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

Calgary/Vancouver Evaluation - updated 3/29/21 - CAL TIED WITH VAN

Rate this topic


Dazzle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some housekeeping items for the end of the year, whether or not we sell/extend Pearson or let him walk.

 

Hopefully we can get Ian a contract and Dipietro some games. Whether it's Benning or ownership, awfully shortsighted to be penny pinching now when this is the future goaltending situation on the line here. 

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/alarm-bells-sound-for-canucks-ian-clark-and-michael-dipietro-3530113

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2021 at 7:15 PM, Dazzle said:

  

 

 

 

This is just a sample of the opinions that don't look very smart after about a month.


Notice where Montreal and Calgary stand - marginally above us, despite our 'major' setback this offseason. Long term, letting Tanev/Markstrom go was the right decision. Whoever the next GM is, they need to get rid of the current coaching staff and let the contracts expire so the team can start relatively fresh.

Alright smart guy... now tell me that Nate Schmidt at 6 million a year is a better bet than Tanev at 4.5???????????????

And secondly, I didn't say sign Markstrom... I said IF Benning didn't plan on signing Markstrom, then he needs to get something for him by trading him.

 

Instead he got ZERO for him, and worse yet had to spend cap to get a poorer goalie in Holtby.... who has been a disaster.  Flush 4.5 mill X two years down the toilet.  No one will touch him in the expansion.

 

And most importantly the missing stat in your analysis...Whats the record of the Canucks THIS YEAR compared to LAST YEAR... hey smart guy... what is it??????

 

The fact that Calgary is doing poorly is not a result of the acquisitions of Markstrom and Tanev, its a function of poor coaching and mediocre play by the Flame's key offensive players.

 

Look at the stats smart guy.... Chris Tanev is clearly the best defensive defenseman on the team... head and shoulders over the rest of the Calgary D Corps.

 

And Markstrom, despite playing on this mediocre team has a winning record.

 

So blow it out.

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

Alright smart guy... now tell me that Nate Schmidt at 6 million a year is a better bet than Tanev at 4.5???????????????

And secondly, I didn't say sign Markstrom... I said IF Benning didn't plan on signing Markstrom, then he needs to get something for him by trading him.

 

Instead he got ZERO for him, and worse yet had to spend cap to get a poorer goalie in Holtby.... who has been a disaster.  Flush 4.5 mill X two years down the toilet.  No one will touch him in the expansion.

 

And most importantly the missing stat in your analysis...Whats the record of the Canucks THIS YEAR compared to LAST YEAR... hey smart guy... what is it??????

 

The fact that Calgary is doing poorly is not a result of the acquisitions of Markstrom and Tanev, its a function of poor coaching and mediocre play by the Flame's key offensive players.

 

Look at the stats smart guy.... Chris Tanev is clearly the best defensive defenseman on the team... head and shoulders over the rest of the Calgary D Corps.

 

And Markstrom, despite playing on this mediocre team has a winning record.

 

So blow it out.

You do realize that Calgary is sitting 1 point below the Canucks right?

 

They lost tonight's game, though they have a few games in hand. But here's the million dollar question: Has Tanev and Markstrom really turned Calgary to be a cup contender?

 

You're done, bud. LOL.

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2021 at 10:53 PM, *Buzzsaw* said:

Alright smart guy... now tell me that Nate Schmidt at 6 million a year is a better bet than Tanev at 4.5???????????????

And secondly, I didn't say sign Markstrom... I said IF Benning didn't plan on signing Markstrom, then he needs to get something for him by trading him.

 

Instead he got ZERO for him, and worse yet had to spend cap to get a poorer goalie in Holtby.... who has been a disaster.  Flush 4.5 mill X two years down the toilet.  No one will touch him in the expansion.

 

And most importantly the missing stat in your analysis...Whats the record of the Canucks THIS YEAR compared to LAST YEAR... hey smart guy... what is it??????

 

The fact that Calgary is doing poorly is not a result of the acquisitions of Markstrom and Tanev, its a function of poor coaching and mediocre play by the Flame's key offensive players.

 

Look at the stats smart guy.... Chris Tanev is clearly the best defensive defenseman on the team... head and shoulders over the rest of the Calgary D Corps.

 

And Markstrom, despite playing on this mediocre team has a winning record.

 

So blow it out.

How about that cup contending prediction for CAL hey?

 

 

Canucks.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 3/3/2021 at 7:15 PM, Dazzle said:

 Update: 3/29/21 - So Calgary has essentially squandered whatever games in hand they had. Montreal has six games in hand, which is ridiculous.


Safe to say Tanev/Markstrom wasn't that big of a loss short term, even though Tanev/Markstrom aren't the reasons for CAL's collapse. Just comes to show you that you can't buy your way out of a decline.

 

 

This is just a sample of the opinions that don't look very smart after about a month.


Notice where Montreal and Calgary stand - marginally above us, despite our 'major' setback this offseason. Long term, letting Tanev/Markstrom go was the right decision. Whoever the next GM is, they need to get rid of the current coaching staff and let the contracts expire so the team can start relatively fresh.
 

Unlike Montreal and Calgary,  we don't have their long-term contracts. So much for them being "cup contenders".

 

Benning's made plenty of mistakes, such as keeping on WD and TG (and staff). This roster's a lot better than what these coaches are getting out of.

