[GDT] Wild @ Canucks - MON - FEB15 - 7PM - SNP

[Mathew Barzal]

1 hour ago, CanadianRugby said:

LOL.  Excited about the Canuck power play AND Linden Vey?  You're the most positive person I've seen in a while.

While Vey might not be the ideal point man he and Hutton bring something I've been wanting on our blueline since we dropped the Hoff. MOBILITY. The ability to walk the blueline to open shooting lanes, diving in deep to create movement. I think we're in for a pleasant surprise with this rotation.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

4 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

Agreed.  Another reason why I think Willie, Trev and Jimmy all have an underminded plan for a top 5 pick.

It's clear Desjardins wasn't watching the same game as the rest of us. I don't see any reason to have Biega out of the line-up, especially when it's for Weber. Did Desjardins see a simple little mistake from Biega that we never saw which resulted in him being a healthy scratch? Or, was he experimenting with the power-play lines? Whatever it may be, but we can all agree Weber doesn't deserve to be in the line-up over Biega.

[theminister]

7 minutes ago, nom_de_plume said:

Not really.  If a young player is a bright spot on a team how is he overrated?  I think if we were still seeing Bo struggle as he did in the first half of the season then maybe it would make sense.  And even through Bo's struggles in the first half you could still see him working his butt off. +- statistics can be somewhat telling, but doesn't give a good overall picture.  Maybe it's just that I disagree with Bo as an overrated player that isn't allowing me to see your point.

If the context is which player is overrated or underrated within this Canuck forum, then I could see how Bo would be considered as such.  He still has much to learn to get to the level that some project him to get to.  But I can't write off the serious energy, speed, tenacity, and ppg production he has brought especially in these past cpuple of months.  

He could be one of those special players in a few years that, when the chips are down, he'll put the team on his back and will us to victory.  He has those qualities and he's starting to bloom with enough confidence to put those qualities on display.  This, for me, is a leader in the making...

I write it off mostly as a statistical anomaly. Sakic was a -102 in his first three years in the league despite scoring at an exceptional clip. It's but a blip in a 15+ year career. He's far from the worst defensive player in the league...in fact, I'd say he's already top half. 

Most importantly, I think he hates getting scored on. I think sportsmanship should be at the top at all times...but you should never like it or get used to it. It should piss you off.  I think it does for him. Good.

The only way to rag on Bo would be to look at stats only and not his play. He's a special player, I firmly believe that  

 

[IrishCanuck5]

Etem isn't bad. I just think it was unjust to give him a roster spot that could have been filled by someone more deserving. 

(I know he probably had to stay in the NHL, but if we traded jensen for some other dude in the AHL, i would have been all for that.)

Seems like he just jumped on in and got a spot without earning it. I feel for the rookies working their tails off in the A. I'ts kinda like if you have been working for a company for a few years and then they bring in some nobody from another branch and he get's a front office job while you are still in the mail room. 

He get's to chat around the water cooler at lunch while you are eating your tuna sandwhich in the boiler room with the janitor.

 

SNOT FAIR I TELLS YA!

[Boddy604]

Take it all with a grain of salt cuz what's said to media (Willes in this case) is mostly crap anyways but....

Linden says Aquilini is supportive of the direction he wants to take and he has no problems with Willie as a coach.

Hopefully the 1st part is honest. The 2nd part... Well Yeo's boss praised him too literally the day before he was canned.

[Gaudette Celly]

7 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

It's clear Desjardins wasn't watching the same game as the rest of us. I don't see any reason to have Biega out of the line-up, especially when it's for Weber. Did Desjardins see a simple little mistake from Biega that we never saw which resulted in him being a healthy scratch? Or, was he experimenting with the power-play lines? Whatever it may be, but we can all agree Weber doesn't deserve to be in the line-up over Biega.

I haven't questioned many of Willie's decisions, but the ones the past few games have indeed been a bit puzzling.  Not to mention, he did say before that others would come out of the lineup before Biega, which they did, but now he's out for some reason while the guy who got shipped out on waivers because of him is now back and in his spot.

