Cerridwen Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, Yotes said: when your not a playoff team, why not play your youth more, lose some games and get a higher pick? We aren't fully tanking, if that was the case we would be sitting a lot more players and using Utica players who likely weren't ready to play in the NHL. We are playing the kids more finally and they are doing well, its exciting to watch. We are actually drawing more penalties due to the speed we have and taking less as we don't need to hook on the back check as much as we have the speed. Again having a higher pick say top 7 allows us to get a top forward of a top D. if we played to win and got 13th we don't get as high of a quality prospect. And at the end of the season we would still miss the playoffs. You want to see Burrows or Vrbata on the top line or in top 6 taking ice time away from Virtanen? The fans will embrace the team playing the youth more, and if that means they gain experience and confidence en route to use getting a higher pick what is wrong with the fans wanting to see more losses to improve the chances of a top pick? I am all for what we are doing now, I would not want us to follow this for 5-6 years straight but in a year we know we wont make the playoffs and have had some key injuries why not? My comment had to do with the quoted post that said "Never thought I'd see the day when fans are upset at a win." And frankly, that sort of response, 'so-called' Canucks fans upset because we had the temerity to win our game tonight. still nauseates me. I have no issue with us playing our younguns more and I have no issue with finally having resigned myself to the fact that we are not going to be making the playoffs and there's something rather freeing in being able to watch this team play and focus on the talent on the ice instead of calculating who must win, who must lose, how many points do we need etc. I think it's appalling, this whole 'tanknation' crap we're subjected to in every single bloody GDT and PGT. I have no respect for those who advocate deliberately losing in order to further some hairbrained idea of possible higher draft picks. Getting a top pick is a gamble at best... years before production on the ice......so the thought of deliberately setting out to lose just on the off chance of one is bull$&!# to me. You play the hand you're dealt and you win or lose with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 DeNiro...WTF man! You've gone to the dark side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 6 minutes ago, nuckfan82 said: Oh ya I forgot. Shinkaruk sure got his chance with the one game and 8 minutes played. We have about two to three third line centres already. How many do we need? How's Shinkaruk doing in Calgary? Oh yeah, not good enough to make the roster of the 4th-worst team. NHL player >>>>>>>>> AHL player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckfan82 Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 Calgary doesn't need his offence right now. That's why they haven't called him up. Canucks could have used it but after the one game he showed them he wasn't going to be an everyday NHL player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Calgary is only three points back of us and are actually playing good hockey. Arizona is only 1 point back and can squeak out wins with their style of play. We don't need to pass Edmonton or Toronto to finish bottom 3. They're likely going to finish 29th and 30th. We only need to be worse than Calgary, Columbus, Arizona, Winnipeg, and Buffalo who are all closely grouped together. I don't see how it isn't still very possible. Oh yeah I also agree it IS possible. I just don't think it's likely however but I guess we will find out in about a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, nuckfan82 said: All I am saying is Shinkaruk was never given a chance to play here and he offered a skill set we desperately needed on the team. How does an AHL skillset help an NHL team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted March 10, 2016 Author Share Posted March 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Cerridwen said: I think it's appalling, this whole 'tanknation' crap we're subjected to in every single bloody GDT and PGT. I have no respect for those who advocate deliberately losing in order to further some hairbrained idea of possible higher draft picks. Getting a top pick is a gamble at best... years before production on the ice......so the thought of deliberately setting out to lose just on the off chance of one is bull$&!# to me. You play the hand you're dealt and you win or lose with it. if the above is what you are reffering to, best to not use this forum, it will never go away, this is the interwen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 Happy for @debluvscanucks :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 15 hours ago, DeNiro said: Calgary is only three points back of us and are actually playing good hockey. Arizona is only 1 point back and can squeak out wins with their style of play. We don't need to pass Edmonton or Toronto to finish bottom 3. They're likely going to finish 29th and 30th. We only need to be worse than Calgary, Columbus, Arizona, Winnipeg, and Buffalo who are all closely grouped together. I don't see how it isn't still very possible. IMO the Canucks had better put a call in to the |Laffers at least they seem to have something right. Sit some of the vets and play the kids. Drafting between #3 - #5 is essential for the Canucks. Suggestions by some that drafting up to #10 is just as good need a head shake. Some on here seem to think there is enough talent on this roster that they can be contenders next year. That is also a fantasy. If the Canucks are extremely lucky they will have a core in another 2 - 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 13 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said: Watched the game. First time in awhile. Really good to see the young guys play well. Hutton and Virtanen were the standouts IMO. Hutton is so poised out there that it's hard to believe that he such an unknown coming into camp. Virtanen is starting to show how well rounded his game could be with physicality and skill. I feel that he is showing that he thinks the game well. Horvat looked good as well, as did Baertschi. Granlund is a quietly effective player but time will tell if he can produce regularly. Gaunce had a few good plays but he looks like he needs a few more games to gel with Horvat. Not sure where Etem and Vey will go next year. I figure they'll be qualified and could be grade bait. Etem is more intriguing with his speed and size since he can still play a 4th line role, especially if Burr goes this summer or plays a much smaller role next year. Vey could still be a decent depth