numb3r 16 Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 10 minutes ago, combover said: Benning era longest goalless streak lowest scoring team possibly the longest losing streak 9 losses so far so at best he'll be in second. Next to keenan keenan nonis Benning bottom three all time nuck gms in any order. You forgot the "2022- 2nd career Stanley cup" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 On 4/1/2016 at 9:44 PM, combover said: Benning era longest goalless streak lowest scoring team possibly the longest losing streak 9 losses so far so at best he'll be in second. Next to keenan keenan nonis Benning bottom three all time nuck gms in any order. Uhm...? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 On 4/1/2016 at 7:02 PM, ABNuck said: Hey G, I missed you! I don't think drafting more Dmen or goalies would help us much in our current situation. In order to overcome our current situation we would need the best 6 Dmen + Holtby. I agree that you need a top notch D corps if your Oside can't score. But for sure, make no mistake about it, we are losing cause we can't score. And it is hardly a small sample size. In the history of every major team sport, teams that can't score don't win diddly squat. To be fair, our D over this 9 game losing streak has been brutal (3.22GAA) but our O group has only produced 8 goals in those 9 games (shut completely out in 4 of them). No matter how you slice it, our offense is more brutal than our D. And PS/ props to you mate for keeping it classy on here. I wish others on here were classy as you are (myself included), you are truly a model debate participant. I will +1 you for sure as soon as I see one of your stances that I personally could agree with, but sorry G, not on this one. On 4/1/2016 at 8:50 PM, clam linguine said: Oh here we go again....look at the Oilers! I might be happy if they start kicking our ass next year, lol. Anyhooo... maybe the Oilers drafted all the offensive players they needed and failed to build their defense. It is defense comes second...not defense comes never Yes, I am Ok with what the Canucks have tried to do at the draft, considering we haven't had very high picks. I feel like Hutton could be a Top 2 guy, so he would be a good example on the Canucks for leaving D men for later (Tanev too). As you suspected, I really hope JB doesn't draft a dman inside the top five this year. i don't have an answer for your Chicago query With recent events (ie. the Canucks winning a couple of games and dropping down/up several places in the finish order), hopes for a top-5 pick have been diminished. I was on-side with drafting an offensive BPA when it looked like there was a very good chance that the Canucks could possibly get Matthews or one of the Finns (yes, they still do have a chance but that chance has been diminished of late). Now, it looks like there is a better chance that the BPA when the Canucks select could be one of Juolevi, Sergachev or Chychrun. Would you guys stick to your draft for offense first policy in this eventuality, or would you take one of these d-men to fill a team need in that area? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 4 hours ago, Gollumpus said: With recent events (ie. the Canucks winning a couple of games and dropping down/up several places in the finish order), hopes for a top-5 pick have been diminished. I was on-side with drafting an offensive BPA when it looked like there was a very good chance that the Canucks could possibly get Matthews or one of the Finns (yes, they still do have a chance but that chance has been diminished of late). Now, it looks like there is a better chance that the BPA when the Canucks select could be one of Juolevi, Sergachev or Chychrun. Would you guys stick to your draft for offense first policy in this eventuality, or would you take one of these d-men to fill a team need in that area? regards, G. If we pick a Dman outside the top five I will not be disappointed. I would be happy with any of those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 9 hours ago, Gollumpus said: With recent events (ie. the Canucks winning a couple of games and dropping down/up several places in the finish order), hopes for a top-5 pick have been diminished. I was on-side with drafting an offensive BPA when it looked like there was a very good chance that the Canucks could possibly get Matthews or one of the Finns (yes, they still do have a chance but that chance has been diminished of late). Now, it looks like there is a better chance that the BPA when the Canucks select could be one of Juolevi, Sergachev or Chychrun. Would you guys stick to your draft for offense first policy in this eventuality, or would you take one of these d-men to fill a team need in that area? regards, G. 4 hours ago, clam