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

Kole Lind | RW


Canucksin2013

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, WeneedLumme said:

Absolutely, no "seems" about it. Some people have the delusion that if they whine about the team they will appear to be clever, no matter how ludicrous their complaint is.

Very True. But it goes both ways.

 

Some people have the delusion that if they pump up every player and prospect like they are generational they will appear to be clever, no matter how ludicrous their hyperbole is.

  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Very True. But it goes both ways.

 

Some people have the delusion that if they pump up every player and prospect like they are generational they will appear to be clever, no matter how ludicrous their hyperbole is.

Who's pumping every player and prospect as generational? And how many people "whine about the team"? 

 

It does go both ways, but it would appear one way is much more prominent.

 

If you track back on the conversation, then you can see that it stems from someone suggesting that Utica (or the Canucks organization) is not developing the prospects correctly, but the player himself has explained what he needs to work on and why he possibly had the season he's had. No one is suggesting Lind is generational and he certainly has a lot to his game to work on that gifting him more ice time wasn't going to solve his issue. It's not a surprise that some players jumping from junior level to a pro level will have a longer transition period, so hopefully he has the drive to find another level to his game and proves he belongs. If he doesn't make it, that doesn't mean Utica screwed up (although it's not an impossibility), but generally it's on the player whether the player isn't taking the notes to heart from the ones that are telling them how to make the NHL (for their respective team) or maybe they simply just aren't cut out for it.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Who's pumping every player and prospect as generational? And how many people "whine about the team"? 

 

It does go both ways, but it would appear one way is much more prominent.

 

If you track back on the conversation, then you can see that it stems from someone suggesting that Utica (or the Canucks organization) is not developing the prospects correctly, but the player himself has explained what he needs to work on and why he possibly had the season he's had. No one is suggesting Lind is generational and he certainly has a lot to his game to work on that gifting him more ice time wasn't going to solve his issue. It's not a surprise that some players jumping from junior level to a pro level will have a longer transition period, so hopefully he has the drive to find another level to his game and proves he belongs. If he doesn't make it, that doesn't mean Utica screwed up (although it's not an impossibility), but generally it's on the player whether the player isn't taking the notes to heart from the ones that are telling them how to make the NHL (for their respective team) or maybe they simply just aren't cut out for it.

Well put. It is interesting that those who delight in putting down various members of the Canucks organization, calling themselves "realistic", feel the need to erect straw men such as the one you quoted, "pump up every player and prospect like they are generational". One would think that a realistic person would use facts and logic to support their position, rather than needing to make things up.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WeneedLumme said:

Well put. It is interesting that those who delight in putting down various members of the Canucks organization, calling themselves "realistic", feel the need to erect straw men such as the one you quoted, "pump up every player and prospect like they are generational". One would think that a realistic person would use facts and logic to support their position, rather than needing to make things up.

Straw men plus tu quoque fallacy, and always short of facts.  Call them out on the irrationality and you are tagged a blind homer, so toss ad hominem onto their pile of logical fallacies, too.  Ultimately, blocking the worst of them (the little cult-like cadre) who never provide anything of substance makes this section much more bearable.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Who's pumping every player and prospect as generational? And how many people "whine about the team"? 

 

It does go both ways, but it would appear one way is much more prominent.

 

If you track back on the conversation, then you can see that it stems from someone suggesting that Utica (or the Canucks organization) is not developing the prospects correctly, but the player himself has explained what he needs to work on and why he possibly had the season he's had. No one is suggesting Lind is generational and he certainly has a lot to his game to work on that gifting him more ice time wasn't going to solve his issue. It's not a surprise that some players jumping from junior level to a pro level will have a longer transition period, so hopefully he has the drive to find another level to his game and proves he belongs. If he doesn't make it, that doesn't mean Utica screwed up (although it's not an impossibility), but generally it's on the player whether the player isn't taking the notes to heart from the ones that are telling them how to make the NHL (for their respective team) or maybe they simply just aren't cut out for it.

perhaps it's the over-hyping of late round prospects that leads to disappointment and general crankiness.. the next step is hyper criticism.. 

 

we all reserve the right to be cranky when first rounders don't pan out. but even that happens to EVERY team now and then.. little dose of reality would be good medicine for some people.. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Very True. But it goes both ways.

