dank.sinatra Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, spur1 said: Needed to balance the absolute negativity you are spouting. Have fun happily supporting a losing team for the next billion years then?? This team is bad. They have been bad for years. There's no end in sight of them not being bad anytime soon. How are you all ok with this? I haven't logged into this forum in over a year I feel like I just entered some sort of Benning Bro insane asylum. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spur1 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, dank.sinatra said: Have fun happily supporting a losing team for the next billion years then?? This team is bad. They have been bad for years. There's no end in sight of them not being bad anytime soon. How are you all ok with this? I haven't logged into this forum in over a year I feel like I just entered some sort of Benning Bro insane asylum. Seems you are. Go back to your TO forums. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 2 minutes ago, dank.sinatra said: Have fun happily supporting a losing team for the next billion years then?? This team is bad. They have been bad for years. There's no end in sight of them not being bad anytime soon. How are you all ok with this? I haven't logged into this forum in over a year I feel like I just entered some sort of Benning Bro insane asylum. Back to Calgarypuck then? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dank.sinatra Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, spur1 said: Seems you are. Go back to your TO forums. Just now, canuck73_3 said: Back to Calgarypuck then? Lmao I'm a Canucks fan. I just realized there's much better places to talk about the team than here where all you get is blind loyalty. Ie. Twitter, Reddit, the moon, literally anywhere. Like I said you guys are free to support the team at all costs. That's your decision. It might just do you a little good to look further than what's been shoved down your throat by this utterly incompetent management group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogs & Podz Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, dank.sinatra said: Have fun happily supporting a losing team for the next billion years then?? This team is bad. They have been bad for years. There's no end in sight of them not being bad anytime soon. How are you all ok with this? I haven't logged into this forum in over a year I feel like I just entered some sort of Benning Bro insane asylum. "Dank.sinatra's so hot right now" Dank... You stank. Edited February 15, 2021 by Hogs & Podz 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 Just now, dank.sinatra said: Lmao I'm a Canucks fan. I just realized there's much better places to talk about the team than here where all you get is blind loyalty. Ie. Twitter, Reddit, the moon, literally anywhere. Like I said you guys are free to support the team at all costs. That's your decision. It might just do you a little good to look further than what's been shoved down your throat by this utterly incompetent management group. No there’s realism then there is vitriol. Somehow you have confused the two. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dank.sinatra Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said: No there’s realism then there is vitriol. Somehow you have confused the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 20 minutes ago, ilduce39 said: Garret has spoken. Heres a piece from Canucks Army last year on Myers: (Stephen Roget) https://canucksarmy.com/2020/03/02/tyler-myers-vs-advanced-stats/ Remember Harman Dyal from the athletic has also said Myers has been “fine” as a Canuck.. and that’s not bad from the stats kids. What The Fancy Numbers Are Telling Us Now And yet, despite that mountain of evidence against him, there’s one thing that can not be denied – the Vancouver Canucks are winning a lot more games with Tyler Myers in the lineup than they were without him, and the Winnipeg Jets are losing a lot more. The conclusion: Analytics will tell you that Myers is a below replacement-level, or at the very least below-average, NHL defenseman. Everything else will tell you that the Vancouver Canucks have significantly benefited from adding him to their blueline. Could the answer be somewhere in between? ... In between as in, he’s a 2nd pair guy who can play over 20 min a night PK or PP plus bring a bit of physicality and offensive pop. Not a bad package. I think it was pretty clear when we lost Myers in the playoffs our team looked a lot weaker. I know he has his deficiencies but to say he’s “replacement level” like we could just be running Chatfield or Rafferty in his 22 minutes a night and not miss a beat is insulting to people’s intelligences. That’s also a big reason why people eyeroll when some gorf named Garret plunks down some stupid graph and proclaims a Myers-level player “replacement level.” Eye test > analytics, especially for defensemen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 9 minutes ago, dank.sinatra said: Lmao I'm a Canucks fan. I just realized there's much better places to talk about the team than here where all you get is blind loyalty. Ie. Twitter, Reddit, the moon, literally anywhere. Like I said you guys are free to support the team at all costs. That's your decision. It might just do you a little good to look further than what's been shoved down your throat by this utterly incompetent management group. Hf boards might be a better fit for you. