[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks @ Toronto Maple Laffs | February 6, 2021 | 4 p.m. PT | NHLN, CBC, TVAS, SN, CITY

[ilduce39]

8 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

I think online fan discussions have little to no affect on the team.  The press on the other hand obviously get under the skin of players and coaches on a regular basis but Vancouver isn't unique there.  Just watch Torts these days or Giroux totally wreck a reporter in Philly. 

 

I think where fans can directly affect the players most is in the rink, both positively and negatively.  Players can feed.off the crowd's energy or be disillusioned by Lack of support. 

 

All that said- and because there are enough fans in the rinks this year - whatever is ailing this group, I don't see it being laid at the feet of the fans.  It is internal between players and/or management.  

Yeah - and I’m on a tangent of my own, I think the group’s issues this year are certainly deeper than fans chatter. I think it’s a lot of things bubbling up all at once. 
 

I think this group really misses playing in front of fans too. I’d assume a good home win would be a nice palate cleanser.  Sure would beat media zoom calls. 

[Quinn Skates]

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure your judgement can 'judge' wadr.

 

Kesler deal was excellent, particularly under the circumstances.

Miller trade was outstanding.

Schmidt was a helluvan opportune deal for a longshot pick.

Pearson = not a bad placeholder at all / good hockey trade.

Motte was a resounding victory of a deal.

Leivo was a steal.

The Shinkaruk trade thread was epic - but Benning got the better player.

People can whine about deals like Baertschi - but no one could foretell concussions.

Make your counter list - pick your whipping points - Sutter, Vey, Gud - whatever.

There are lots of decisions I don't agree with - that is true with every single administration.

 

If you want the good - you have to take the bad with it - because there is risk in every move - and every single GM in the NHL has wins and losses.

 

I am not concerned about 'making trades'.   I'd be happy to see some players moved - I'd be shopping Roussel and Benn - would unconditionally waive Eriksson, would proabably be looking for a hockey trade for (a better fit than/for Gaudette).   I'd also be testing the market for Pearson.  People would love to throw the 'foundation' centers in that mix - I would not - not at this point, and certainly not without replacing them.

 

My greater concern would actually be if they fired Benning.

Who would hire the next GM?

Linden hired a lot of good people in my opinion.  A hockey person hiring hockey people.

Prior to Linden - came the bizarre - and wildly failed - Tortorella experiment.

People love to assume that change will necessarily result in something better/ improved.   That aint necessarily the case - it could just as possibly end up in making worse decisions than the present group.   Simply firing someone - is not a 'plan'.

 

Fine. Fire the owner then.

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Quinn Skates

[oldnews]

17 minutes ago, Me_ said:

Canucks are worst in the league in GA

... but first int eh league in GF

 

 

 

 

and lead the league in games played with 15....only 3 other teams have played 13....there are a half dozen that haven't played 10 yet....

 

The gaa is sky high regardless - but there's no mystery there.

[Canuckfanforlife82]

5 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure your judgement can 'judge' wadr.

 

Kesler deal was excellent, particularly under the circumstances.

Miller trade was outstanding.

Schmidt was a helluvan opportune deal for a longshot pick.

Pearson = not a bad placeholder at all / good hockey trade.

Motte was a resounding victory of a deal.

Leivo was a steal.

The Shinkaruk trade thread was epic - but Benning got the better player.

People can whine about deals like Baertschi - but no one could foretell concussions.

Make your counter list - pick your whipping points - Sutter, Vey, Gud - whatever.

There are lots of decisions I don't agree with - that is true with every single administration.

 

If you want the good - you have to take the bad with it - because there is risk in every move - and every single GM in the NHL has wins and losses.

 

I am not concerned about 'making trades'.   I'd be happy to see some players moved - I'd be shopping Roussel and Benn - would unconditionally waive Eriksson, would proabably be looking for a hockey trade for (a better fit than/for Gaudette).   I'd also be testing the market for Pearson.  People would love to throw the 'foundation' centers in that mix - I would not - not at this point, and certainly not without replacing them.

 

My greater concern would actually be if they fired Benning.

Who would hire the next GM?

Linden hired a lot of good people in my opinion.  A hockey person hiring hockey people.

Prior to Linden - came the bizarre - and wildly failed - Tortorella experiment.

People love to assume that change will necessarily result in something better/ improved.   That aint necessarily the case - it could just as possibly end up in making worse decisions than the present group.   Simply firing someone - is not a 'plan'.

 

Do you want him making trades if he knows his days are numbered? Desperation trades are the worst.

[sockeye]

8 minutes ago, Quinn Skates said:

How about we fire the owner?

 

Fire the owner (which can't happen) and hire Linden as the GM.  Linden was right when he wanted a rebuild and not a retool and this appeared to cause friction with the GM and owner. 

