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

[Edited] Bottom 5 Finish Now in Reach!

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Does anyone know how and why Tankathon lists us as 7th?

 

It seems most of the sims I've done put us around 7th. A freaking one percent chance Dallas got first overall in one sim, and Arizona (forfeited first round pick) also.

 

I know there's more games to go, so maybe we will fall more in the standings when those are completed.

ummm... because we are 6th worst by winning percentage and then Seattle is added in ahead of us as per the expansion agreement?

It is listed right on the site showing the column of winning % in order.

Math?

Edited by Provost
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2021 at 9:49 PM, Arrow 1983 said:

I am guaranteeing it. The Canucks will be playing games when the playoffs begin

The perfect absurd bookend to the (original counterpoint) OP.

 

how fitting  

 

/end of thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, oldnews said:

The perfect absurd bookend to the (original counterpoint) OP.

 

how fitting  

 

/end of thread.

Wow... did we make the playoffs overnight while I was sleeping?!!  That is amazing!!

 

I mean, it would be truly ridiculous if you were continuing to be snarky because reality showed all your posts on the thread to be entirely misinformed and wrong.

 

As it turns out, the playoffs were out of reach... who could have predicted such a thing?!!

 

My next prediction... an incoming bunch of WADR from you about how just because objective reality shows that I was actually right, it doesn’t really mean I was “really” actually right and how it is just coincidence that you turned out to be wrong (maybe you can shoehorn dZone start % and how Gudbranson is an elite top pairing D in there so you include more of your greatest revisionist history hits).

 

:D

  • Haha 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Provost said:

ummm... because we are 6th worst by winning percentage and then Seattle is added in ahead of us as per the expansion agreement?

It is listed right on the site showing the column of winning % in order.

Math?

Cool. I get that you feel victimized whenever I reply to your posts, so you accused me in the other thread of "stalking" or "following" you, but when you do it, it's not? :lol:

 

3 hours ago, Provost said:

Still stalking me because you are salty about looking foolish about the playoffs being out of reach?  Maybe go take a walk and find some joy in your life.

For the record, I don't care whether or not you reply. I just wanted to call you on your blatant hypocrisy. Hilarious.:lol::gocan:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Cool. I get that you feel victimized whenever I reply to your posts, so you accused me in the other thread of "stalking" or "following" you, but when you do it, it's not? :lol:

 

For the record, I don't care whether or not you reply. I just wanted to call you on your blatant hypocrisy. Hilarious.:lol::gocan:

 

 

You mean responding to a question you literally posed in a thread that I made is stalking?

 

That contrasts  pretty well with the dozen or so times a week you make snarky and objectively false responses to anything I post.

 

As I already said, grow up... go for a walk... go find some joy in your life.  It is sad that you are holding  some weird grudge on a hockey forum because you made arguments that turned out to be wrong.  Maybe if that bothers you so much, don’t post... or just post “in my opinion...” rather than calling out other posters for being dumb for posting something you disagreed with.

Edited by Provost
  • Huggy Bear 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, debluvscanucks said:

 

 

May 6th....could the Canucks be "mathematically eliminated" tonight?  Or will it take another night or two?

 

 

February 8th - the first of Provost's  "how many games before elimination?" thread lol...... 3 months / 32 games ago.

 

February 18th - v2.0 of the "practically if not mathematically eliminated" p.e. threads.

 

To answer the first question - that was game 16 - tonight's is game 48....so it's that hard thing called "math" - but that's (at least) 32 games later....

Second thread - started at game 20 = tonight's is 28 games later....

 

That's including, of course such minor obstacles like a teamwide Covid outbreak, the loss of 3 of 4 centers...you know....those excuses, excuses kinda things.

 

For perspective - the Habs have 4 games remaining in the season - and have not eliminated this team yet..... certainly solid grounds for the OP to be in here chirping...

 

My personal 'feeling' is that there were 3 virtual breaking points for the season...

