Post Game Comment: "Daniel Sedin: "From some guys right now, the effort is not there."

[wallstreetamigo]

40 minutes ago, TheCammer said:

That seems like an extremely curious decision by the Vets to skip the morning skate if you are trying to set an example of "hard work"

Do as I say, not as I do. That's the way to straighten those lazy kids out vets! Typical veteran entitlement as always.

[oldnews]

 

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Do as I say, not as I do. That's the way to straighten those lazy kids out vets! Typical veteran entitlement as always.

LOL.  The typical wallstreet narrative when he knows absolutely nothing regarding why this would be the case.

Carry on drama queen.   If the Province weren't sinking I'd recommend dropping Botch a resume.

[wallstreetamigo]

4 minutes ago, hockeyking said:

by that logic the past five years any player not on chicago or LA are all not clutch. Also it means nobody on the caunucks is clutch not even one person because the same argument can be applied to any team or player that hasn't one a cup.

Being clutch in the playoffs has nothing to do with ultimately winning or losing because that relies on a lot of variables outside a players control. It has to do with HOW you as a player play and how you impact the game and make a difference when you are in the ice. 

 

Like I said, if you guys would choose the Sedins over any number of other players as your go to guys in the playoffs, good for you. I sure wouldn't.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Do as I say, not as I do. That's the way to straighten those lazy kids out vets! Typical veteran entitlement as always.

Injuries perhaps?

 

Older vets frequently take optional practices off, particularly when nursing injuries.

 

But no, the more dramatic, baseless ranting is probably the way to go... 

[hockeyking]

16 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Being clutch in the playoffs has nothing to do with ultimately winning or losing because that relies on a lot of variables outside a players control. It has to do with HOW you as a player play and how you impact the game and make a difference when you are in the ice. 

 

Like I said, if you guys would choose the Sedins over any number of other players as your go to guys in the playoffs, good for you. I sure wouldn't.

This whole statement contradicts this

29 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Then stop responding. Last time I checked this was a forum for discussing the Canucks and you don't own it or run it. So that means I have as much right to post here as you do.

 

If you think the Sedins are clutch playoff players that's all anyone needs to know about your hockey analysis outside of using only advanced stats as the end all and be all. Here is the only stat that matters: We have choked with them as leaders and first liners every year except one on the playoffs (and we almost choked on the first round then had easy pickings in the 2nd and 3rd rounds then choked in the finals). Not exactly what I would call clutch.

 

Puck possession metrics do not equal playoff effectiveness though. Because other teams are happy to let the Sedins waste two minutes cycling the puck for a weak sauce shot from the perimeter. They do it all the time in the playoffs. 

You just said as the sedins as the leaders of the team have made it to the final once which makes them not clutch. Now you say that being clutch doesn't have to do with winning or losing.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

 

LOL.  The typical wallstreet narrative when he knows absolutely nothing regarding why this would be the case.

Carry on drama queen.   If the Province weren't sinking I'd recommend dropping Botch a resume.

Don't you have some obscure advanced stats to explain exactly why the vets sat out practice? 

 

Might want to get on that. 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Don't you have some obscure advanced stats to explain exactly why the vets sat out practice? 

 

Might want to get on that. 

Seriously, Winterpeg has the best IKEA outside of Sweeden.  For a Swede, not going to that IKEA, would be like a young Canadian missing a chance to party with Beiber.  

[oldnews]

6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Don't you have some obscure advanced stats to explain exactly why the vets sat out practice? 

 

Might want to get on that. 

Why would I make a claim about something I have literally no information regarding.

 

I'll leave that up to you.  

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, hockeyking said:

This whole statement contradicts this

You just said as the sedins as the leaders of the team have made it to the final once which isn't clutch. Now you say that being clutch doesn't have to do with winning or losing.

Not everything is an absolute. I should probably have said that the outcome (winning or losing) relies on more than just one or two players. Having said that, clutch performances by your top players contribute to your chances at success in the playoffs. That much seems common sense to me. 

 

In 2011 we were the best regular season team. We were at of near the top of the league in gf, ga, pp, pk if I am not mistaken. So theoretically we should have dominated the playoffs if all else was equal, right?

 

All else is not equal though. And THAT is where clutch players make the difference. I am in no way blaming only the Sedins. They are fine players. They are just too one dimensional to do more to help the team win if they get shut down offensively in a game or series. They don't push back and they let themselves be pushed around looking for the pp. That's fine when it works but too bad it doesn't in the playoffs. And typically teams that have their top players step up offensively AND defensively are the ones who succeed.

 

In hindsight, losing that Chicago series in round 1 would have probably brought about huge changes. That might have meant a different path for the team since then rather than all these wasted playoff years since.

[CeeBee51]

4 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

In hindsight, losing that Chicago series in round 1 would have probably brought about huge changes. That might have meant a different path for the team since then rather than all these wasted playoff years since.