[Oldmanpower]

I don't give a flying !&#+ what the line up is or the names on the back of the jersey. This team is supposed to be playing for the crest on the front. We got our buts kicked by a team on Saturday night that did just that. Completely out worked at home on national tv. Our so called Nhl roster against a so called Ahl roster. Why are we not giving our Ahl guys more opportunity? Way more! I want to see effort,grit, bloody determination for my twelve rows up,upper deck seats my wife bought me for Christmas. So after consuming a few $8 dollar beers and heading back to the hotel and catching a ferry home the next day I can say that dammit that was a hard fought game. Hopefully we win but at the very least I can discuss some plays that didn't quite click but man I can appreciate the heart that was required to make that play even happen. Please ice me a roster that can do this because so far this season, I don't see this enough.......

[nom_de_plume]

16 minutes ago, theminister said:

I write it off mostly as a statistical anomaly. Sakic was a -102 in his first three years in the league despite scoring at an exceptional clip. It's but a blip in a 15+ year career. He's far from the worst defensive player in the league...in fact, I'd say he's already top half. 

Most importantly, I think he hates getting scored on. I think sportsmanship should be at the top at all times...but you should never like it or get used to it. It should piss you off.  I think it does for him. Good.

The only way to rag on Bo would be to look at stats only and not his play. He's a special player, I firmly believe that  

 

That's what used to kill me about Bieksa.  It's like getting scored on was just another day at the office for him, ho hum.  Been seeing it in Edler lots the last years

[PhillipBlunt]

5 hours ago, apollo said:

CUP or BUST homie!! 

Go Canucks Go. Cut me and watch me bleed sedinery (doesn't make sense but believe that!) 

So what Bo is out? -27 

He's without a doubt the most overrated player on this team. 

Vey day is upon us... Feast your eyes. VEYDAY! 

Bo is the real deal, Vey is an overrated smurf that Willie favors. 

You think WD is a joke but love his star pupil?

I'm sorry dude, but you've completely lost your mind. 

[PhillipBlunt]

27 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

It's clear Desjardins wasn't watching the same game as the rest of us. I don't see any reason to have Biega out of the line-up, especially when it's for Weber. Did Desjardins see a simple little mistake from Biega that we never saw which resulted in him being a healthy scratch? Or, was he experimenting with the power-play lines? Whatever it may be, but we can all agree Weber doesn't deserve to be in the line-up over Biega.

WD won't be able to ice a competitive team because he lacks the ability to coach at the NHL level. 

He needs to be replaced. Putting in Weber over Biega is an irretrievably stupid choice that neatly defines Desjardins approach. 

[Ghostsof1915]

Injuries have killed our season.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

WD won't be able to ice a competitive team because he lacks the ability to coach at the NHL level. 

He needs to be replaced. Putting in Weber over Biega is an irretrievably stupid choice that neatly defines Desjardins approach. 

But we really need top picks, so we get elite skill.  I say keep WD for his contract term.  The suffering we have to endure watching him NOT coach, or coach BADLY, will be rewarded in the long term.  

[-Vintage Canuck-]

5 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

WD won't be able to ice a competitive team because he lacks the ability to coach at the NHL level. 

He needs to be replaced. Putting in Weber over Biega is an irretrievably stupid choice that neatly defines Desjardins approach. 

It seems like he doesn't want a top-5 pick, neither does he want to make the playoffs. If we put in Biega for some games, and Weber for the others, we'll probably finish 9th or 10th place - the worst place to finish.

[PhillipBlunt]

7 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

It seems like he doesn't want a top-5 pick, neither does he want to make the playoffs. If we put in Biega for some games, and Weber for the others, we'll probably finish 9th or 10th place - the worst place to finish.

He shouldn't have any bearing on what picks the Canucks acquire seeing as he can't determine who a capable NHL defenseman is on his own team. WD is lost. 

[theminister]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

But we really need top picks, so we get elite skill.  I say keep WD for his contract term.  The suffering we have to endure watching him NOT coach, or coach BADLY, will be rewarded in the long term.  

You can keep trumpeting this but it's not implicitly true, in any fashion. 

1) Elite players can come at any spot, though agreed it's usually 1st round. But it isn't necessarily top 5.

2) Losing more ensures nothing with this draft format. There will be likely one, maybe two, major movers in the lottery. It only changes probabilities on a minor scale. 