linguine said: If we pick a Dman outside the top five I will not be disappointed. I would be happy with any of those guys. I'm gonna stick to my guns here, if we don't get O help from the draft (ie/ top 3) then we will be better off trading that pick for some immediate help (need a big centreman)...I'm not as sold on RNH as I once was, he's starting to look a bit fragile, but I'd be OK with Johansen or Turris so if NSH or OTT is interested in our 4 to 7 pick, then I'd be tempted to at least call and inquire. We might be able to get Turris for the pick, but I'm positive we'd have to add to pry RyJo out of NSH. So then here's the question: if we're picking outside the top 3 what should we do to try and reverse the problem addressed in this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 4 hours ago, clam linguine said: If we pick a Dman outside the top five I will not be disappointed. I would be happy with any of those guys. More than I want to deal with atm, chum. It's sunny outside, and baseball season is starting up. Let me know how it works out. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 42 minutes ago, ABNuck said: I'm gonna stick to my guns here, if we don't get O help from the draft (ie/ top 3) then we will be better off trading that pick for some immediate help (need a big centreman)...I'm not as sold on RNH as I once was, he's starting to look a bit fragile, but I'd be OK with Johansen or Turris so if NSH or OTT is interested in our 4 to 7 pick, then I'd be tempted to at least call and inquire. We might be able to get Turris for the pick, but I'm positive we'd have to add to pry RyJo out of NSH. So then here's the question: if we're picking outside the top 3 what should we do to try and reverse the problem addressed in this thread? I echo your thoughts on RNH. Oilers held onto him too long now. How do we solve the scoring issues? I can only say that if one of the deals you suggest happened, I would not be outraged. Lets keep hoping for a Top 3. (down from top 5 for me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 So tonight's the night...in order to avoid the dubious honor of being the lowest scoring Canucks team in history, we need to score 5 goals tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 On April 2, 2016 at 2:57 AM, Gollumpus said: Uhm...? regards, G. Mike Keenan became the principle of hockey ops(intern gm) between the firing of pat Quinn 1997 and the hiring of Brian Burke summer 1998. in that time he traded linden for a great return yet his messier love and tyrannical mentality made him a terrible gm. so yeah nucks gm mike Keenan regards C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 31 minutes ago, combover said: Mike Keenan became the principle of hockey ops(intern gm) between the firing of pat Quinn 1997 and the hiring of Brian Burke summer 1998. in that time he traded linden for a great return yet his messier love and tyrannical mentality made him a terrible gm. so yeah nucks gm mike Keenan regards C Ah yeah, now that you mention this. It was a dark time and not really worth remembering. regards, G. PS - I got that "regards" thing copyrighted. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Nuck Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 1 hour ago, ABNuck said: So tonight's the night...in order to avoid the dubious honor of being the lowest scoring Canucks team in history, we need to score 5 goals tonight. And if the same player scores all 5 maybe someone will finall win the million dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 And we did it! We set a new a new team record! In 1998-99 this team scored a pathetic 192 goals...and this year...191! Way to go boys! We tried hard but there was no way we were gonna touch the modern NHL mark (TBL scored just 151 in 1997-98)...but the effort was definitely there for sure. If only Hank and Daniel would have had months long injuries I think we could have had a shot. Scary isn't it. I think we need some scoring depth. I know...thanks Capt. Obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 2 hours ago, ABNuck said: And we did it! We set a new a new team record! In 1998-99 this team scored a pathetic 192 goals...and this year...191! Way to go boys! We tried hard but there was no way we were gonna touch the modern NHL mark (TBL scored just 151 in 1997-98)...but the effort was definitely there for sure. If only Hank and Daniel would have had months long injuries I think we could have had a shot. Scary isn't it. I think we need some scoring depth. I know...thanks Capt. Obvious. Yep, I've been saying that for years now... We were 7th worst in Goals Against, but the worst over all in goal differential @ -52 thanks to be being 2nd worst in goals for! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.