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

Favourite Sedin Tribute

Rate this topic


supermanbieksa

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Xanlet said:

-Olympic Gold

-World Championship

-Art Ross in back to back years

-Hart

-Ted Lindsay

-King Clancy Trophy

-Set many Canucks records

-Massive community contributions including millions of dollars donated

-Soon to be hall of famers

 

If only their dad had been director of hockey operations, maybe they'd have a Bettman cup as well

 

I only care about the cup..

and if you read my posts I'm saying the Sedins had no back bone On the ice, off ice yea they've done great things but that's not what I'm questioning now is it....

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do we want Petey and Hughes to fight now? Because asking the Sedins to fight would be futile. They weren't built for it, that's what Lapierre and Torres, Prust, Cowan, kassian, Brashear, Rypien etc. I would never want to risk Petey getting ko'd like flimsy wrist Svechnikov by Ovie. 

You wanna talk about tough, look at Henriks iron man streak prior to Torts. Those guys had targets on their backs every night, took multiple cheap shots, and bad hits and people wanted them to play aggressive or show a backbone? If it's not in your DNA don't force it, that's foolish.

Sedins were brains not Braun. The league just frowns upon it in the playoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Xanlet said:

Cups are won when the old boys club decides one franchise needs a financial boost (or one of their sons plays on a team)

Here we see the director of hockey operations celebrating his son's team winning the cup and announcing to the world that the NHL and Stanley cup have become an absolute joke

 

Nepotism.jpg

Yet, you remain a fan of the team and help finance their place within the Sports Entertainment business, just like myself or any of us in here. 

 

Remember when the newly formed San Jose Sharks, then who was it... Florida, then Carolina and Vegas... etc, all made the finals out of nowhere? I’m sure I’m missing some, but those expansions stand out as far as promotional gimmicks go, to me at least. 

 

Who wants to bet that Seattle will be gifted some playoff revenue and exposure early into their tenure? Maybe the market there doesn’t need an artificial anchor point because of the work already done to secure a market on the west coast. 

 

Having said all of that and thus agreed with with the existence of “game management” elements in the NHL, the post cap LA and Boston teams, for instance, absolutely steamrolled the competition and deserved those Cups. The league can only do so much to influence the outcomes. 

 

 

 

 

The Sedins ultimately failed to win a Cup because just as the infamously demoralizing Ratboy clip demonstrates, they relied on PPs in the playoffs to be successful... and everyone knows playoff hockey has different rules and that there are no whistles. 

 

The Sedins were not suited for playoff hockey. The way they played the game was exactly the opposite of playoff hockey.

 

Maybe AV should shoulder some blame here, but having the Sedins wearing the letters they did while behaving as they did on the ice, like perpetual victims, helped destroyed the legacy this franchise had as being tough to play against - win or lose, it was going to cost some skin. 

 

The status the twins have in here needs to be balanced by posts like mine or the place would tip over on its side. 

 

Many in here know how happy I am to have the roster changes we’ve seen lately and that I’m among the happiest fans still posting in here. You guys had your way for a decade in here, now I’m going to have mine, starting with captain Horvat. 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DS4quality said:

So do we want Petey and Hughes to fight now? Because asking the Sedins to fight would be futile. They weren't built for it, that's what Lapierre and Torres, Prust, Cowan, kassian, Brashear, Rypien etc. I would never want to risk Petey getting ko'd like flimsy wrist Svechnikov by Ovie. 

You wanna talk about tough, look at Henriks iron man streak prior to Torts. Those guys had targets on their backs every night, took multiple cheap shots, and bad hits and people wanted them to play aggressive or show a backbone? If it's not in your DNA don't force it, that's foolish.

Sedins were brains not Braun. The league just frowns upon it in the playoffs. 

Fight? 

As in drop the gloves and throw punches?

:bored:

 

Straw man, rhetoric question and an answer here to match yours. - No, but have a spine and pushback, even a little... like EP has done.

