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

The Athletic article... Sabres vs Canucks: After 50 years and No Stanley Cups, who's fans have had it worse?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I just wrote an article on the worst sports writers over the past 50 years and Drance came in at number 1!

 

He just edged out Brooksie in a tight race!

 

 

a 3 year old with a broken etch-a-sketch could create better output than Drance....

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

On a positive spin we’ll be re-signing Hughes and Pettersson during a flat cap where salaries will be down.

 

Also Pettersson is having a bit of a quieter season than many had predicted. He’s not getting the type of numbers that would warrant the 10+ million dollar contract people were throwing around.

 

Hughes will get a good payday since he leads the NHL in points by a defenseman but his poor underlying numbers this season should be used to get a bit of a discount.

 

If both are signed long term in the 8-9 million dollar range it’s hardly crippling us. After all we have more than that in dead cap alone this season.

I'm thinking long term more in the 7-8 but close enough.   EP hasn't done enough to warrant more then Barzal on a bridge deal - or AHO on a longer term one.   Hughes i'd bridge before EP.   Watching the talking heads suggest we do them as a pair isn't a bad idea either. BB doesn't make 6 and is the best player on the team this year - that also matters to a certain degree.    Also feel they won't try and break the bank.   JB has been fair with all his bridges/RFAs up to date (go back and look at what folks even said about Bear .... felt it was a fair or even team friendly deal) - i'd be disappointed if a long term deal is over 8.   Also not expecting it either.  

 

Edit:  The 10plus ones - well i can understand why anyone felt that EPs first 20 or so games.   Since then fell down to earth.   Dubas...- and Keller are the outlier deals.    All the rest have a lot more sanity attached to them.  

Edited by IBatch
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, UnkNuk said:

Messier.

lol

 

I meant a legendary player, not a villain.

 

Messier became a villain in 94, given the bad blood, getting him was a mistake as we all know.

 

Besides, he still had two 90 point seasons in him unlike Messier who was completely washed up.

 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Imagine how his wife must feel cozying up to this assclown.

Drancep9MVWpYH-e1429282220933.jpeg

Is that the "Book of Mormon" in his pocket, or is he just happy to see you? 

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Sabres lost a Cup with a series winning goal that was illegal at the time. As painful as our losses have been, that has to be worse.  Wish @SabreFan1 still posted here for his input.

That was Game 6 though so they would have had to win that and the next game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

That was Game 6 though so they would have had to win that and the next game. 

Agreed, but to lose the series on a goal that would not have counted in an honest league is even worse than to lose the series because Sutherland decides to pull his garbage.  That series was when I realized just how corrupt the league is, and how willing they are to openly rig a SCF.

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Agreed, but to lose the series on a goal that would not have counted in an honest league is even worse than to lose the series because Sutherland decides to pull his garbage.  That series was when I realized just how corrupt the league is, and how willing they are to openly rig a SCF.

I learned it in 1994 when the NHL decided to give an extra day off between game 6 and 7 in MSG. No surprise that the Rangers had the oldest team in the league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

I learned it in 1994 when the NHL decided to give an extra day off between game 6 and 7 in MSG. No surprise that the Rangers had the oldest team in the league.

Had my suspicions then but the skate in the crease rule removed any possibility that the league was honest.  Bettman's successor will have a hell of a job trying to gain back trust in the league's integrity.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Had my suspicions then but the skate in the crease rule removed any possibility that the league was honest.  Bettman's successor will have a hell of a job trying to gain back trust in the league's integrity.

Have to say it was a garbage rule at the time and that in the run of the play leading up to that goal by Hull, his half a skate in the crease had no impact at all of what now would be a legal goal. I get that a rule is a rule but it feels rather like our contemporary equivalent of calling for a replay on goal scored a minute after someone entered the zone 3 millimeters ahead of the puck. When such technicalities are called upon they tend to white wash the truth of what really happened between the athletes on the ice.

 

Now ..... if you are disparaging of referees and the league I'm with you all the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, zimmy said:

Have to say it was a garbage rule at the time and that in the run of the play leading up to that goal by Hull, his half a skate in the crease had no impact at all of what now would be a legal goal. I get that a rule is a rule but it feels rather like our contemporary equivalent of calling for a replay on goal scored a minute after someone entered the zone 3 millimeters ahead of the puck. When such technicalities are called upon they tend to white wash the truth of what really happened between the athletes on the ice.

 

Now ..... if you are disparaging of referees and the league I'm with you all the way.

Rule was garbage but the SCF deciding goal is not the appropriate time to correct it.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to say that I'm handling the Canucks not having the Cup (yet).

 

The sun comes up every morning (even if it's cloudy). I have someplace that is warm, dry, safe, pleasant and comfortable. There's food in the larder. I have a support network or family, friends and acquaintances who brighten the day. Even with the lack of movies and some other such distractions, there's lots to do.

 

And so on...

 

                                                       regards,  G.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, gizmo2337 said:

Trivia question!!!

Name the 4 teams that have never won a cup or picked 1st OA at the draft?


Hint: Buffalo is no longer in that club.

Canucks

Golden Knights

Wild

Predators

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

BUF because of where they live?

 

or VAN because they've never had a 1st overall?

Simpsons in Buffalo / Update New York

 

Simpsons in Vancouver

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

 

18 hours ago, DSVII said:

Depends how you define misery. Is getting super close but not quite getting it three times worse than never having a chance?

 

Over the last 40 years I'll prefer our situation over Buffalo. theirs is a situation where having #1 picks come in makes no difference, total overhaul is needed.

 

 

Or Toronto's! :lol:

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kilgore said:

The over-the-top hatred of sports journalists in this town is hilarious. 

This is a tough a read for sure.  And one could make the argument that its the last thing we need to read right now. But its all true nonetheless. 

 

Only one thing he is glaringly wrong about.  The big V jerseys are, in fact, their best jerseys. Still too much ahead of their time to be understood. Just need the right colours. ;)

 

There are actual verifiable reasons the Canucks have been so woeful. Not even mentioned is our pitiful amateur scouting department for decades of mis picks.  But a lot is also simply bad luck. But that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

 

Hate the message, not the messenger.

 

 

 

I can agree that it's all true, nonetheless. 

 

The problem I have, and I'm sure many do as well, is, it's the way these 'journalist's' spin the article in a negative way to gain traction. Kind of like clickbait kinda' crap. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Imagine grasping at straws to such a degree, in vain attempt at justifying your lousy, futile, daily endeavour? Mindless drivel from an insignificant tw*t.

If you are a writer/creator, you should always dig deeper than you thought you'd need to in order to uncover the real fascinating story/angle. This really is a putrid attempt at creating attention. Suppose he accomplished that, but it's definitely a pathetic way of having to resort to getting attention.

  • Vintage 1
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...