 

The retool was a failure and delayed our movement towards being a cup contender.  I would like to see a new owner but I doubt this will happen.  Retooling has cost us draft picks and added bad contracts.  It's still not to late to rebuild because our best players are under 25.

 

I would love to see the owner admit his mistakes (eat some humble pie) and hire Linden again; but I doubt our owner has the humility to do that.

Edited February 7, 2021 by sockeye

[-DLC-]

37 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

They have been in the same location for four days and the same time zone for a couple of weeks now. They have also had breaks in between those games. Fatigue cannot be an excuse and it is still early in the season. Yes they have played more games but it’s not like they have had to travel like they would have in years past. I don’t buy the fatigue factor. I would if they had been travelling beforehand like crazy. If they are tired now we are in big trouble for the rest of the year.

I don't think you've really looked at the schedule because "years past" has NEVER been for this duration without a substantial break.  We are the ONLY team in this division that's only had one day off in between games to date (and, again, many of those spent traveling).  So even though we're in the same place...you have to factor in how we got there.  TO was on 4 days off and at home before they met us...

You clearly are not aware of what our schedule really does look like in comparison to others.  That's become evident.

 

Like DeNiro...not saying it's THE reason for our poor play...but it certainly isn't helping.  

 

Fatigue is legitimate and your refusal to acknowledge it is a head in the sand deal.    It's not about playing more games...it's how they're spaced apart.  I've examined it and you probably should too.  It's something, it's not "nothing".

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

Do you want him making trades if he knows his days are numbered? Desperation trades are the worst.

I don't find it a "good' question tbh.

 

The irony is that Toffoli was considered a 'desperation' trade by many.   And now, ironically, he's an idiot because ('things changed' and) he didn't/couldn't re-sign him.   Otherwise 'genius'.  Or de 'we' have a serious collective borderline personality disorder?

 

Obviously - it depends what the trade is - always does.

 

 

[CanucksJay]

57 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Even teams like Ottawa play hard and they know they’re not winning a cup.

 

Not playing hard almost guarantees the moves management made will result in a poor season. I don’t buy this argument.

 

Also that means they just don’t care about Demko? They’re gonna hang him out to dry because they miss Markstrom?

 

I think people are reading too much into it. Players lose friends on the team all the time. Doesn’t mean you jus quit on the rest of your teammates. Never win a championship with that mentality.

Professional athletes aren't ok with not playing hard and getting blown out. They wouldn't have made it the NHL if they were ok with that. 

The issue is with the team being out of sync and being mixed up in their assignments. 

Most of the problem is between the ears. 

If they were losing by 1 or 2 goals, sure we can chalk it up to not having the horses while playing in a tough decision. What we've seen for the past 4 games isn't that

[Wayne Glensky]

16 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure your judgement can 'judge' wadr.

 

Kesler deal was excellent, particularly under the circumstances.

Miller trade was outstanding.

Schmidt was a helluvan opportune deal for a longshot pick.

Pearson = not a bad placeholder at all / good hockey trade.

Motte was a resounding victory of a deal.

Leivo was a steal.

The Shinkaruk trade thread was epic - but Benning got the better player.

People can whine about deals like Baertschi - but no one could foretell concussions.

Make your counter list - pick your whipping points - Sutter, Vey, Gud - whatever.

There are lots of decisions I don't agree with - that is true with every single administration.

 

If you want the good - you have to take the bad with it - because there is risk in every move - and every single GM in the NHL has wins and losses.

 

I am not concerned about 'making trades'.   I'd be happy to see some players moved - I'd be shopping Roussel and Benn - would unconditionally waive Eriksson, would proabably be looking for a hockey trade for (a better fit than/for Gaudette).   I'd also be testing the market for Pearson.  People would love to throw the 'foundation' centers in that mix - I would not - not at this point, and certainly not without replacing them.

 

My greater concern would actually be if they fired Benning.

Who would hire the next GM?

Linden hired a lot of good people in my opinion.  A hockey person hiring hockey people.

Prior to Linden - came the bizarre - and wildly failed - Tortorella experiment.

People love to assume that change will necessarily result in something better/ improved.   That aint necessarily the case - it could just as possibly end up in making worse decisions than the present group.   Simply firing someone - is not a 'plan'.

 

FIRE BENNING 

[CanucksJay]

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't find it a "good' question tbh.

 

The irony is that Toffoli was considered a 'desperation' trade by many.   And now, ironically, he's an idiot because ('things changed' and) he didn't/couldn't re-sign him.   Otherwise 'genius'.  Or de 'we' have a serious collective borderline personality disorder?

 

Obviously - it depends what the trade is - always does.

 

 

I think most ppl were happy with the Toffoli trade. They question was whether he would get re-signed. 