Stale systems, mind-numbing roster decisions, and no adaptation.

Once we get a set of proven NHL coaches, I'm sure this team will do a lot better next year.

 

 

Canucks.png

YOU STILL DON'T GET IT DO YOU BOZO?

 

WHAT IS VANCOUVER'S POSITION THIS YEAR COMPARED TO LAST YEAR???????

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dazzle isn't actually smart enough to see that it isn't Markstrom and Tanev's performance which is the problem with the Flames... its the rest of the team.

 

Look at Markstrom's performance:

 

He has only a marginally worse GAA and Save percentage than last year and he has more shutouts.  This on a team which is just breaking even.

 

And Tanev is also playing well, by all commentary the best D man on the team... his plus/minus is identical to what it was on Vancouver last year when he was with a winning team.

 

Calgary picked up two excellent players who have done all that was asked of them... its the rest of the team which has gone in the toilet.

 

Calgary's didn't trade Markstrom or Tanev at the deadline, they traded Dave Rittich who was the weak link goalie, and they traded Sam Bennett... also wanted to trade Derek Ryan, but couldn't find a taker.

 

They can't trade their real failures this year, which are their 1st line players.

 

But Dazzle doesn't believe in looking at the facts.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

Dazzle isn't actually smart enough to see that it isn't Markstrom and Tanev's performance which is the problem with the Flames... its the rest of the team.

 

Look at Markstrom's performance:

 

He has only a marginally worse GAA and Save percentage than last year and he has more shutouts.  This on a team which is just breaking even.

 

And Tanev is also playing well, by all commentary the best D man on the team... his plus/minus is identical to what it was on Vancouver last year when he was with a winning team.

 

Calgary picked up two excellent players who have done all that was asked of them... its the rest of the team which has gone in the toilet.

 

Calgary's didn't trade Markstrom or Tanev at the deadline, they traded Dave Rittich who was the weak link goalie, and they traded Sam Bennett... also wanted to trade Derek Ryan, but couldn't find a taker.

 

They can't trade their real failures this year, which are their 1st line players.

 

But Dazzle doesn't believe in looking at the facts.

Dazzle seems to not understand what an injury to a key player(Markström) do to a team.


 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Timråfan said:

Dazzle seems to not understand what an injury to a key player(Markström) do to a team.


 

Timrafan doesn't seem to understand that north american coaches aren't all neanderthal coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

Dazzle isn't actually smart enough to see that it isn't Markstrom and Tanev's performance which is the problem with the Flames... its the rest of the team.

 

Look at Markstrom's performance:

 

He has only a marginally worse GAA and Save percentage than last year and he has more shutouts.  This on a team which is just breaking even.

 

And Tanev is also playing well, by all commentary the best D man on the team... his plus/minus is identical to what it was on Vancouver last year when he was with a winning team.

 

Calgary picked up two excellent players who have done all that was asked of them... its the rest of the team which has gone in the toilet.

 

Calgary's didn't trade Markstrom or Tanev at the deadline, they traded Dave Rittich who was the weak link goalie, and they traded Sam Bennett... also wanted to trade Derek Ryan, but couldn't find a taker.

 

They can't trade their real failures this year, which are their 1st line players.

 

But Dazzle doesn't believe in looking at the facts.

And yet Calgary is barely a few points ahead of us, and we have the games in hand this time.

 

Your original post was so unbelievably wrong before and your post still isn't any better. It's because I look at the facts that I see your posts are nothing but emotional garbage haha.

 

Like seriously, my screenshot is still up there. Lololol. Calgary cup contending.

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dazzle said:

And yet Calgary is barely a few points ahead of us, and we have the games in hand this time.

 

Your original post was so unbelievably wrong before and your post still isn't any better. It's because I look at the facts that I see your posts are nothing but emotional garbage haha.

And why are Calgary in such a bad position? 

Let’s see if you can analyze away ...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timråfan said:

I really hope they is kept in AHL nowadys. 

Lots of good coaches in the AHL. Just because your dahrlen Dahlen (pun intended) didn't make it doesn't mean he was mishandled. He couldn't even make it on San Jose and they could've used their offense lol. They sent him to the AHL. And Dahlen, as we all know, is still playing in the same league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

And why are Calgary in such a bad position? 

Let’s see if you can analyze away ...

Is there really a need to argue with people who are too "neanderthal" to look at screenshots that point out that Calgary wasn't a cup contender (as buzzsaw had emphatically claimed)?

 

In addition, he doesn't address any evidence that doesn't support his claims. You can see how he never addressed my previous posts

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dazzle said:

Lots of good coaches in the AHL. Just because your dahrlen Dahlen (pun intended) didn't make it doesn't mean he was mishandled. He couldn't even make it on San Jose and they could've used their offense lol. They sent him to the AHL. And Dahlen, as we all know, is still playing in the same league.

Lol, talking about Dahlen instead of anything important.

 

Is there a name for those trolling their own threads?

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Is there really a need to argue with people who are too "neanderthal" to look at screenshots that point out that Calgary wasn't a cup contender (as buzzsaw had emphatically claimed)?

 

In addition, he doesn't address any evidence that doesn't support his claims. You can see how he never addressed my previous posts

So you can’t analyze why they are in that position?

Edited by Timråfan
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...