forward but it's hard to see him sticking anywhere. Looking forward to Tryamkin's debut and seeing guys like Pedan and Grenier get some time with the big club. Vey and Etem - I think they might try and sign them on a two-way deal before the qualification deadline. I can't see them wanting them on a one-way deal with the possibility that both might end up in the AHL (and I think Vey has arbitration rights and maybe even Etem). I don't think it shows well to ownership if they keep on sending one-ways to the AHL even if there's no cap implications - it's also about managing a budget. There's a logjam of players and several will end up in the AHL so they'll probably want to limit the number of one-way deals for the players competing for spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckfan82 Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 It is funny to see people bash Shinkaruk when he was NEVER GIVEN THE CHANCE TO PLAY WITH THE BIG CLUB. That is true is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 Just now, Harvey Spector said: Oh yeah I also agree it IS possible. I just don't think it's likely however but I guess we will find out in about a month. I think it's just as likely that we finish bottom 3 as any of the other teams around us. We've been playing horrible hockey lately, tonight we took advantage of a bad team that played undisciplined. I don't see us winning much over the next month. Whereas I think teams like Calgary, Arizona, Columbus, and Winnipeg are capable of winning more of their remaining games. Tonight was definitely not the difference maker for finishing bottom 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerridwen Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, Yotes said: if the above is what you are reffering to, best to not use this forum, it will never go away, this is the interwen This is my 13th year on this board, seen it all. But this season is truly the first time I've ever seen this whole 'tanknation' crap so pervasive. And it is insulting to all long term and loyal Canucks fans. Not to mention our team on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, nuckfan82 said: Calgary doesn't need his offence right now. Canucks did. Thats why they haven't called him up. So if Calgary doesn't need him then why did they trade for him? He's going on 22 he's not 19. Calgary is a very young team so it's not like they are shipping out a bunch of veterans next year to fit Shinkaruk in. As for the Canucks needing his offence Shinkaruk is either a top 6 winger or in the minors. He can't play a bottom 6 role like Granlund can. And since he's a left winger he would have to have taken Dank or Baer's spot to make the Canucks roster. So who would you have sat out, Dank or Baer?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted March 10, 2016 Author Share Posted March 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Cerridwen said: This is my 13th year on these forums, seen it all. But this season is truly the first time I've ever seen this whole 'tanknation' crap so pervasive. And it is insulting to all long term and loyal Canucks fans. i totally agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Spector Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 7 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: How's Shinkaruk doing in Calgary? Oh yeah, not good enough to make the roster of the 4th-worst team. NHL player >>>>>>>>> AHL player Exactly. Some just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, Boudrias said: IMO the Canucks had better put a call in to the |Laffers at least they seem to have something right. Sit some of the vets and play the kids. Drafting between #3 - #5 is essential for the Canucks. Suggestions by some that drafting up to #10 is just as good need a head shake. Some on here seem to think there is enough talent on this roster that they can be contenders next year. That is also a fantasy. If the Canucks are extremely lucky they will have a core in another 2 - 3 years. How does sitting Burrows, Vrbata, and Dorsett help us tank? Last time I checked these guys have done very little to help us win over the last couple months. If anything we should be playing them more. It's the kids that are putting in the effort and helping us win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 14 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Tryamkin cannot play in Utica this season -- his signing came after the deadline. He is with the Canucks for the rest of the way. He's not even here yet, let alone getting in practice time. Even if he looks great and fully ready, he's still at least a week away. It's not only a new team but a whole new league but whole new country. Oh... he will play....you know he'll play. He'll play with Sbisa! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckfan82 Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 The tank nation is so pervasive because we have had different management come in and continue to stick and rely on the Sedins. They have all said the same thing when it came to the deadlines. Our hands were tied and we couldn't do anything. Yet you see other teams make moves and get creative. Fans are just tired of hearing we couldn't do anything or our hands were tied. The Sedins should have never been as heavily relied upon as they have been. A younger superstar should have been in place by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 10 minutes ago, Cerridwen said: My comment had to do with the quoted post that said "Never thought I'd see the day when fans are upset at a win." And frankly, that sort of response, 'so-called' Canucks fans upset because we had the temerity to win our game tonight. still nauseates me. I have no issue with us playing our younguns more and I have no issue with finally having resigned myself to the fact that we are not going to be making the playoffs and there's something rather freeing in being able to watch this team play and focus on the talent on the ice instead of calculating who must win, who must lose, how many points do we need etc. I think it's appalling, this whole 'tanknation' crap we're subjected to in every single bloody GDT and PGT. I have no respect for those who advocate deliberately losing in order to further some hairbrained idea of possible higher draft picks. Getting a top pick is a gamble at best... years before production on the ice......so the thought of deliberately setting out to lose just on the off chance of one is bull$&!# to me. You play the hand you're dealt and you win or lose with it. Thanks you for all of this, been busy all night and havnt had time to chime in but very well said. Great game, was excited to see the compete level. For the haters it was a horrible game but who cares bout them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.