Winning the cup might have done that as well.

[Rush17]

1 hour ago, TheCammer said:

That seems like an extremely curious decision by the Vets to skip the morning skate if you are trying to set an example of "hard work"

I would say it's a smart decision, let he youth have practice to themselves and let them motivate and lead each other after Danny's comments.  

 

See we who has character and who steps up and leads.  No one there to hold their hands. Time for the kids to show some pride and see who steps up as a leader. 

[oldnews]

12 minutes ago, hockeyking said:

This whole statement contradicts this

You just said as the sedins as the leaders of the team have made it to the final once which makes them not clutch. Now you say that being clutch doesn't have to do with winning or losing.

And the discussion never really was about 'being clutch'.  It started with claims they are "soft" and have a horrilble playoff record (and when their virtual ppg playoff production is raised, wallstreet tanks the discussion with +/- lol).   The attempt to then turn this into a discussion of how "clutch" they are is convenient because it's open to wild interpretation.

How do you measure "clutch"?   I'm sure wallstreet can come up with something from his clear and incisive "eye test", combined with a liberal dose of dramatic interpretation.

Are they the most "clutch" leaders in the NHL or history?  Never heard anyone make that claim to be honest, but to entertain the strawman, they do have 10 game winning goals in the playoffs - I'd say for guys that have horrible records in the playoffs, don'ts show up, are soft, can't elevate their game, etc - I'd say nearly a ppg in the playoffs (actually, that is quite impressive against the NHL's best teams) and 10 gwg is not really that bad - certainly doesn't serve the dramatic narratives of guys like wallstreet.

[hockeyking]

13 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Not everything is an absolute. I should probably have said that the outcome (winning or losing) relies on more than just one or two players. Having said that, clutch performances by your top players contribute to your chances at success in the playoffs. That much seems common sense to me. 

 

In 2011 we were the best regular season team. We were at of near the top of the league in gf, ga, pp, pk if I am not mistaken. So theoretically we should have dominated the playoffs if all else was equal, right?

 

All else is not equal though. And THAT is where clutch players make the difference. I am in no way blaming only the Sedins. They are fine players. They are just too one dimensional to do more to help the team win if they get shut down offensively in a game or series. They don't push back and they let themselves be pushed around looking for the pp. That's fine when it works but too bad it doesn't in the playoffs. And typically teams that have their top players step up offensively AND defensively are the ones who succeed.

 

In hindsight, losing that Chicago series in round 1 would have probably brought about huge changes. That might have meant a different path for the team since then rather than all these wasted playoff years since.

In my opinion that is a false conclusion as luck, officiating, injuries and another factors can make things unequal.

 

How does one measure clutch as you say.

 

 

[higgyfan]

Much ado about nothing again.  Have people around here never said something out of frustration and then regretted it afterwards.  Think about the recent team results and then having micorphones stuffed in your face within seconds after a dreadful game.

 

We don't even know who he was talking about, or what he sees on/off the ice.

 

Give it a rest and hopefully it will go away.

[oldnews]

I'm glad a few vets are resting.

 

Hamhuis:  broken face

Higgins: broken foot, concussion.

Henrik:  who knows - has played through what appears an obvious hand/arm/shoulder/back? injury whereby he went long stretches where he could scarcely take a draw - and then got cheap-shotted from behind by Grabovski.  I don't think anyone can question his laziness or "entitlement".  That is idiocy.

Who knows about Bartkowski - but he did not look good last game - at all. 

 

Save it for the game.  That people are questioning this is comical.  I'm sure the Canucks are aware of the optics - and could not care less.

Ironic that folks on 'tank nation' would be here complaining about stuff like this though.

[LaBamba]

Way to go @wallstreetamigo you pissed off @oldnews

 

Just step back and walk away, l learned this lesson the hard way in the Luongo trade thread versions 1,2,3,4 and 6 I was on holidays during version 5.0. 

[Fred65]

15 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

Much ado about nothing again.  Have people around here never said something out of frustration and then regretted it afterwards.  Think about the recent team results and then having micorphones stuffed in your face within seconds after a dreadful game.

 

We don't even know who he was talking about, or what he sees on/off the ice.

 

Give it a rest and hopefully it will go away.

Isn't school out this week ?, could explain a lot

[oldnews]

4 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

Way to go @wallstreetamigo you pissed off @oldnews

 

Just step back and walk away, l learned this lesson the hard way in the Luongo trade thread versions 1,2,3,4 and 6 I was on holidays during version 5.0. 

on the contrary noheart, you were one of my favorites.

 

[Sean Monahan]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Don't you have some obscure advanced stats to explain exactly why the vets sat out practice? 

 

Might want to get on that. 

And with that, the argument is officially over.  Kicking sand doesn't really help your case.

 

why am I not surprised to see these two arguing though?

[vancouverdepression]

16 hours ago, gerry35 said:

Flames fan........

Canucks minus Sedins fan