 

Some people have the delusion that if they pump up every player and prospect like they are generational they will appear to be clever, no matter how ludicrous their hyperbole is.

And then there are some others that are always negative about pretty much everything and I suspect they also want to appear to be clever.  Both are the extreme of the other and are a minority on this board.  The majority are quite realistic in my opinion. 

 

In the end, it may be a slight annoyance, but they do have the right to their opinions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

And then there are some others that are always negative about pretty much everything and I suspect they also want to appear to be clever.  Both are the extreme of the other and are a minority on this board.  The majority are quite realistic in my opinion. 

 

In the end, it may be a slight annoyance, but they do have the right to my opinion.

Ftfy

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I almost feel like the people who over-hype the prospects and the people complaining and being disappointed when they do not achieve unrealistic expectations are one and the same.

 

I like to be optimistic about our players and always hope they strive to achieve the next levels required to make the big league, but I never put lofty expectations on them. For example, Palmu. Palmu was an overage 6th round pick and was a long shot to ever make it, but he had a decent showing in camp which earned him a contract. Now even though he has gone back for more ice time, it's not like he bolted from the organization so he remains property of the Canucks in case he ever finds his game at a higher level. But yet, it is deemed as a major issue in Utica and how they cannot develop. I honestly don't understand how that jump of a conclusion is made. The expectation should be lowered for Palmu (and he is more than welcome to blow those lower expectations out of the water) and this shouldn't be an example if there is even a problem in Utica which I just don't see right now.

 

As for 1st round picks, I can understand some frustrations as every year there are differing opinions about who the BPA is and obviously if/when a player stands out more then it's easy to criticize. However the organization has their own (more thorough) way of scouting and they are looking for people who fit as a Canuck and character seems to be a big factor.

 

The most complained about pick is likely the Juolevi over Tkachuk one. Perhaps the team didn't like his interview or whatever reason so they decided to not take him. Perhaps they did make a mistake. I personally would like to see what Juolevi can do for us before calling it a failed pick.

 

This leads to the next most complained about pick, Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers. You have a local boy with size and speed and had decent junior numbers. Perhaps Nylander didn't have a good interview demonstrating his character (look at his last contract talk). Perhaps the team thought Ehlers was too small or whatever and made a mistake here, but they've reassessed and went with higher end skill later on. At the end of the day, we still have an NHL player in Virtanen that provides elements that this team still needs. I'm not projecting him to be a Bertuzzi (again he's welcome to blow my expectations out of the water), but I think he will be a serviceable player at the very least so I don't see the point in continuing to whine about this either.

 

And after several amazing 1st round picks like Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes, the whiners will still revert back to these two and can't seem to let it go and wish the best for our guys. Let's say Juolevi doesn't make it (which I doubt), then that's one botched 1st round pick, 2 serviceable picks in Virtanen and McCann (I think Juolevi will at least be in this grouping as well) and 3 home run picks (grand slam with Pettersson). It just doesn't seem like a track record worth complaining about unless you're looking for a reason to complain.

I was going to bring up the same players, especially palmu.. like.. really..? I like how it was put: feel free to blow the expectations away. but come on.. an overage, undersized 6th round pick..? yah.. clearly the organization failed him.. lol.. 

 

he's the poster child for unrealistic expectations and unreasonable complaining

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I almost feel like the people who over-hype the prospects and the people complaining and being disappointed when they do not achieve unrealistic expectations are one and the same.

 

I like to be optimistic about our players and always hope they strive to achieve the next levels required to make the big league, but I never put lofty expectations on them. For example, Palmu. Palmu was an overage 6th round pick and was a long shot to ever make it, but he had a decent showing in camp which earned him a contract. Now even though he has gone back for more ice time, it's not like he bolted from the organization so he remains property of the Canucks in case he ever finds his game at a higher level. But yet, it is deemed as a major issue in Utica and how they cannot develop. I honestly don't understand how that jump of a conclusion is made. The expectation should be lowered for Palmu (and he is more than welcome to blow those lower expectations out of the water) and this shouldn't be an example if there is even a problem in Utica which I just don't see right now.

