Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 We, Canucks fans, have endured a season worse than the torts year. There are few people who didn't like tank nation. These fans wanted the playoffs. They had to watch the 5-2 streak, the 8 games without a win, the longest shutout streak in franchise history. Let's take a moment and congratulate these fans for hanging in for this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 How about those fans who have been waiting 40+ years for a Stanley Cup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 2 minutes ago, Rocky Balboa said: How about those fans who have been waiting 40+ years for a Stanley Cup? This is arguably as bad as when we first came into this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Just now, chilliwiggins said: Its looking like 50 This is 45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Hey, at least we don't have bad asset management.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Just now, Rocky Balboa said: Hey, at least we don't have bad asset management.. That is edmontons job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Thank you. Thank you all. Really...thanks. I couldn't have done it alone....and I appreciate all of yous too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Jack Fig said: Thank you. Thank you all. Really...thanks. I couldn't have done it alone....and I appreciate all of yous too! I meant real fans and not just fans of winning but ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 23 minutes ago, Stamkos said: We, Canucks fans, have endured a season worse than the torts year. There are few people who didn't like tank nation. These fans wanted the playoffs. They had to watch the 5-2 streak, the 8 games without a win, the longest shutout streak in franchise history. Let's take a moment and congratulate these fans for hanging in for this long. I should close this based on a lack of substance, but must respond. YOU may think it's worse than...I don't see it that way. I am excited over the infusion of some young players who have injected some speed into the game. With that, the tradeoff is that experience, chemistry and other things take time to develop and may not be there yet. So I'm realistic in my approach and expectations by having patience as they work toward that...I didn't expect them to jump in and be perfect. And knew that the risk is that they may not develop into reaching potential that I/we'd like them to have. Some will, others won't. What fan doesn't want playoffs? That's the goal, is it not? So to step on to a soapbox in a high and mighty way like it's somehow wrong to want to enjoy that aspect of a season? Tanking to acquire picks is a great concept except some people (me) buy tickets and go to games...I don't want to pay to watch a team that has a mission only to lose (in order to "try" to win later). Tanking doesn't mean "winning"...it means you may get a good pick. Who may/may not pan out. There are fans of the team, fans of hockey and fans of "winning" (only). Let's allow people to decide, for themselves, which they are without judging or somehow feeling we're "better" fans for selecting a different option. I want to see good hockey. I love my team. I am learning, over time, to let go and move on/forward, but it's a struggle. So we all have our deal...and none is the "best"...just the "best for us" as individuals. I am not "for" tanking in that I am cheering for my team to lose...but I accept losing as something with a very positive result. That, through loss at this late stage, we'll possibly gain. I prefer winning...but that gets us nothing (now). I want them to play hard, try to win, develop good habits and...if they should lose during that, well let's fire up the draft lottery ball machine and get the party started. It's nice to have something rather exciting to take away from it all as a consolation prize. So I want them to feel good out there and build confidence and momentum...but the flip side is that when we lose it's ok because there's something in that. We will acquire an asset to help in that for the future. A payoff. Suggesting this is as bad as? Makes me question your age and how long you've been on board. This is some exciting hockey in comparison to days when we lost 9-2. The speed and skill alone is miles beyond what we used to see. So, nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I will never be pro-tank. That's not to say, at times like this, that you win at all costs. These games can be important for experience/development, so let injuries heal fully and play the rookies. But rather than cheer on the losses, why not pick out the positives like the evolution of Tryamkin, Baertschi, and Markstrom? I've said it before, a good draft pick is what you humbly accept at the end of a long, grueling, and ultimately unsuccessful season. Cheering on losses just seems obnoxious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 7 minutes ago, Stamkos said: I meant real fans and not just fans of winning but ok I meant there are people in the world who hope to have something to eat today, but I guess tolerating the foibles of a lousy hockey team is right up there too, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I'm not pro-tank but I'm a realist as well. What bothers me is the compete level. Guys like Vrbata, clearly mailed it in this season, and demonstrates the risk in UFA's if they are here just for the money. They have to want to be here and make an impact. What bothers me is guys like Burrows, Etem, Gaunce, and yes Vey. They seem to be trying but they aren't following Tryamkin's and Beiga's lead of just keep it simple. Baer and Horvat at times seem to be snake bit too. After watching North Dakota in Division I and Chicago last night I see whats part of our problem is. Those teams use the defence to not only defend and cut down on scoring chances. The defence springs the offence on breakaways, or the attack. We need to simplify the game, lots of short crisp passes, and avoid