regimes past to have me glowing about where this group is going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a good team,

Here's where you have blinders on.

A good team is one who can contend for the Cup. We aren't even close. When we are a team that has a legit shot at winning it all, then I'd say we have a good team.

If your standards are low enough that having a decent regular season makes for a good team, then that's on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened in the playoffs had a lot to do with bad luck. Miller being injured and not ready to go right from the beginning, Kassian being injured, losing Burrows, Richardson playing injured. It's difficult to overcome all this against a team like the Flames, who are bend on beating us, have a ton of energy and aren't going to stop coming at us. We need to get tougher on defence, and keep getting younger, we'll be fine. Would be a huge bonus if Cole makes the team next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's where you have blinders on.

A good team is one who can contend for the Cup. We aren't even close. When we are a team that has a legit shot at winning it all, then I'd say we have a good team.

If your standards are low enough that having a decent regular season makes for a good team, then that's on you.

Sorry!?

So a good team is a team which will contend for the cup? Ok, What about the really good teams? Or the great teams? Or the stellar teams?

You do understand that you're arguing about a definition right?

If you get 101 points and finish, was it 8th? Then you have a good team. Not a great team, nor the best team, but a good team.

So stop talking nonsense... please... We do understand that you're a much better coach and GM than our management, and you'd have won the cup years ago, but stop beating down on pure definitions...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry!?

So a good team is a team which will contend for the cup? Ok, What about the really good teams? Or the great teams? Or the stellar teams?

You do understand that you're arguing about a definition right?

If you get 101 points and finish, was it 8th? Then you have a good team. Not a great team, nor the best team, but a good team.

So stop talking nonsense... please... We do understand that you're a much better coach and GM than our management, and you'd have won the cup years ago, but stop beating down on pure definitions...

One might argue that it is you that is playing semantics.

We know it is all relative because compared to lesser leagues or a team made up of You and Gross and me even the Oilers and Sabres are a really, really stellar teams.

But compared to the rest of the NHL they suck.

Best teams ever in the NHL? 50s and 70s Habs. 5 straight Cups, 6 and 8 loss season

Next best probably the Oilers and Isles from the 80s.

Currently the Canucks are a team that overachieved in the regular season but played status quo with other Canuck teams in the last four playoffs. (out in the 1st or missed all together)

When you decide how many categories you want to make ( really, really, really, etc) then we can slot this team in where it belongs.

It won't be at the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry!?

So a good team is a team which will contend for the cup? Ok, What about the really good teams? Or the great teams? Or the stellar teams?

You do understand that you're arguing about a definition right?

If you get 101 points and finish, was it 8th? Then you have a good team. Not a great team, nor the best team, but a good team.

So stop talking nonsense... please... We do understand that you're a much better coach and GM than our management, and you'd have won the cup years ago, but stop beating down on pure definitions...

^This exactly

Winning environment? Where? What did the team actually win?

Winning environment means making the playoffs, and being a good team in the regular season.

Look at Horvat. He's thriving in a minor role on a playoff team, and it will likely be good for his development. Do you think Horvat would have developed properly if we had tanked, compared to if he was brought up in a winning environment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my first post, and it is the first topic I have seen in a long time worthy of a first time post. I had wanted to comment on the amount of negativity that the fans and media bring to this team. Still unsure as to which one is in the driver seat there. I get so tired of hearing how the team would just be better if the Sedin twins were our second line. If they play less minutes then the other lines, are they still the top line? The fact is they can play less minutes and out score the other players. When Naslund and Bert. were around they were considered the top line even when the twins had started to out produce with less time. They are two world class players that we as fans are lucky to get to watch on a regular basis. They were both in the top 15 scorers this year ahead of a lot of big names. In Pittsburgh the penguins haven't done much lately, must be time to send Malkin and Crosby to the Ahl, It's just that there contracts are so big! The twins get shat on regularly by there own fans, if it were the flames fans I would understand but...

If the fans keep it up they will chase them away too, as Kesler said they (players) have feelings too. Oh and don't forget to chase away Bieksa going down with the boat. At the end of the season questions when the reporter was grilling about if he or Hamhuis would wave their no trades, all while trying to ram it down their throats that a youth movement is needed to compete.

The true fans will stick it out, and hopefully as some of the seats become available they will get louder as well. I live 5 hours away and do not make a lot of money but still bring my family out for a couple of games every year, Had my game 7 tickets the moment they were released. When we go to the games my family will try to start chants the whole time, I have a 3 and 5 year old that give it their all. Other then the time Manny came back from his eye injury (game 2 Stanley cup final), the loudest cheer I was at a game for was when the crowd cheered when Lou got pulled against Anaheim, (it's just the contract) I felt sick to my stomach. And after reading posts like I pay this much for a ticket, I can cheer if I want then. Can't understand why he would have wanted out.

I lived in Calgary for 5 years and every time the Canucks came I had tickets. The stadium was over half Canucks fans, and at the time those were some of the only sell outs there (at the time they were talking about where the Flames should be relocated). We all cheered as loud as we could, trying to make a statement and it probably didn't hurt the Canucks players to hear the cheers.