 

Canucks were on a playoff push and losing ground with Boeser out. The move was to make the playoffs (which they did). Ppl wanted him re-signed. Problem was, the cap problems from years past reared its ugly head. 

It goes both ways. We got Miller when Tampa was in a cap crunch we got Schmidt when Vegas was in a cap crunch. Mtl got Toffoli because we were in a cap crunch. 

It sucks that guys like baerstchi, Erikson, Sutter, Rousel, Beagle, Ferland, Luongo were the reason we couldn't sign him

 

But to also call for bennings head now seems a little late. This wasted cap  has been there for years and a lot of us saw this coming. For me though, his moves the past few seasons have been great. Most of these issues were from many years ago which was forgiven by his last 3-4 years

Edited February 7, 2021 by CanucksJay

[Ghostsof1915]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't find it a "good' question tbh.

 

The irony is that Toffoli was considered a 'desperation' trade by many.   And now, ironically, he's an idiot because ('things changed' and) he didn't/couldn't re-sign him.   Otherwise 'genius'.  Or de 'we' have a serious collective borderline personality disorder?

 

Obviously - it depends what the trade is - always does.

 

 

Calgary might regret signing Tanev and Markstrom for 4 years. Short term wise they are bringing what they were advertised. Toffoli as long as he doesn't slow down, 4 years and $4.25 million? Hmm. I'd say it was a fair contract. If no one wanted to offer anything for Jake and Gaudette I'd understand. As much as I like him as a character I'm saying short so far Schmidt is...well meh is being kind. (Then again the whole team sucks right now) I don't think he's the right fit for this team. Might be way to early to write him off.

But then again Eriksson never looked like he fit in Vancouver either from the get go. 

[Ghostsof1915]

3 minutes ago, Wayne Glensky said:

FIRE BENNING 

Hire Trevor as President again? 

[fanfor42]

29 minutes ago, Me_ said:

Canucks are worst in the league in GA

... but first int eh league in GF

 

 

 

 

There is a positive spin on this.  Leading the league in GF is actually pretty great.  The GA is a tire fire.  But, wouldn't you rather have this situation than the reverse? We can score.  That's easier said than done.

 

Work over the next 2 years with systems and personnel changes can be focused on improving team defense.

If we can hang with Toronto on the defensive side in the future, each game would be close given our ability to score.

 

 

[CanucksJay]

58 minutes ago, Odd. said:

Quickly losing interest in this team. Don't know why I should watch 3 hours of the same old dog$&!# hockey. Team looks uninterested.

I've been breezing through these games now lol. Watched an entire game in 15 min skipping 30 seconds at a time after they go down by 2 

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Calgary might regret signing Tanev and Markstrom for 4 years. Short term wise they are bringing what they were advertised. Toffoli as long as he doesn't slow down, 4 years and $4.25 million? Hmm. I'd say it was a fair contract. If no one wanted to offer anything for Jake and Gaudette I'd understand. As much as I like him as a character I'm saying short so far Schmidt is...well meh is being kind. (Then again the whole team sucks right now) I don't think he's the right fit for this team. Might be way to early to write him off.

But then again Eriksson never looked like he fit in Vancouver either from the get go. 

anyone might regret any move.

 

Tanev would have been my priority (not going to repeat what I said at the time, or now - but the reasoning is very sound imo).

Any player comes with various forms of risk - when the greatest risk is 'injury' it's not valid imo, particularly when you play the game the way Tanev does.  I don't buy a particlar 'decline' risk where Tanev is concerned.  Signing a goaltender long term is generally far higher risk imo - but Markstrom is as solid as they come.

And literally anyone can get injured in countless ways, any time they step on the ice - so I've yet to hear a credible argument against Tanev.

[Angry Goose]

12 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I

 

My greater concern would actually be if they fired Benning.

Who would hire the next GM?

Linden hired a lot of good people in my opinion.  A hockey person hiring hockey people.

Prior to Linden - came the bizarre - and wildly failed - Tortorella experiment.

People love to assume that change will necessarily result in something better/ improved.   That aint necessarily the case - it could just as possibly end up in making worse decisions than the present group.   Simply firing someone - is not a 'plan'.

 

Worried about this too, esp. if firings are due to an outlier season. 

 

That being said if the axe falls, I guess there are some good options like Krueger/Hextall.  

[xereau]

5 minutes ago, fanfor42 said:

There is a positive spin on this.  Leading the league in GF is actually pretty great.  The GA is a tire fire.  But, wouldn't you rather have this situation than the reverse? We can score.  That's easier said than done.

 

Work over the next 2 years with systems and personnel changes can be focused on improving team defense.

If we can hang with Toronto on the defensive side in the future, each game would be close given our ability to score.

 

 

We've played up to 5 games more than some other teams too. So, there's that.