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Romo Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, coolboarder said: You need to take a look at the NHL rules regarding to 50 contract limit and there is only so much spots. If we have had 60 draft picks, we need at least 10-15 veterans to insulate the team and ability to develop their draft picks properly, and we lose maybe 10-20 draft picks in last 7 years due to this rule called unsigned prospects by the time they are 20 are automatic sent back to the draft pick and other teams take them. It is a wasted asset and wasted rebuilding the team years by not being able to develop their own players properly. The effect is what we see the Leafs and the Oilers on a losing culture for years with no real depth to back them up. With the lottery rules in place, considering the #1 overall picks goes to teams that is not bottom 5 in last few years. Had the top 3 pick lottery in place before McDavid/Matthews, they are extremely lucky to land in that spot. Had it not for them, the Leafs and the Oilers will be dead in the water in the basement for years by now. Also considering the Oilers had too many top 10 picks and where are they now? They are not with the Oilers anymore, see Hall, Yak as one of the examples. Benning has this strategy right and the result will speak for itself with the patience approach by signing expensive free agents that is bottom 6 else they wouldn't be coming here. It is a price to pay when we were unable to attract some free agents if we are too cheap, the result will not be pretty. Once we turn into a powerhouse, it becomes easier to entice quality bottom 6 players for cheap. Nobody wants to go to a lousy team and everybody wants to play for a winner and that is the reality of the cost of overpay their players in order to build a quality team. Best of them all, the term is just about right, it is not too long of a term to handcuff us like that. Leafs may have their own 11 million players but you fail to recognize once their own star players is up for a contract, they can't afford them and depth will not be good after a few years. No way the Leafs will be able to win the Cup with this and the weak North division will be exposed to a real team once they reach the final 4. But all the Leafs star players are signed long term? The Oilers are a poorly run franchise with no plan, we are better than them, The Leafs just toyed with us for 3 games, have a better roster than us, they have their star players signed for the next couple years, they still managed to have a deeper roster than us, and they have a deeper prospect pool than us; I think it is fair to say based on all that, that maybe the Shanaplan has worked out better than us Canucks fans would like to admit. Comparing us to the oilers-yes that does make us look good. Edited February 15, 2021 by Tony Romo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 2 minutes ago, Tony Romo said: But all the Leafs star players are signed long term? The Oilers are a poorly run franchise with no plan, we are better than them, The Leafs just toyed with us for 3 games, have a better roster than us, they have their star players signed for the next couple years. they still managed to have a deeper roster than us, and they have a deeper prospect pool than us; how can we say that our plan has worked better than the Shanaplan? Comparing us to the oilers-yes that does make us look good. Next season the Leafs will need to sign between 10-12 players, with just over $13 mill in space. They will need a #1 goalie so that'll eat between $3.5 to 6 mill. Going to be tight, their "window" is probably right now. I would not be surprised to see Mathews traded this off season; to create more cap space, prospects and picks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 30 minutes ago, gurn said: Quote someone that said the Canucks are close to being a contender, don't forget to include the timeline the poster is stating. The level of vitriol, is more astounding. Nods... but then again this is the CDC.. nothing should surprise and anyone, and to prove it.. I remember the post "burrows, do we really need him" All I could think of after reading that was "are you for real?" or are you the biggest troll in CDC history? So same ole' _hit, different day.. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 44 minutes ago, dank.sinatra said: Hughes has struggled this year. That's not nonsense lol. Why is it that any criticism of this team and its players is invalid to you? Ask anyone with an objective view of hockey and they'll tell straight up Hughes has not been as good this year as last year. Hughes is an absolute elite talent. I don't expect his struggles to last long. He'll adapt soon enough. Losing Tanev was massive for him on and off the ice. The team's structure has been bad and Hughes has looked bad in his own zone and the stats back it up. I'm Hughes' biggest fan. He's literally my favorite player. But Hughes has struggled this year. That's a fact. Accept it. He will get better obviously, but to say he hasn't struggled is just straight up denying reality which so many of you on this