 

The first was the pair of back to back losses to Wpg - games 36 and 37 - just before the outbreak...

 

The second was the outbreak itself - that 'felt' like absolute curtains - and I think has subsequently proven to be fatal to this season.

 

The third was after the pair of return to play victories vs Toronto - when they suffered their first loss this season vs Ottawa.

 

At that point they still held the gap in points in games in hand - an unrealistic run at that point could have/would have gotten them back in the thick of the race...

 

But of course, to do so they'd have had to go on a run with three centers out of the lineup, with 7 or 8 replacement players in the lineup every night / with the state of the team's health - and playing an absurd amount of compacted scheduled games down the stretch.

 

Still though - they've lost 7 of 8 and still are not 'mathematically eliminated' yet.

 

One thing is for certainthough - they were nowhere near "mathematically eliminated" - no matter what deluded qualifier one used - on Feb 18th.

Edited by oldnews
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

May 6th....could the Canucks be "mathematically eliminated" tonight?  Or will it take another night or two?

 

 

February 8th - the first of Provost's  "how many games before elimination?" thread lol...... 3 months / 32 games ago.

 

February 18th - v2.0 of the "practically if not mathematically eliminated" p.e. threads.

 

To answer the first question - that was game 16 - tonight's is game 48....so it's that hard thing called "math" - but that's (at least) 32 games later....

Second thread - started at game 20 = tonight's is 28 games later....

 

That's including, of course such minor obstacles like a teamwide Covid outbreak, the loss of 3 of 4 centers...you know....those excuses, excuses kinda things.

 

For perspective - the Habs have 4 games remaining in the season - and have not eliminated this team yet..... certainly solid grounds for the OP to be in here chirping...

 

My personal 'feeling' is that there were 3 virtual breaking points for the season...

 

The first was the pair of back to back losses to Wpg - games 36 and 37 - just before the outbreak...

 

The second was the outbreak itself - that 'felt' like absolute curtains - and I think has subsequently proven to be fatal to this season.

 

The third was after the pair of return to play victories vs Toronto - when they suffered their first loss this season vs Ottawa.

 

At that point they still held the gap in points in games in hand - an unrealistic run at that point could have/would have gotten them back in the thick of the race...

 

But of course, to do so they'd have had to go on a run with three centers out of the lineup, with 7 or 8 replacement players in the lineup every night / with the state of the team's health - and playing an absurd amount of compacted scheduled games down the stretch.

 

Still though - they've lost 7 of 8 and still are not 'mathematically eliminated' yet.

 

One thing is for certainthough - they were nowhere near "mathematically eliminated" - no matter what deluded qualifier one used - on Feb 18th.

Exactly. I loved how he tried to equate the words "highly unlikely" and "now out of reach" as being the same thing. They're not. It was wayyyy too early to call the Canucks out. The end result wasn't a matter of him being right, lol. Mathematically eliminated is basically the proper equivalent to "out of reach".

 

How funny how he had to ignore the main definition of it to twist the argument to go his way. And he just said I was being dishonest in the other post. Lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

was just checking the TSN info again, one scout claiming Clarke has "genius" level hockey IQ. Wouldn't that be nice to get.

 

My wish list order would be:

1st round:

Clarke

Wallstedt

 

2nd round:

Boucher - big RW (like the family history and toughness angle - we need that), maybe some potential to move up if we lose/trade Brock down the road

Logal Mailloux - more right side d depth 

 

 

I am like a kid in a toy store...............I want them all

 

But if push come to shove........I would take want these guys 

 

#1...........Clarke

#2...........Sillinger

#3...........Ceulemens

#4...........Svechkov

#5...........McTavish

#6...........Morrow

 

If we could get any 2 of these 6.............I would be over the moon

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I am like a kid in a toy store...............I want them all

 

But if push come to shove........I would take want these guys 

 

#1...........Clarke

#2...........Sillinger

#3...........Ceulemens

#4...........Svechkov

#5...........McTavish

#6...........Morrow

 

If we could get any 2 of these 6.............I would be over the moon

one nice aspect of a bad season is also picking high in round 2 which is often overlooked in the media, sometimes you get 1st round value like with Hoglander. 

