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

[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs Calgary Flames | May 16, 2021 | 7:30 p.m. PT | SNP | PLAYOFF SERIES VS CALGARY EDITION

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Gaudette only had 4 points with Chicago.

We won the trade! :frantic::frantic::frantic:

I see the sarcasm but I’d like to point out Guad has 4 point in 7 games Highmore 5 In 15

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been hoping for Virtanen to blossom for some years now. I also wasn't so sold on MacEwan until now. I am impressed with MacEwan's speed and intensity. He plays with a passion and heart, that never really came from Virtanen. So, as we see the end of Virtanen as a Canuck, I feel we have a better replacement with MacEwan. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dats hockey said:

I see the sarcasm but I’d like to point out Guad has 4 point in 7 games Highmore 5 In 15

And I just want to point out that Gaudette sucks all points aside

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gawdzukes said:

And I just want to point out that Gaudette sucks all points aside

One of the best selection of cellys though

 

 

  • Hydration 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dats hockey said:

I see the sarcasm but I’d like to point out Guad has 4 point in 7 games Highmore 5 In 15

And what else does Gaud contribute if not on the scoresheet?  It will be interesting to see if Chicago offers him a contract, or just lets him go.  He’s not good enough to play in our top nine.  He had to go.  

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 204CanucksFan said:

And yet somehow the team has managed to strike gold in 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2019 despite falling back in every draft lottery we've been a part of.

There is mathematical term called "regression toward the mean", also called "everything evens out"! We can't always lose in this lottery game. However, Hospital Lotteries I always lose (So I treat them as a donation)!

  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dats hockey said:

I see the sarcasm but I’d like to point out Guad has 4 point in 7 games Highmore 5 In 15

Who cares both will be bottom 6 players respectively. Both teams won the deal because Chicago gets a project and we get a player that knows his role and place on the team. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Googlie said:

One of the best selection of cellys though

 

 

Yeah great, him and Lack can make a team of funny cool guys that can't hockey. ;)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Googlie said:

I met Fedotenko about a decade ago when visiting friends in Krivoy Rog.  He was the featured celebrity at a combined schools' awards presentation.  I spoke with him for a few minutes - he was with the Rangers at that time, really nice young man. It always mystified me why Ukraine wasn't a force in hockey ... lack of rinks was obviously a factor, but also athletic youths seemed to stream into football (soccer) and volleyball much more readily (cheaper to play, ofc) 

rinks could be a factor, I suppose back in the CCCP days they just sent kids to Moscow instead of investing in Kiev rinks. 

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

Not following that assertion at all.  Why would owners want to avoid playoffs? That's when they make their money.  Players aren't paid after the regular season ends (other than the NHL payments to them for winning a series or the Cup) so the costs to the owners are arena and staff costs.  Even in a no-fan era, these costs will be more than covered by playoff revenue sharing from TV, merchandising, and US modest gate revenues

 

Just another excuse, imo, to throw some more guff at 

My main point, (just talking about this season) it was already an uphill battle from the start and it would probably had been prudent long term to showcase & play the future more to see were these players might fit for next year before losing any of them to the ED  as unknowns in the NHL (perhaps, would had been a good time as well to replenish the prospect cupboards).  I get it - that the owners are wanting the playoffs $ (and I dont blame them) but other teams, if you look at how they go through a losing season, they seem to to focus more on the future and they start trading off assets that are not part of the future with good long term results like Pittsburgh, Colorado and Chicago as my examples.  Ofcourse, with context they are not very similar to each other and the path is also not so linear cause a few things thing to consider are: the draft rules for each and the top end talent of the draft when looking back at each teams rebuild but they each made sure they were drafting as high as possible to get the most impactful player they can get in the draft.  So far, with hindsight there hasn't been too much improvement on a yearly basis with the Canucks besides watching the young core develope with the anxious anticipation of a contending team in the very near future.

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be 0% surprised if we win every game from here on in and ruin that lotto spot lol! Typical Canonks fashion :P

 

End of the day the nhl isnt handing us a lotto tho... Doesn't matter how low we finish.

 

I trust that Jim doesn't care, he'll win the draft regardless of where we pick. His specialty is winning drafts after being pushed down 3 spots 

 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris12345 said:

Same story almost every year.

if it means another Petey or Hughes, cool. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Alflives said:

And what else does Gaud contribute if not on the scoresheet?  It will be interesting to see if Chicago offers him a contract, or just lets him go.  He’s not good enough to play in our top nine.  He had to go.  

