Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

-Article- Huge if True


CanadianRugby

Recommended Posts

What a sh!tty article... :bigblush:

 

Seriously though, it's hard for me to take this "Puck Daddy" seriously considering how poorly this was written (numerous grammatical errors, missing or misplaced words, run on sentences) and the fact that he cites Botchford as an information source. This "article" is no better than any of the Anti-Benning posts on this forum. I rate it 10 poop emojis out of 10 for it's high fecal content. 

 

 

fbd1ca95cc54192e42de177a5819df10

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a ridiculous article.

 

 

The Canucks aren't as bad as people are making them out to be. They were without their #1 Dman, there 2C, 1C was hurt, and they had upwards of 5 rookies playing!

 

this year they added a huge snarling Dman, an elite 2 way 30 goal scorer and didn't pull much of anything off the roster. If they stay healthy and the kids progress they will be a better team than the pundits think. My guess is a 104 pt season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, IBatch said:

This is a long post to read considering its the same drum that's been beating pretty much since Benning stated what he has been trying to make happen.  Yes Tanev is the only piece that has value, and yes he is valuable so why trade him.

Since Hammer left, I don't see any scenario where Tanev gets moved. Dido for Edler.  They are a legit top pairing. They cover each other's weaknesses quite well. Edler is still good for 30-35 points (fingers crossed 40prs) and with Tanev, they can match up well defensively with teams top lines. A 1+1=2.5 deal.   The only way either is moved, is in a blockbuster deal with us likely retaining cap. 

 

Edler, Burrows and Sbisa for Keider and Staal, with us retaining salary is one suggested idea. Not mine, so don't flame me;). 

 

We we would have to get significant value back. This would be a trade that we would have to win, for any type move to be made. 

 

Sbisa is is a likely target, but won't get much unless we package him. 

 

My thoughts for what there worth. E.W.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Winter Soldier said:

Yes, because iron sharpens iron. As much as the armchairs and bloggers will fight to deny it, the players want to be in the playoffs and are better for having the experience even if you don't go all the way. The players learn what it takes to win at the highest level, fans are happy and continue spending money and the city as a whole becomes more attractive for both free agents and players with no trade clauses. Rebuilding the 'right way' because 'muh draft picks' is an attitude for work-shy losers.

 

None of this constitutes a mandate from ownership stating 'make the playoffs or you're fired' as much as some on here desperately want to believe.

Yeah it is just an asinine assumption of LoserNation that ownership is cramming this down management's throat.  There is not a single reason to assume this.  Besides which, if you really look around the league, you should be very thankful for our ownership.

 

(And Greg Wyshinski is a guy that actually named himself Puck Daddy, so there isn't much to say here.  I am pretty comfortable writing off the sneering clown who looks down on the whole league from a lofty internet perch, taking hockey so seriously that he crusades for John Scott.  It's actually hard to imagine a bigger loser.  He's actually worse than Pratt.  I would mercilessly beat Pratt into a coma, probably twice, but at least he's one of ours.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ice orca said:

Well i think players even get frustrated getting punted out of the 1st round, missing the playoffs, getting close or punted out again.

Its called Motivation. Do you think the Ducks are not as hungry for a cup as it gets? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Twilight Sparkle said:

i want to see more poo emojis in articles. i may actually take **** the province articles make at comedic value

Agreed. It was a creative way of presenting a point.

 

30 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

Yeah it is just an asinine assumption of LoserNation that ownership is cramming this down management's throat.  There is not a single reason to assume this.  Besides which, if you really look around the league, you should be very thankful for our ownership.

 

(And Greg Wyshinski is a guy that actually named himself Puck Daddy, so there isn't much to say here.  I am pretty comfortable writing off the sneering clown who looks down on the whole league from a lofty internet perch, taking hockey so seriously that he crusades for John Scott.  It's actually hard to imagine a bigger loser.  He's actually worse than Pratt.  I would mercilessly beat Pratt into a coma, probably twice, but at least he's one of ours.)

Are the rumours of interference of ownership in the past not good enough reasons? Heck the former GM even blamed them for hiring one of the worst coaches this franchise has ever hired.

 

Wyshinski didn't write the article, this is the work of Lambert. I can recognise Lambert's work usually after the first paragraph itself. Arrogance and condescension are trademark Lambert.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Twilight Sparkle said:

i want to see more poo emojis in articles. i may actually take **** the province articles make at comedic value

Agreed, should be on the CDC emoticon list.

 

Maybe instead of up-votes or down-votes, we can use poo.  I'd imagine all sorts of poo being thrown around CDC.

 

Huge if True: How will the Canucks get a scoring winger?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, drummerboy said:

Jesus man.  

Why do these writers all hate the Canucks so much?

Because we're not lying down and giving up.  Because we're doing it differently than the precious precious Maple Leafs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Managements job is to make the team better but without  hurting the future. There could some good deals this year because of salary issues and the expansion draft next year. If they did not take a serious look at all potential deals then they are not doing their jobs. Media thinks that the only route for the team is to blow it up and will ridicule them for anything else. 