It's not that we lost to the flames it's how we lost. I remember when the Canucks were up 2 games on the Red Wings and Cloutier let a goal in from center ice. Then we lost 4 straight, they won the cup. That was a crapty way to loose, but the fans were still their and it seemed that every team we played went on to win the cup or play for it, that in itself was enough for me to know our team gave them a good run, who ever it happened to be. What about 04 when the Canucks tie with seconds left, with Jovo in the box, only to loose with Jovo still in the box.

To me it seems that most of the Canuck fans cheered more when we were the underdogs, but after 2011 that all changed, we were expected to win. Number one in almost every category, yet they lost. With a little help I might add, I don't know if ever speed bagin' a players head isn't a penalty (no matter what Don Cherry says), or Thomas choppin' for fire wood in front of the net. If only the Canucks had thought of getting Colin Cambells son, (does Bettman have a son?). But had the Canucks one against all odds, and almost did, don't you think there would be a couple more teams with more skill, not just big bodies.

The 94' team holds a special place in my heart as does 2011, but all of the years are special to me.

PS

Love seeing the talented youth, Good job Trev, JB and Willy,

Keep doing your job and I will keep doing mine.

GO CANUCKS GO.

GO CANUCKS GO.

Welcome. Nice post.

In case it helps it helps for the future, speaking only for myself, I find posts easier to get through if there are fairly frequent paragraph breaks.

Thanks for posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my first post, and it is the first topic I have seen in a long time worthy of a first time post. I had wanted to comment on the amount of negativity that the fans and media bring to this team. Still unsure as to which one is in the driver seat there. I get so tired of hearing how the team would just be better if the Sedin twins were our second line. If they play less minutes then the other lines, are they still the top line? The fact is they can play less minutes and out score the other players. When Naslund and Bert. were around they were considered the top line even when the twins had started to out produce with less time. They are two world class players that we as fans are lucky to get to watch on a regular basis. They were both in the top 15 scorers this year ahead of a lot of big names. In Pittsburgh the penguins haven't done much lately, must be time to send Malkin and Crosby to the Ahl, It's just that there contracts are so big! The twins get shat on regularly by there own fans, if it were the flames fans I would understand but...

If the fans keep it up they will chase them away too, as Kesler said they (players) have feelings too. Oh and don't forget to chase away Bieksa going down with the boat. At the end of the season questions when the reporter was grilling about if he or Hamhuis would wave their no trades, all while trying to ram it down their throats that a youth movement is needed to compete.

The true fans will stick it out, and hopefully as some of the seats become available they will get louder as well. I live 5 hours away and do not make a lot of money but still bring my family out for a couple of games every year, Had my game 7 tickets the moment they were released. When we go to the games my family will try to start chants the whole time, I have a 3 and 5 year old that give it their all. Other then the time Manny came back from his eye injury (game 2 Stanley cup final), the loudest cheer I was at a game for was when the crowd cheered when Lou got pulled against Anaheim, (it's just the contract) I felt sick to my stomach. And after reading posts like I pay this much for a ticket, I can cheer if I want then. Can't understand why he would have wanted out.

I lived in Calgary for 5 years and every time the Canucks came I had tickets. The stadium was over half Canucks fans, and at the time those were some of the only sell outs there (at the time they were talking about where the Flames should be relocated). We all cheered as loud as we could, trying to make a statement and it probably didn't hurt the Canucks players to hear the cheers.

It's not that we lost to the flames it's how we lost. I remember when the Canucks were up 2 games on the Red Wings and Cloutier let a goal in from center ice. Then we lost 4 straight, they won the cup. That was a crapty way to loose, but the fans were still their and it seemed that every team we played went on to win the cup or play for it, that in itself was enough for me to know our team gave them a good run, who ever it happened to be. What about 04 when the Canucks tie with seconds left, with Jovo in the box, only to loose with Jovo still in the box.

To me it seems that most of the Canuck fans cheered more when we were the underdogs, but after 2011 that all changed, we were expected to win. Number one in almost every category, yet they lost. With a little help I might add, I don't know if ever speed bagin' a players head isn't a penalty (no matter what Don Cherry says), or Thomas choppin' for fire wood in front of the net. If only the Canucks had thought of getting Colin Cambells son, (does Bettman have a son?). But had the Canucks one against all odds, and almost did, don't you think there would be a couple more teams with more skill, not just big bodies.

The 94' team holds a special place in my heart as does 2011, but all of the years are special to me.

PS

Love seeing the talented youth, Good job Trev, JB and Willy,

Keep doing your job and I will keep doing mine.

GO CANUCKS GO.

GO CANUCKS GO.

Welcome to CDC, proud to have you here too!

And it will be awesome to see how you kids evolve. Sounds like they will have a chance to cheer for the Canucks for all the right reasons.

Yes welcome aboard & keep cheering loud!

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...