drop passes as they make us vulnerable. Then attack the front of the net. How often do they dump and chase? Usually only on line changes. We need to get movement on the inside and get the forwards and defence to commit, to set up a scoring chance. Not perimeter play and pass, pass, pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 11 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said: Suggesting this is as bad as? Makes me question your age and how long you've been on board. This is some exciting hockey in comparison to days when we lost 9-2. The speed and skill alone is miles beyond what we used to see. So, nope. I went to the sundowner, a place that is a great hockey venue, and the Canucks game that was on wasn't being shown. When asked why it wasn't on, they said that there was no point of showing the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 You think this is bad? Try the 70's and 80's (with exceptions for a few years), and I'd take this over the late 90's any day. I'm not about to congratulate any fan just for "sticking with the team" through this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Reality check on droughts. Chicago Cubs. 1908 Cleveland Indians 1948 Leafs: 1967 Blues: 1967 Buffalo: Tied with Vancouver 1970 Sacramento Kings: Never been to a final nor won since 1951 (When they were in Rochester NY) Arizona Cardinals: 1947 San Diego: 1963 AFL Title, no Super Bowl or World Series. Like Vancouver lost their NBA team. Clippers have been in Buffalo, San Diego and LA, Founded in 1970 (I'm detecting a pattern here) and no Finals appearances. There's a lot of pain to go around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philthy Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 A solid loosing season like this is great for the fan base, I couldn't be happier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe-max Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Stamkos said: I meant real fans and not just fans of winning but ok This is one of the most arrogant, degrading and at the same time meaningless and hollow words ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 last nite burrows showed us ,maybe one of the last glimpes of what he did on a regular basis, and like all the other hawk killing moments i appreciated it . less and less we see these goals,plays of what was ,as this team forms a new identity. gcg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 46 minutes ago, Rocky Balboa said: How about those fans who have been waiting 40+ years for a Stanley Cup? I am one those fans who has been waiting a long time for a Cup. Strangely, I found last year more frustrating that this year. Last year the management group was insisting on "rebuliding on the fly", and they brought in a couple of overpaid buy pretty good veteran UFAs (Miller and Vrbata) who did help the team on the short term basis. WIth that infusion, and a much better coach than in the previous year, I thought the Canucks would contend for a marginal playoff spot. They actually did a bit better than that, finishing second in the Division, but one of a large group of "middle of the road" teams separated by only a few points in the standings. (The Canucks were 8th in the league with 101 pts but Calgary was 16th with 97 pts.). But I thought that the Canucks had a bit more than their share of good luck during the regular season and could easily have been in the final playoff spot or just out of playoffs. Then the Canucks had a very disappointing first round playoff loss to Calgary. But I thought the Canuck managment was in denial and was heading toward of long trajectory of mediocrity. The team still depended very heavily on aging stars -- the Sedins, with Vrbata added in, and did not have the kind of strong young core that would auger well for the future. And I was critical of many of the decisions made by Benning (like overpaying to re-sign Sbisa and Dorsett). So last year I saw visions of being a Cup contender actually fading away instead of getting better. This year at least the management group has been forced to face reality and is focusing on rebuilding the young core. Benning's draft picks from both his draft years made a lot of progress -- Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin and Boeser. (I still think McCann should have been in Junior this year though). Other prospects picked by Benning made progress, especially Baertsch and Pedan. And some prospects from the Gillis era also made progress, especially Hutton, but also Gaunce and Subban. And there are other young guys who might contribute. I think the odds are against each one as an individual, the but the group as a whole might yield at least one good player. This group includes Etem, Granlund, and Vey. And the team appears to be headed for a very good prospect in this year's draft and should also get a good prospect in the second round. I am not wildly optimistic, but I think the team is at least rebuilding now. Last year, I thought the team actually lost ground relative to teams like Calgary in terms of long run development. I just hope Benning does not try to apply another UFA bandaid but instead focuses on a genuine rebuild this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe-max Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 32 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Reality check on droughts. Chicago Cubs. 1908 Cleveland Indians 1948 Leafs: 1967 Blues: 1967 Buffalo: Tied with Vancouver 1970 Sacramento Kings: Never been to a final nor won since 1951 (When they were in Rochester NY) Arizona Cardinals: 1947 San Diego: 1963 AFL Title, no Super Bowl or World Series. Like Vancouver lost their NBA team. Clippers have been in Buffalo, San Diego and LA, Founded in 1970 (I'm detecting a pattern here) and no Finals appearances. There's a lot of pain to go around. The Blues and the Leafs both won in 1967? As far as I know the Blues appeared in three finals (1968-1970), but never won one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.