 

As for 1st round picks, I can understand some frustrations as every year there are differing opinions about who the BPA is and obviously if/when a player stands out more then it's easy to criticize. However the organization has their own (more thorough) way of scouting and they are looking for people who fit as a Canuck and character seems to be a big factor.

 

The most complained about pick is likely the Juolevi over Tkachuk one. Perhaps the team didn't like his interview or whatever reason so they decided to not take him. Perhaps they did make a mistake. I personally would like to see what Juolevi can do for us before calling it a failed pick.

 

This leads to the next most complained about pick, Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers. You have a local boy with size and speed and had decent junior numbers. Perhaps Nylander didn't have a good interview demonstrating his character (look at his last contract talk). Perhaps the team thought Ehlers was too small or whatever and made a mistake here, but they've reassessed and went with higher end skill later on. At the end of the day, we still have an NHL player in Virtanen that provides elements that this team still needs. I'm not projecting him to be a Bertuzzi (again he's welcome to blow my expectations out of the water), but I think he will be a serviceable player at the very least so I don't see the point in continuing to whine about this either.

 

And after several amazing 1st round picks like Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes, the whiners will still revert back to these two and can't seem to let it go and wish the best for our guys. Let's say Juolevi doesn't make it (which I doubt), then that's one botched 1st round pick, 2 serviceable picks in Virtanen and McCann (I think Juolevi will at least be in this grouping as well) and 3 home run picks (grand slam with Pettersson). It just doesn't seem like a track record worth complaining about unless you're looking for a reason to complain.

Clearly your a blind homer and Benning nut-hugger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:bigblush:

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

Stop with the fascist movement already.  How soft do you have to put people on ignore?  It's just hockey, dude.  Provide facts and substance and shut someone down if you're so smart.  The ignore button is for people with no rationale or facts.  Keep on spreading the hate, atta guy

Or those who don't feel like wading through typical "angry internet bullcrap" in their down time? You may be able to tolerate that kind of nonsense, but I for one would rather just mute it so I can read discussions without all the mud. I come on sites like this in my spare time, my relaxing time, reading through some of the junk posted here (and anywhere on the internet) is not worth doing in that relaxing time.

Edited by shayster007
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The 5th Line said:

He pushes the use of the mute button like an evil dictator.  A hockey forum with strict rules, shouldn't be that hard to handle.  

Regardless. There is other reasons to use the ignore function. You portrayed it as a sign of weakness or something, I view it as a sign of not caring to read trash in my spare time. There is whole websites dedicated to that kind of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, shayster007 said:

Regardless. There is other reasons to use the ignore function. You portrayed it as a sign of weakness or something, I view it as a sign of not caring to read trash in my spare time. There is whole websites dedicated to that kind of thing.

Yeah, once someone has demonstrated clearly that they are either dishonest or brain dead, as so many of the haters do with their fabricated, willfully ignorant crap, unless they are entertaining I often put them on ignore. 

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

There are two types of posters.  Ones who will criticize a job while it's in progress, and others who will come out of the woodwork afterwards.  The former are considered haters, the latter are ones who snake there way through and do no wrong because they supported the job being done, but when it goes south they can hop on the hate wagon because nobody will remember them doing the cheer leading because they were in the majority.

 

Some of the most popular posters here are ones who literally won't or have not said a single bad thing about the team.  Sure that's cool, but it's setting you up to be wrong an awful lot and if you don't want to get called out on it, stop doing it (or just put the person on ignore so they don't wreck your fantasy-land)

I like to consider myself a third type. I guess I am a bit more neutral, the more wait and see type.

 

I will criticize when bad moves are made but will also give credit. Like trying for the playoffs back in 2014-15 wasn't the right call but he got Boeser that draft which was a pretty good snag.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The 5th Line said:

I have my own reasons for the speculation thank you very much.  A sign of weakness indeed, I'm sticking with that.

Opinions are like...nevermind... you know the rest of the saying.

Edited by shayster007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

I don't hate Jim, I think he's good at certain things.  I think he's inexperienced and in a bit over his head

I think it's just a matter of hiring maybe a solid assistant gm with good experience. I agree, he's made some questionable decisions but overall I'd hope we continue with him.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...