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

Marshmallow test


Makaramel MacKhiato

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, alfstonker said:

 

Sorry I think if you watch the coach's interview the ice time is dictated by Jake's performance. So while you make it sound like policy it is not, it is governed by performance and attitude.

 

No they are not they are treating the team as they have been employed to by the owners i.e. as a business. We are not Toronto, we will vacate the arena like snow off a hot roof if we have any extended period of failure. It's ok people like you pontificating on the benefits of waiting on your second marshmallow but the reality is this club could suck $millions out of the owner's pockets with a policy like that in this City.

 

We have a decent coach and management who are trying to win but look what happened when we lost 3 in a row. All hell breaks loose and all the bedroom coaches and basement GMs start acting like they have a clue.

Some say they won't go back and others say they will just look at the highlights (I think that's what many of them do anyway) 

THIS FANBASE HASN'T THE BALLS, THE PATIENCE OR THE ATTENTION SPAN to wait for their second marshmallow and the owners don't have deep enough pockets even if they could.

 

I dispute we are nibbling at it, we are eating it because that is our only real option.

 

As I say why should the owners absorb $millions in losses when our fanbase can't be bothered to buy their seats or season tickets. It's a two way street. It is fine to talk in idealistic and marshmallow analogies but this is Vancouver, the city that turned to riots and burning just because they lost a Stanley Cup final.

 

the balls? wtf? did some bigger kid beat you up for your marshmallow? is that what all this is about? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

As long as management sticks with their plan I'll be happy.

 

Has anything changed with respect to the rebuild since last year?  Not really.  

 

Last year, they said that they wanted to win and make the playoffs.  When Benning arrived, the plan was to develop players in a winning environment, so 2 years ago, they wanted to win.  And now this year, they want to win too.  This talk about winning ahead of developing is spin.  They're trying to sell tickets.

 

Are they rebuilding and slowly introducing drafted players?  Still, yes.  

Year 1.  Horvat.  Year 2.  McCann, Virtanen.  Year 3. Gaunce.

 

Have they been adding players in their early 20's to help make up for poor drafting for 5-7 years?  Yes

Year 1.  Bonino, Sbisa, Vey.  Year 2.  Sutter. Bartkowski, Etem, Granlund.  Year 3.  Rodin, Larsen, Gudbranson, Stecher.

 

Have they been adding veteran players to shoulder the responsibility and tough match ups on top lines?  Yes

Year 1.  Vrbata, Miller, Dorsett.  Year 2 Prust, (Sutter....there's some overlap).  Year 3. Erickson.

 

The difference between this year and last year is the new system they're playing.

 

 

 

Year 1 McCann  gone, Virtanen hope he pans out, Gaunce  dime a dozen

Year 1 Bonino Sbisa and Vey, ill stop right there and wont get into Bartkowski and Etem

Year 1 Prust and Dorsett in for tough match ups, we will agree to disagree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Baggins said:

I see it the opposite way. You guys wanting kids to be handed ice time regardless of performance are the one marshmallow people. No patience. Those of us wanting the kids to be brought along slowly and earn their roster spot and ice are the two marshmallow folks. We have the patience.

8 hours ago, J.R. said:

Ding f'ing ding. 

That covers my comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, alfstonker said:

 

Sorry I think if you watch the coach's interview the ice time is dictated by Jake's performance. So while you make it sound like policy it is not, it is governed by performance and attitude.

 

No they are not they are treating the team as they have been employed to by the owners i.e. as a business. We are not Toronto, we will vacate the arena like snow off a hot roof if we have any extended period of failure. It's ok people like you pontificating on the benefits of waiting on your second marshmallow but the reality is this club could suck $millions out of the owner's pockets with a policy like that in this City.

 

We have a decent coach and management who are trying to win but look what happened when we lost 3 in a row. All hell breaks loose and all the bedroom coaches and basement GMs start acting like they have a clue.

Some say they won't go back and others say they will just look at the highlights (I think that's what many of them do anyway) 

THIS FANBASE HASN'T THE BALLS, THE PATIENCE OR THE ATTENTION SPAN to wait for their second marshmallow and the owners don't have deep enough pockets even if they could.

 

I dispute we are nibbling at it, we are eating it because that is our only real option.

 

As I say why should the owners absorb $millions in losses when our fanbase can't be bothered to buy their seats or season tickets. It's a two way street. It is fine to talk in idealistic and marshmallow analogies but this is Vancouver, the city that turned to riots and burning just because they lost a Stanley Cup final.

Moral of the story is: If you mention Riots and burning you will get + reputation marks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with a young player having to perform to earn his ice time.  However there are some players that need that ice time over an extended period of time to get going. 

I'm like that. No middle gear. But once I get going look out.

So it shouldn't be a hard fast rule. 

I don't see the logic in playing skille over jv.

My gut feeling is that good ice time over an extended period of time would see Jake gradually get better. Make what you want of my gut feeling

 

Any of you who are familiar with Jakes junior career  should be able to comment on Wether he was a slow starter or not...?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, garthsbutcher said:

Year 1 McCann  gone, Virtanen hope he pans out, Gaunce  dime a dozen

Year 1 Bonino Sbisa and Vey, ill stop right there and wont get into Bartkowski and Etem

Year 1 Prust and Dorsett in for tough match ups, we will agree to disagree

Nothing has changed in Bennings approach, that's the point.  Not everybody worked out obviously

Link to comment
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...