 

The result of their behaviour remains infamously there as a legacy. Don’t shoot the messenger. We were all there and saw how they were treated and made fun of. The team was made fun of. I HATED that. Today, I don’t have that fan-shame that many of us had about that era. The winning aside, it was a circus act and cost this franchise more than most are willing to admit in here. I’m thankful that is over.

 

Guys like Miller are restoring the reputation of the Canucks’ name. 

 

Just like in real life, school, jail or wherever, if you don’t stickup for yourself, you become someone’s bitch. When you put a C on that personality... shivers. 

 

Edit

As for as the streak prior to Tortz, yes well, as soon as the Sedins were forced to play a complete game, not just take all the gravy, they broke. 

 

Connect the dots.

Toughness... right up until they had to finish a single hit, block a single shot or do anything at all away from the puck. 

 

Tortz did this fanbase a favour and exposed several holes and misconceptions about the roster. 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DS4quality said:

So do we want Petey and Hughes to fight now? Because asking the Sedins to fight would be futile. They weren't built for it, that's what Lapierre and Torres, Prust, Cowan, kassian, Brashear, Rypien etc. I would never want to risk Petey getting ko'd like flimsy wrist Svechnikov by Ovie. 

You wanna talk about tough, look at Henriks iron man streak prior to Torts. Those guys had targets on their backs every night, took multiple cheap shots, and bad hits and people wanted them to play aggressive or show a backbone? If it's not in your DNA don't force it, that's foolish.

Sedins were brains not Braun. The league just frowns upon it in the playoffs. 

You forget Quinn showed at the world  jrs he will fight....or atleast have his teams back...

petey has push back too.

im not asking for them to fight but stand up for your self and go shot for shot....slash for slash kinda deal. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2019 at 9:05 AM, 189lb enforcers? said:

Yet, you remain a fan of the team and help finance their place within the Sports Entertainment business, just like myself or any of us in here.

I spend exactly 0 dollars on anything NHL, and that has been a fact for some 10 years

 

But I'm glad to hear we agree that the business and politics of the league dictates who wins cups, essentially robbing the cup and playoffs of any meaning whatsoever

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2019 at 9:05 AM, 189lb enforcers? said:

The Sedins ultimately failed to win a Cup because -

Sorry to double post, but I'm going to have to stop you here. If you agree that the organizers of a competition are purposely arranging things for the other side to win, it is the height of cognitive dissonance to then say "well if only our side had done better we would have won!"

 

If you recall the series against San Jose where SJ had over double the powerplays of Vancouver, the deciding goal was scored because Daniel had laid a clean body check but had been called for a penalty in overtime. As you say, the rules change from game to game and from team to team. Play aggressive and physically? Spend the game in the box. Play with composure? Other team punches you in the face with no penalty.

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

1 hour ago, Xanlet said:

I spend exactly 0 dollars on anything NHL, and that has been a fact for some 10 years

 

But I'm glad to hear we agree that the business and politics of the league dictates who wins cups, essentially robbing the cup and playoffs of any meaning whatsoever

Good call. 

I still go to a few Canuck games a year though.

My money goes to the BCJHL and the WHL and of course, the WJs... which I am twitching for. 

 

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

1 hour ago, Xanlet said:

Sorry to double post, but I'm going to have to stop you here. If you agree that the organizers of a competition are purposely arranging things for the other side to win, it is the height of cognitive dissonance to then say "well if only our side had done better we would have won!"

 

If you recall the series against San Jose where SJ had over double the powerplays of Vancouver, the deciding goal was scored because Daniel had laid a clean body check but had been called for a penalty in overtime. As you say, the rules change from game to game and from team to team. Play aggressive and physically? Spend the game in the box. Play with composure? Other team punches you in the face with no penalty.

You have a point, but you can’t stop goals really, but you can manage the f out of things and hope guys like Bure won’t keep scoring at will. 

 

They can only manage so much of the result. 