If Chicago doesn't renew him, I bet Seattle grabs him

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Perhaps (?)   Would had been nice if this losing season was mostly used to see how any of these unkown prospects would do in the NHL before losing them to the ED but I get it - purposely tanking is seen by some/most fans (perhaps the vocal ones) and the owners (cause of the palyoff $) as accepting losing thus a losing culture.  Imo, it all comes down to messaging from the top and (good chance) if they were just honest (no specifics) about maximizing a losing season for long term success, the (lomgtime) fans would still support the team. 

 

Ofcourse, there are no guarantees - just look at Buffalo & (for most of the past decades) Deadmonton and there run of 1st OA's (now it is NJ & Buffalo - again - having there runs of top 3 picks) but those situations can each be looked at with context and a smart GM can learn from each situations of how to move forward.   Imo, despite playing a veteran laden lineup for most of the season; with hindsight, the team still finished in the bottom of the division  and it just seems counter intuitive to be re signing any of our FA's (which will be a year older) to any deals - none of them rose to top and perhaps alot of circumstantial reasons like scheduling or covid can be blamed but none of the FA agent vets really stood out as sure fire re sign.  Good chance, there will be covid cast offs available and hopefully, JB will look for cheaper options rather than overpaying for nostalgia and great intangibles player that (mostly) contribute nothing on the ice but eats up a good percentage of the cap.

I just mean in terms of talent lost, losing Gadjovich is getting off light in the expansion draft. Other teams are going to either lose or trade away top 4 d's, e.g. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

I just mean in terms of talent lost, losing Gadjovich is getting off light in the expansion draft. Other teams are going to either lose or trade away top 4 d's, e.g. 

The problem is Gadjovich is just scratching the surface of what he’s capable of.

 

Thats like Columbus saying oh we’re just giving up Karlsson, or Anaheim saying oh we’re only losing Theodore.

 

Not saying he’ll be on those players level but it just goes to show it could look a lot worse in  a few years. 
 

I leave Motte unprotected.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, apollo said:

Would be 0% surprised if we win every game from here on in and ruin that lotto spot lol! Typical Canonks fashion :P

 

 

End of the day the nhl isnt handing us a lotto tho... Doesn't matter how low we finish.

 

I trust that Jim doesn't care, he'll win the draft regardless of where we pick. His specialty is winning drafts after being pushed down 3 spots 

 

Wouldn't be shock if we draft no higher than fifth - again and smh.

 

Yeah, the late season surge when playoffs team had clinch and two bottom feeders (not trying to be too obvious) competing for the lottery cup - hoping for a split against the Flakes so each team can finish the season on a high note.

  • Sedinery 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, wloutet said:

There is mathematical term called "regression toward the mean", also called "everything evens out"! We can't always lose in this lottery game. However, Hospital Lotteries I always lose (So I treat them as a donation)!

Absolutely. But the way the lottery is set up, statistically, you have better chance of winning the lottery and moving up in the 6-10 slots then you do in the top 5. In fact if you finish with the third worst record in league you have a 71.2% chance of falling back in the draft and only a 22.8% chance of winning, whereas at 9th, where we are now, we only have a 26.4% chance of falling back and a 9.3% chance of winning.

 

Look at the last 5 lotteries, in those 5 drafts, teams that finished in the bottom 5 won 8 of the 15 available slots, teams that finished in the 8-15 range won 6 of 15 slots. 

 

I have no problem with us losing games because we are trying to play the youth, let them see what it takes to play in the NHL and learn from mistakes and what they need to work on on the off season but saying that we need to lose just give us better odds in the lottery doesn't make sense. It's never helped us before and isn't a sound argument mathematically, at least not with the current lottery set up. Sure you get slightly better odds of winning but you also get much better odds at falling back.

Edited by 204CanucksFan
  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I just mean in terms of talent lost, losing Gadjovich is getting off light in the expansion draft. Other teams are going to either lose or trade away top 4 d's, e.g. 

I get it but at this point, Gadj is still an unkown lottery ticket in the NHL level and a good garbage man in front of the net would be a very good complementary player to have. Perhaps, he might even become an important part of the young core (?).

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs Calgary Flames | May 16, 2021 | 7:30 p.m. PT | SNP | PLAYOFF SERIES VS CALGARY EDITION
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...