 

So you may just get your wish.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Exactly. I loved how he tried to equate the words "highly unlikely" and "now out of reach" as being the same thing. They're not. It was wayyyy too early to call the Canucks out. The end result wasn't a matter of him being right, lol. Mathematically eliminated is basically the proper equivalent to "out of reach".

 

How funny how he had to ignore the main definition of it to twist the argument to go his way. And he just said I was being dishonest in the other post. Lol.

Spent the mid section of the season hiding under his bed = crickets - hoping the team wouldn't finish what they started and make foolish of this re-tread. Was rescued by the Covid outbreak - but instead of the sensible thing - taking the 'fortune' of the team's season being sabotaged by the pandemic - and leaving it alone - comes back in here to chirp as if prophetic lol.  Desperate need to be 'right' no matter how absurd  the ego defense need be.   4 games remaining for the Habs and still not "mathematically eliminated" - a term that is not subjective - but as objective/fact based as it comes.  If that's not enough, has the nerve to call his equal and opposite - Arrow 83 -  a "troll".   Thread is pure gold.  I'm pretty sure this isn't even the v2.0 - wasn't there one of these last year as well?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Provost said:

Wow... did we make the playoffs overnight while I was sleeping?!!  That is amazing!!

 

I mean, it would be truly ridiculous if you were continuing to be snarky because reality showed all your posts on the thread to be entirely misinformed and wrong.

 

As it turns out, the playoffs were out of reach... who could have predicted such a thing?!!

 

My next prediction... an incoming bunch of WADR from you about how just because objective reality shows that I was actually right, it doesn’t really mean I was “really” actually right and how it is just coincidence that you turned out to be wrong (maybe you can shoehorn dZone start % and how Gudbranson is an elite top pairing D in there so you include more of your greatest revisionist history hits).

 

:D

I'd rather be the person that believes in my team then to crap on it.

 

your position sucks because if you are right (there's still a chance) you can't be look who was right. You where betting against your team now look you are arguing a bottom 5 finish. I will all ways root for my team. Win lose. Supporting a team isn't rooted in being realist. it is about believing every year your team can win. That every year they have a chance to make the Playoffs even win a Stanly Cup.

 

Otherwise why be a fan?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I'd rather be the person that believes in my team then to crap on it.

 

your position sucks because if you are right (there's still a chance) you can't be look who was right. You where betting against your team now look you are arguing a bottom 5 finish. I will all ways root for my team. Win lose. Supporting a team isn't rooted in being realist. it is about believing every year your team can win. That every year they have a chance to make the Playoffs even win a Stanly Cup.

 

Otherwise why be a fan?

Sassy Red Wine GIF by Married At First Sight

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Provost said:

Sassy Red Wine GIF by Married At First Sight

Are you even a fan. 

 

You are Crapping on a team that lost their top Centre If Edm lost Mcdavid would they be in the Playoffs.

 

The Canucks have also lost their best PK centreman Beagle

 

This team has been Crapped on by the Likes of Eriksson who has never gave his best and really is proving to the fan that all he cares about is money other then retiring and given the next generation of player to have a better chance and give their GM that cap space back.

 

So yeah we need more guys like you to crap on the team and tell us what we really don't want to except. We are Canadian fans we aren't stupid but we love Hockey

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the ‘bright’ side we are still 3rd last. Good for the mental to get a dub. 
 

Probably still won’t win much with this atrocious schedule unless Demko/Holtby steal one or a goalie gifts us one like tonight. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

On the ‘bright’ side we are still 3rd last. Good for the mental to get a dub. 
 

Probably still won’t win much with this atrocious schedule unless Demko/Holtby steal one or a goalie gifts us one like tonight. 