At any rate, I will also repeat myself and state that IMO, the Sedins were not suited for playoff hockey. 

 

Tribute that, being my sticking point in my posts for this particular thread. 

 

The Sedins kept a wide berth around Chara all series. There are many reasons beyond the prison guards for why the Canucks couldn’t get it done. 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute garbage take that the Sedins played the victim and was the cause of the lack of respect from the idiots that couldn't stop them defensively. It had nothing to do with who wore the letters, They didn't have enough players like Gino at the time, Nobody would stand up for them probably because they didn't want anyone to. They wanted to take the highsticks and roughing penaltys and score on the PP and that's usually what happened. Nobody talks about Gretzky like this because he was protected. Sedins never complained or played victim once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

You have a point, but you can’t stop goals really, but you can manage the f out of things and hope guys like Bure won’t keep scoring at will.

Mike Murphy would disagree with you

 

 

Edited by Xanlet
vid link
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Xanlet said:

Mike Murphy would disagree with you

 

 

Beat the goalie clean then, which is my point. 

 

Going into the weeds here, using kicking motions, to show how the game can be rigged isn’t the same as just scoring one-timer goals, etc. No contest - no problem. 

 

50-50 review plays aren’t going to move this conversation along, but I appreciate the video just the same. 

 

PS

Ron McLean is such a weasel.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Beat the goalie clean then, which is my point. 

 

Going into the weeds here, using kicking motions, to show how the game can be rigged isn’t the same as just scoring one-timer goals, etc. No contest - no problem. 

 

50-50 review plays aren’t going to move this conversation along, but I appreciate the video just the same. 

 

PS

Ron McLean is such a weasel.

I refer back to that specific incident because Mike Murphy verbatim contradicts the rule book. He actually states openly that it was not a "distinct kicking motion" but they disallowed it anyway. He also references the DVD addendum which clearly shows goals like Daniel's should be allowed. That example is 100% a good goal from two points of incontrovertible data.

 

The league has shown that you can score a legal goal according to the rule book AND a DVD example, and they can still cancel it out at will. In the playoffs.

 

Now I agree they can't pull this kind of thing on every goal, but I ask you, in the course of a playoff run, 4 different series which are often won or lost in a single game, how many goals disallowed are needed to knock a team out? How many record setting suspensions for 0.5 second late hits does it take? How many one sided penalties? How many strategic scheduling moves?

 

The league has shown they have multiple roads of entry to influence the outcome of games, and that even if you have a President Trophy winning team, the league's influence is enough to tip the scales.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Xanlet said:

I refer back to that specific incident because Mike Murphy verbatim contradicts the rule book. He actually states openly that it was not a "distinct kicking motion" but they disallowed it anyway. He also references the DVD addendum which clearly shows goals like Daniel's should be allowed. That example is 100% a good goal from two points of incontrovertible data.

 

The league has shown that you can score a legal goal according to the rule book AND a DVD example, and they can still cancel it out at will. In the playoffs.

 

Now I agree they can't pull this kind of thing on every goal, but I ask you, in the course of a playoff run, 4 different series which are often won or lost in a single game, how many goals disallowed are needed to knock a team out? How many record setting suspensions for 0.5 second late hits does it take? How many one sided penalties? How many strategic scheduling moves?

 

The league has shown they have multiple roads of entry to influence the outcome of games, and that even if you have a President Trophy winning team, the league's influence is enough to tip the scales.

No argument from me here.

You lay out a well-articulated argument, for someone or another debate. 

 

I like the way you present your ideas. 

 

PS edit

You should post more often, bud. 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

No argument from me here.

You lay out a well-articulated argument, for someone or another debate. 

 

I like the way you present your ideas. 

 

PS edit

You should post more often, bud. 

Thanks, I used to post more often, but for my own sanity I've distanced myself a little bit. I think I'll always be interested and invested in the Canucks, but the frustration is real

  • Cheers 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...