Calgary has done just fine even though they dragged out their rebuild. I think they are much farther ahead of the oilers..

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Toews said:

Agreed. It was a creative way of presenting a point.

 

Are the rumours of interference of ownership in the past not good enough reasons? Heck the former GM even blamed them for hiring one of the worst coaches this franchise has ever hired.

 

Wyshinski didn't write the article, this is the work of Lambert. I can recognise Lambert's work usually after the first paragraph itself. Arrogance and condescension are trademark Lambert.

They just conducted a series of interviews and made their choice.  Do you really think that they accepted Benning's pitch and then came back at him with a whole other plan?  No, a rumour is not a good basis for an illogical opinion.  We have every reason to think that Linden and Benning believe in what they're doing, and that they don't think that getting bad to get good actually works.

 

This is a strange fantasy that I cannot see the point of.  On top of that, these are some of the best owners in the league, so using an illogical assumption to disparage them is that much more annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Toews said:

When you sign a player on the wrong side of 30 to a six year deal you are going for it.

 

Who knows maybe if absolutely everything goes right and the team gets hot at the right time they might even go deep. That's the attitude that I have chosen to take now that it seems clear what the direction is. 

I disagree. When you sacrifice your future for immediate gains you are "going for it". Signing a free agent winger who fills a long standing organizational need and fits under your budget is just plain Jane "getting better" without having to give up assets. I realize that any move that appears to be making the Canucks better doesn't fit the current T.O. media driven groupthink of losing on purpose, but it doesn't mean they are going for it either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, another article from Toronto-based media that doesn't know anything about the Canucks organization.

 

 

Just talk about Auston Matthews, he signed why not talk about how he's going to be the Leafs' savior!

 

:picard:

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

What in the .... has happened to journalism.

...

It's a sports article through Yahoo. That should say it all.

 

But I came across this elsewhere yesterday and I couldn't even read through it all the way. There's nothing huge and nothing true - and certainly nothing worth reading with this article.

 

Terrible title by the way, OP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading for EG  = filling a glaring organizational hole with a great player/character person in exchange for an expendable asset.

Signing LE = solidifying the top 6 with one of the best UFAs available whose universally regarded as a character person/player. 

Making Playoffs = the exact same thing every single other GM in the league is, and should be, trying to do.

Puckdaddy = self anointed Internet hack with more time than hockey knowledge trying to drum up traffic on his site in off season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what the big freak out is here, no trades are really suggested, no players are marked for certain demise. Its true, we don't have anything to trade that will get us back anything other then Tanev and possibly Edler if someone takes a flyer.  

 

Personaly im happy with trading tanev if someone wants him bad enough, when a player is sought after a overpayment is needed. Tanev is our best D man, and as pointed out in the article is tops shut down D man in the league and is mentioned with some of the best for a reason. If another GM is willing to trade us a young scoring 2nd linger winger, and blue chip prospect and a first over all would you say no? 

 

If anyone thinks that no one will pay that much for tanev, there are a few things to consider. 

 

Taylor hall, top 5 LW in the league. Traded for larsson, a top 4-6 D man on a contending team. 

 

Tanevs age is still young enough he might still improve for a couple years. 

 

Tanev has one of the best contracts in the league. 

 

Top shutdown, play against opposing top line players every night. 

 

 

Yes it would hurt loosing Tanev in a trade but Tanev might just fetch us a kings ransom, and even though I wont abide tanking, its not like we are going to win the cup with out without Tanev right now

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

They just conducted a series of interviews and made their choice.  Do you really think that they accepted Benning's pitch and then came back at him with a whole other plan?  No, a rumour is not a good basis for an illogical opinion.  We have every reason to think that Linden and Benning believe in what they're doing, and that they don't think that getting bad to get good actually works.

 

This is a strange fantasy that I cannot see the point of.  On top of that, these are some of the best owners in the league, so using an illogical assumption to disparage them is that much more annoying.

We have past instances of interference from this ownership group.

 

It is very much possible that Benning was hired with a certain mandate, to rebuild the team while keeping it competitive enough to sell tickets. 

 

You said there was no reason to believe it when looking back we have seen this ownership group take a more active role in the way this team is run.

 

I am on board with the plan but I still believe that this is ownership's plan and they hired the guy that would facilitate that plan.

39 minutes ago, hlinkas wrister said:

I disagree. When you sacrifice your future for immediate gains you are "going for it". Signing a free agent winger who fills a long standing organizational need and fits under your budget is just plain Jane "getting better" without having to give up assets. I realize that any move that appears to be making the Canucks better doesn't fit the current T.O. media driven groupthink of losing on purpose, but it doesn't mean they are going for it either. 

Eriksson is 31 years old. The best years of the contract will likely be in the next 2-3 years. 6 years of cap space is a big commitment and it is likely that he won't be the same player in 4 years when he is 35 that he is today. That is sacrificing future cap space for current gains.

 

I have little interest in what the Toronto media says. I think they are going for it and I am on board with that. It is possible that if everything comes together this could work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...