I suspect we win 3. This last 4 Calgary games is primed for a winning streak.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I'd rather be the person that believes in my team then to crap on it.

 

your position sucks because if you are right (there's still a chance) you can't be look who was right. You where betting against your team now look you are arguing a bottom 5 finish. I will all ways root for my team. Win lose. Supporting a team isn't rooted in being realist. it is about believing every year your team can win. That every year they have a chance to make the Playoffs even win a Stanly Cup.

 

Otherwise why be a fan?

:picard:

You limit your crapping -  to individual prospects - because that's different I suppose?

 

Let me show you how it's supposed to be done if we play the game you posture here....

 

"I guaranteez that Kole Lind will score 10 goals by the end of the season!!"

But instead you presume he'll never amount to anything at the NHL level.

Your position sucks because you're betting against our prospect(s). 

But you're just being a 'realist' where Lind is concerned, right.

It's about believing!!

Otherwise, why be a fan?

 

You're the perfect bookend to this thread.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, oldnews said:

:picard:

You limit your crapping -  to individual prospects - because that's different I suppose?

 

Let me show you how it's supposed to be done if we play the game you posture here....

 

"I guaranteez that Kole Lind will score 10 goals by the end of the season!!"

But instead you presume he'll never amount to anything at the NHL level.

Your position sucks because you're betting against our prospect(s). 

But you're just being a 'realist' where Lind is concerned, right.

It's about believing!!

Otherwise, why be a fan?

 

You're the perfect bookend to this thread.

 

 

I do not bet against prospect I support my team. The team is the bigger picture. They are out of it so playing Lind now does not hurt the team probably best Management learns it now instead of in a new season. 

 

Ask yourself this everyone should why did Green wait until after the team was out of the playoff hunt before putting him in. Why has he not made the team out of the pre season.

 

I guess green does not like winning. Or maybe Green sucks. wait a second.  Hoglander made the team out of the pre season so did Hughes and Pettersson. But not Lind or Rafferty I wonder why.

 

Maybe you do not ask yourself why

 

You are starting to troll me I wonder am I the only one that responds back to you. Here in the GDT all you do is disagree but you  have no opinions of your own or reasoning to refute mine. It must suck not to know how to think. I would not know. 

Edited by Arrow 1983
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I do not bet against prospect I support my team. The team is the bigger picture. They are out of it so playing Lind now does not hurt the team probably best Management learns it now instead of in a new season. 

 

Ask yourself this everyone should why did Green wait until after the team was out of the playoff hunt before putting him in. Why has he not made the team out of the pre season.

 

I guess green does not like winning. Or maybe Green sucks. wait a second.  Hoglander made the team out of the pre season so did Hughes and Pettersson. But not Lind or Rafferty I wonder why.

 

Maybe you do not ask yourself why

 

You are starting to troll me I wonder am I the only one that responds back to you. Here in the GDT all you do is disagree but you  have no opinions of your own or reasoning to refute mine. It must suck not to know how to think. I would not know. 

the ironing of you being called a troll in here by the OP - and now complaining that I am 'trolling' you.

 

you're right - I don't ask myself those questions - or know how to think.

 

again, the perfect bookend to this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:

I suspect we win 3. This last 4 Calgary games is primed for a winning streak.

IDK about that. They have a pretty spread out schedule and our schedule gets hectic around when we play them.

 

We play 5 games in the last 7 days when we play the Flames which includes 4 games in 5 days(3 of them vs the Flames). We will be coming off a back to back in Winnipeg prior to facing the Flames with only a day's rest while the Flames have all those 3 days off.

 

Check out the schedules.

 

Canucks  https://www.nhl.com/canucks/schedule/2021-05-01/PT

Flames  https://www.nhl.com/flames/schedule/2021-05-01/MT

 

They are gonna be fresh as an ice cold beer while we're gonna be flat like one left out for hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...