board seem happy to You are too focused on plus minus . You are not paying attention to the reality of his deployment. As the teams goes Hughes goes . When the team is struggling to execute Hughes is put into more high risk situations. Higher risk plays come with more force turn overs. When the club is having to play catch up then he will be playing a much high risk game. When playing with a lead then his game changes dramatically. As this clubs structure and depth improves then Hughes will be able to settle into his game. Dose he have room for improvement. He is kid in a mans game. So of coarse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 40 minutes ago, ilduce39 said: Garret has spoken. Heres a piece from Canucks Army last year on Myers: (Stephen Roget) https://canucksarmy.com/2020/03/02/tyler-myers-vs-advanced-stats/ Remember Harman Dyal from the athletic has also said Myers has been “fine” as a Canuck.. and that’s not bad from the stats kids. What The Fancy Numbers Are Telling Us Now And yet, despite that mountain of evidence against him, there’s one thing that can not be denied – the Vancouver Canucks are winning a lot more games with Tyler Myers in the lineup than they were without him, and the Winnipeg Jets are losing a lot more. The conclusion: Analytics will tell you that Myers is a below replacement-level, or at the very least below-average, NHL defenseman. Everything else will tell you that the Vancouver Canucks have significantly benefited from adding him to their blueline. Could the answer be somewhere in between? ... In between as in, he’s a 2nd pair guy who can play over 20 min a night PK or PP plus bring a bit of physicality and offensive pop. Not a bad package. I think it was pretty clear when we lost Myers in the playoffs our team looked a lot weaker. I know he has his deficiencies but to say he’s “replacement level” like we could just be running Chatfield or Rafferty in his 22 minutes a night and not miss a beat is insulting to people’s intelligences. That’s also a big reason why people eyeroll when some gorf named Garret plunks down some stupid graph and proclaims a Myers-level player “replacement level.” Yeah and most lose the fact he is a BIG boy that can actually clear the crease and keep opponents out of our goalies face so he can see the puck but hey it's ALL analytics isn't it? too funny hey? geeez 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanucks25 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Especially when their boss has approved said direction. Yes because Aquilini is surely a hockey savant. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: It's knee jerk because nobody was firing him last year when we were beating St Louis and on to the second round of the playoffs with our third consecutive Calder candidate leading the way. Maybe not on CDC, but that's just CDC. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: First of all, yet again, 7 years is not a long rebuild. Again, the rebuild is over? It's 7 years now, not total. We're still counting. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Sure, if Gillis had missed the playoffs 5 of 7 years with the rosters he had, you have a right to impatience. When a rebuilding club does it...? That should be expected to anyone who doesn't drool when they talk. Strawman. I've never said that missing the playoffs in Benning's early years wasn't expected. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Probably after we don't have 3 (going on 4 and possibly 5 next year when Podkolzin arrives) Calder candidates in a row, a rebuilt young core of talented players not even sniffing their primes, with more solid prospects on the way and a trade that brought in a key top 6 F for a solid value, anitger trade for a top pair D for peanuts and signed another top 4 D for a perfectly reasonable contract. You completely dodged the question. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Nope, just reality. How convenient. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Demko seems established just fine for his age. Splitting starts and was stellar in the playoffs. Not sure what else anyone would expect for a guy in his second full season? He's 25 and has 47 NHL games. This year is the first year he's expected to carry the ball and he's at .899 I actually like Demko and have faith in him (he was incredible in the playoffs) but that's nowhere near starting goalie establishment. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Juolevi looks damn good or there was well. It's hard to take someone seriously when something like this is said. 10 NHL games treading water as a bottom-pairing D-man @ a few months away from 23 YO after being selected 5th overall. Where are the standards here? It's all sunshine and lollipops. If that's your definition of "damn good" it's literally impossible for anything related to the Canucks to be bad. Which is fine, if you want to be an overly optimistic fan. Doesn't really help when it comes to logical discussion, though. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Lots of other depth prospects still coming from prior drafts as well. Like? Other than Podkolzin who was another top-10 pick. And I mean actual prospects, ones that actually look like they can play top-9 F or top-4 D? 