It's basic math...just like the 6/49. Buying two tickets give you a twice as good odds to win! It doesn't mean squat. 

First pick...20%...which means an 80% chance you lose. 4 to 1...that's huge in gambling...major. Then, you might get bumped up to 23% for the 2nd pick. Lose that and your chances move up to 25%. 

Even the worst place team will only have 68% chance of a top three pick, aggregated. Each time they lose they will be against the odds. Get ready for the first year to see a major mover...and I mean someone in the 8-14 range will likely get a top 3 pick. Their accumulated odds are greater than the favourites. It's almost a forgone conclusion. 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

He shouldn't have any bearing on what picks the Canucks acquire seeing as he can't determine who a capable NHL defenseman is on his own team. WD is lost. 

Change is coming, soon. Hopefully.

[theminister]

26 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Change is coming, soon. Hopefully.

You haven't seen change, VC? I have. 

It would be exceptionally incorrect to assume there isn't dialogue between upper management and the coach. These things aren't happening in isolation. This is the execution of a plan, for right or wrong. JB knows what is being done and I'm sure they talk almost daily.

When we say 'one step back for two steps forward'...you have to acknowledge the one step back. WD isn't a fool...that's ridiculous Botch material. They are working in unison to execute a plan...agree with it or not...it isn't Willie-nilly  

 

[dura_mater]

1 hour ago, theminister said:

You can keep trumpeting this but it's not implicitly true, in any fashion. 

1) Elite players can come at any spot, though agreed it's usually 1st round. But it isn't necessarily top 5.

2) Losing more ensures nothing with this draft format. There will be likely one, maybe two, major movers in the lottery. It only changes probabilities on a minor scale. 

It's basic math...just like the 6/49. Buying two tickets give you a twice as good odds to win! It doesn't mean squat. 

First pick...20%...which means an 80% chance you lose. 4 to 1...that's huge in gambling...major. Then, you might get bumped up to 23% for the 2nd pick. Lose that and your chances move up to 25%. 

Even the worst place team will only have 68% chance of a top three pick, aggregated. Each time they lose they will be against the odds. Get ready for the first year to see a major mover...and I mean someone in the 8-14 range will likely get a top 3 pick. Their accumulated odds are greater than the favourites. It's almost a forgone conclusion. 

It's entirely true.  The lower you finish in the standings the better odds you have at drafting higher.  You say it's "basic math" but I'm not sure why you can't grasp that. 

This argument that you can find talent anywhere in the draft is utter nonsense.  No s*** you can find talent anywhere in the draft but if it were so easy as some people make it out to be then you'd see GMs trading away their first, second, third overall for a later pick and additional picks or prospects.  People love to say oh well what about Gaudreau in the 4th round or Larkin 15th overall.  For all those players there are 20 players who don't make it or are 3rd/4th line players.  All they're doing is cherry picking stats.

"and I mean someone in the 8-14 range will likely get a top 3 pick. Their accumulated odds are greater than the favourites"

This actually makes me wonder if you do in fact understand basic math.  You're grouping teams 8-14 together yet they draft alone and one team keeps the player.  You can't compare 6 teams odds of drafting top 3 vs one teams.  It's very simple math, you finish lower you have a higher chance at drafting higher.  I'm not arguing this guarantees the best player or that a team should "tank", but it does in fact give you the best possible chance to draft higher.

[apollo]

Woaaaa ruffled a lot of feathers. 

Relax, I love Bo.  I'm just saying it's not the end of the world, plus minus is a very poor stat to chose to be last in the NHL in. 

[Boddy604]

2 minutes ago, apollo said:

Woaaaa ruffled a lot of feathers. 

Relax, I love Bo.  I'm just saying it's not the end of the world, plus minus is a very poor stat to chose to be last in the NHL in. 

+/- is just a very poor stat in general. How many times has Bo been the guy sent onto the ice after a sloppy line change? He had nothing to do with the play but since he hit the ice, he gets the -. Or when he's been double shifted to play the 2nd and 4th. Or spending most of the season as the only competent defensive centre. It's a flawed stat in general cuz it accounts for nothing but who's skates are on the ice when the puck goes in the net.