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

[PGT] Another loss...now 7-7-6


TheRussianRocket.

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Robongo said:

Actually, anyone that had watched Bieksa earn his very first ridiculous overpaid contract, which was a one off before his 2011 deal ,was sounding the alarm that his 2011 year was a one off. Bieksa the year before was complete garbage and he earned his 4.6 mil deal because of Hamhuis. Yes, he played well, but he has shown since that that was a complete one off. There was in fact , enough room to resign Ehrhoff, but Gillis gave him the ultimatum to sign for Bieksa value and be a "team player" or bounce.

Garrison or Vrbata was the choice you say?  Well, again you're forcing your own narrative that isn't based on reality. It wasn't Garrison or Vrbata, it was actually Garrison or Miller. We hired a coach that thought he could make something out of a Linden Vey , which we all know was a complete and utter failure. They decided to lose depth on the blue line to go with a goaltender in which the GM was more than familiar with, JB has openly alluded to this fact, but please continue to claim it was Garrison or Vrbata :lol: .


Sbisa was a complete disaster, every single metric both regular stats/advanced stat and the eye test confirmed it. Just because you are in complete denial of this doesn't make it any less true. Regardless, your comments about Bieksa's "cuts" as blame for his decline demonstrate you have not played a lick of sports in your life. You are a keyboard warrior , if you've gone through a surgery and attempted to play sports after you would see how ridiculous your statement was. Likewise, if you asked Bieksa what he thought of your lame ass assessment that he was worse off from his injuries he would laugh in your face

The blueline HAS been dismantled, actually. In 2011 our Top pairing was Hamhuis/Bieksa, Edler/Ehrhoff.

Do we have Bieksa? Nope! Do we have Ehrhoff? Nope.  So your 3/4  of our top 4 that you claim is complete and utter crap. We have 3 top 4 defenceman this year at best and Hamhuis is no longer capable of carrying a pairing on his own. We literally had the top offensive blueline in the entire league, but no , it wasn't dismantled, I'm just a dimwit and you're the smartest person on this board

So what your saying is you wish Bieksa and Erhoff wee still on the team? Erhoff is a healthy scratch every night in LA and Bieksa is one of the worst moves the Ducks have ever made. Not sure why you'd want them back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bobbyg43 said:

great we have another coach aprenticing here an will move on to success elsewhere after he does his time here .now I am a glass half emty guy after living the majorityof my whole life it was half full.

Its more than that though, Rookie GM, 3rd in a row

rookie President,2nd in a row

Rookie head coach

rookie D coach

inexperienced O coach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TSN1040: WD: (1) Our rookies haven't hurt us. They've been good and played hard. But if you're a vet and you're not sure what someone is going...

@TSN1040: WD (2) to do, you overplay a bit and then you get in trouble. I just think it's learning the trust factor
 
 
 
This is for all the people who blame the rookies or say we have too many rookies whenever we lose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CANUCK-EXPRESS said:

@TSN1040: WD: (1) Our rookies haven't hurt us. They've been good and played hard. But if you're a vet and you're not sure what someone is going...

@TSN1040: WD (2) to do, you overplay a bit and then you get in trouble. I just think it's learning the trust factor
 
 
 
This is for all the people who blame the rookies or say we have too many rookies whenever we lose.

 

So if "the vets" don't trust "the rookies" whose fault is it? The vets for not trusting? The rookies for not being trustworthy? The coaches for not nurturing a climate of trust?  Likely all of the above.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lmm said:

Its more than that though, Rookie GM, 3rd in a row

rookie President,2nd in a row

Rookie head coach

rookie D coach

inexperienced O coach

Don't kid yourself.

Maybe Trevor?

JB over 20 years scouting and near 15 in senior management.

WD over 30 years coaching.  See below. Its someone who understands what is going on & where we have to get...

16 minutes ago, CANUCK-EXPRESS said:

@TSN1040: WD: (1) Our rookies haven't hurt us. They've been good and played hard. But if you're a vet and you're not sure what someone is going...

@TSN1040: WD (2) to do, you overplay a bit and then you get in trouble. I just think it's learning the trust factor
 
 
 
This is for all the people who blame the rookies or say we have too many rookies whenever we lose.

Plus one & great comments by a coach who has a handle on it.

Hasn't solved it yet. But has that understanding & probably will!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Quoted said:

 

So if "the vets" don't trust "the rookies" whose fault is it? The vets for not trusting? The rookies for not being trustworthy? The coaches for not nurturing a climate of trust?  Likely all of the above.

 

Why does there need to be an assignment of blame at all? Does it really matter? To me, it's an internal issue and i'll bet you dollars to donuts that they are addressing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lmm said:

Its more than that though, Rookie GM, 3rd in a row

rookie President,2nd in a row

Rookie head coach

rookie D coach

inexperienced O coach

The 'rookie' head coach label is badly misused around here...WD was an assistant coach with the Dallas Stars....and wasn't spotted by the Canucks ,as he was hitch hiking his way to Medicine Hat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is every one upset with losing like we are.  This exactly the best possibility we all should have hoped for.  Were not losing easy like the oilers did, were losing hard every game which is exactly how a rebuilding club should be losing.  I didn't mind this loss we played hard and didn't lose because of a lack of effort , we just weren't better than the Jets.  I hope if we lose, we lose games like that.  Those games make the young guys hungrier and angrier for a victory     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RonMexico said:

Why does there need to be an assignment of blame at all? Does it really matter? To me, it's an internal issue and i'll bet you dollars to donuts that they are addressing it.

I agree. The blame thing was in response to the original post ("don't blame the rookies"). I was trying to say it is a complex situation. You are right, a lot of good minds are looking at this team and trying to resolve things (management, coaches, etc.). In the end, though, the reality is that even if everything can be "fixed", they still won't be a contending team with the current roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, vantbl said:

Why is every one upset with losing like we are.  This exactly the best possibility we all should have hoped for.  Were not losing easy like the oilers did, were losing hard every game which is exactly how a rebuilding club should be losing.  I didn't mind this loss we played hard and didn't lose because of a lack of effort , we just weren't better than the Jets.  I hope if we lose, we lose games like that.  Those games make the young guys hungrier and angrier for a victory     

There are games where there does seem to be lack of effort (or focus) for long stretches.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Quoted said:

There are games where there does seem to be lack of effort (or focus) for long stretches.

 

I think it has been happening less than last year, though our team  for some reason has been doing way to many brain farts. 

We just aren't the same team as last year. We relied on the goalie to carry us way to much last years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whiskey healed the wound.

I had a blast watching the game live. Only because I had a mickey of jack daniels in my pocket. The MTS center is not all it's hyped to be, it was pretty quite despite the desperate win by the Jets. My neighbour lamented that it was way louder last year in the regular season when they were in a hunt for playoffs. I guess the novelty is wearing off. The tickets were cheaper  than the Rog too: $145 for lower bowl row 10.  

About the team. Once again, the power play production killed us. Also, there was no answer to the big and tough Jets. They set the tone and the Nucks bent over.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, philtbc829 said:

Watching the Oilers take it to the Hawks...sigh...the VETs really need to step up...here.....fracking sad hockey at the moment.... :(

they sure took it to the Hawks. Only lost in overtime.  And you wish we were like them? wow!

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...