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Handful? He's basically rebuilt our... Have to stop you there. Love when people literally give Benning credit for time passing. OF COURSE he's rebuilt everything, it's been 7 freaking years and 95% of the old core has retired. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Handful? He's basically rebuilt our current/future top 6 by drafting Pettersson, Boeser, Hoglander and Podkolzin and trading for Miller. With a huge pool (Lind, Jasek, Costmar, Lockwood, Karlsson etc, etc) of quality depth prospects to fill out the bottom 6 (with Motte, MacEwan etc) in coming years. Same goes for the top 4 D in drafting Hughes and Juolevi, trading for Schmidt and signing Myers. And we still have Rathbone, Woo, Tryamkin etc to add to that as well as decent depth guys like Brisebois, Rafferty, Chatfield and some pretty nice looking D prospects taken last draft. As well as plenty of opportunity to trade or sign for other pieces as needed. All the "prospects" you've listed here are fringe guys, every team has guys like these. Which one of them is expected to be an impact player? It's not an impressive list (I'm talking the non-NHLers only). 2 hours ago, aGENT said: They've largely made good picks throughout the draft, first round included. Are we complaining about that now too? Benning's ability to draft outside the top-10 is grossly overexaggerated. Here are a couple facts: 1) It took 6 years (Demko) for any of Benning's 2nd round picks to play games in the NHL 2) No draft pick after the 2nd round (Demko, Hoglander) has made any sort of significant impact on this team. - Gaudette has a decent amount of GP but as a depth player and is still struggling to establish his role or himself as player - Tryamkin played 1 season as a depth D-man and hasn't been seen since, that was several years ago when we were just starting the dumpster fire years - EDIT: Forsling has played NHL games... none for the Canucks, because he was traded for a nothing player. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: Didn't commit term and cap to vets when we'll actually be needing it What a concept. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: improved our D lol 2 hours ago, aGENT said: lateral on goalies lol 2 hours ago, aGENT said: very little 'opportunity cost' lost. So you rather have Eriksson than Tanev right now? 2 hours ago, aGENT said: We don't have 'long term cap' issues. At all. Well yeah, not anymore. It'll only have taken 8 full seasons. Edited February 15, 2021 by kanucks25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 34 minutes ago, dank.sinatra said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 44 minutes ago, ilduce39 said: Garret has spoken. Heres a piece from Canucks Army last year on Myers: (Stephen Roget) https://canucksarmy.com/2020/03/02/tyler-myers-vs-advanced-stats/ Remember Harman Dyal from the athletic has also said Myers has been “fine” as a Canuck.. and that’s not bad from the stats kids. What The Fancy Numbers Are Telling Us Now And yet, despite that mountain of evidence against him, there’s one thing that can not be denied – the Vancouver Canucks are winning a lot more games with Tyler Myers in the lineup than they were without him, and the Winnipeg Jets are losing a lot more. The conclusion: Analytics will tell you that Myers is a below replacement-level, or at the very least below-average, NHL defenseman. Everything else will tell you that the Vancouver Canucks have significantly benefited from adding him to their blueline. Could the answer be somewhere in between? ... In between as in, he’s a 2nd pair guy who can play over 20 min a night PK or PP plus bring a bit of physicality and offensive pop. Not a bad package. I think it was pretty clear when we lost Myers in the playoffs our team looked a lot weaker. I know he has his deficiencies but to say he’s “replacement level” like we could just be running Chatfield or Rafferty in his 22 minutes a night and not miss a beat is insulting to people’s intelligences. That’s also a big reason why people eyeroll when some gorf named Garret plunks down some stupid graph and proclaims a Myers-level player “replacement level.” I don't want to be too hard on Dayal (or Roget) - for breaking the trend and refuting some garbage 'analytics' - but he's also hard to take seriously himself. Quote Chris Tanev’s rapidly declining play introduces another asset management dilemma for Canucks Quote Dayal: Hughes is without a doubt the best defenseman on a Canadian team. I'm not sure - but I think either he (or one of his peers) was also responsible for the claim that Tanev 'dragged down' Hughes last season. But kudos to him here for dismissing that 'replacement level' garbage / pseudo metrics / hero-chartesque quality 'analytics'. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanucks25 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 hour ago, oldnews said: yes, exactly like that one. Shirley, you're being obtuse, acutie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, kanucks25 said: Shirley, you're being obtuse, acutie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanucks25 Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 1 minute ago, oldnews said: ya but srsly... where's that president of hockey ops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now