With the Leafs loss to the Habs, guys like Rick Dhaliwal,Thomas Drance, JD Burke, 650 Sportsnet, and HF Canucks have received VERY huge blows

[Dazzle]

3 minutes ago, 204CanucksFan said:

So what is the right plan? Tank it til you make it? Sure that worked for Tampa, but it took them 14 years after they started that plan before they won a cup. It still hasn't worked out for Toronto, Edmonton, Arizona or Buffalo. Carolina never had a plan like that they just failed for a lot of years because they had a terrible owner that wouldn't spend any money until Dundon bought the team. Hasn't worked for Florida either but they blew their cap space prematurely on Bobrovsky and screwed themselves. Colorado is looking good but they still haven't won anything and they have been rebuilding since 2007, just as long as Tampa.

 

So please enlighten everyone on this board, what is the right way to rebuild a franchise in 7 years? Especially after 7 years of Gillis having the worst draft record in the NHL in the new millennium. You would easily be the best GM in the NHL if you could do that. 

 

In 2019-20 the Canucks were on pace for 93 points in an 82 game season, they will do better than that next season.

Very good points. Colorado specifically had up and down (mostly down years), in which they accumulated players like Landeskog, Jost, and Makar. It also didn't hurt that they had Duschene (and got a very good return for him).

 

This greatly helped Colorado with their rebuild/retool. But this context helps us understand that things like these take time. Buffalo/Edmonton, as you have correctly pointed out, have spent AT LEAST 7 years trying to rebuild/retool.

There really isn't a 'right' way to do it.

Edited June 1, 2021 by Dazzle

[Dumb Nuck]

25 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Were they involved in some Mutual of Omaha wild kingdom type business? I'm thinking if you're within 5' of a polar bear, you're within about 5 seconds of being eaten alive.

 

[RomanP]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

thats true, good point. 

 

I just saw too many good ideas die on the vine doing work for government clients. Its why I got out of that game. 

I can relate to that. We work with governments of multiple countries and certain level of incompetence within their internal resources exists everywhere. You just have to put proper contingencies in place.

[wallstreetamigo]

10 minutes ago, 204CanucksFan said:

So what is the right plan? Tank it til you make it? Sure that worked for Tampa, but it took them 14 years after they started that plan before they won a cup. It still hasn't worked out for Toronto, Edmonton, Arizona or Buffalo. Carolina never had a plan like that they just failed for a lot of years because they had a terrible owner that wouldn't spend any money until Dundon bought the team. Hasn't worked for Florida either but they blew their cap space prematurely on Bobrovsky and screwed themselves. Colorado is looking good but they still haven't won anything and they have been rebuilding since 2007, just as long as Tampa.

 

So please enlighten everyone on this board, what is the right way to rebuild a franchise in 7 years? Especially after 7 years of Gillis having the worst draft record in the NHL in the new millennium. You would easily be the best GM in the NHL if you could do that. 

 

In 2019-20 the Canucks were on pace for 93 points in an 82 game season, they will do better than that next season.

I have never been part of the tank crowd. Were there times where the Canucks were already out of it that they should have given young players bigger roles at the end of the season to see what they were capable of, win or lose, rather than be so starved to win meaningless games that they kept going with veterans in those key roles?

 

I would say yes. Those opportunities have been missed alot by Benning and the Canucks.

 

The time spent from starting to rebuild to winning a cup is a false narrative that seems to need to be fluffed up by Benning supporters to absolve him of any criticism.

 

The only thing that really matters in terms of judging a rebuild is progress along the way. Winning a cup requires relying on a bunch of factors outside the teams control after all. Building a consistently competitive team relies far less on outside factors.

 

How long until a team became consistently competitive? How long until they were making the playoffs regularly? Was the team taking steps forward overall over that period of time? Was the team incrementally improving their roster? Were they managing cap effectively?

 

How long a rebuild "should" take is an arbitrary number. Just like there is not one way to rebuild a team. 

 

When judging a rebuild, its important to look at progress. The approach used can be good or bad, it depends on the execution.

 

Could Benning's actual retool plan have worked better if he signed better players and managed the cap better? Probably. 

 

The criticism of Benning should not be the lack of a plan or the merits of the plan itself. It should be on the judgment used in executing it. 

Edited June 1, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

 

Now jump on it's back and ride it. 

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

 

Hope that's a picture you got.   Have had many bear encounters, only a couple a little scary.    That's a big one.   If their head can get stuck in a garbage can don't try and get it off.  Just leave it on.   

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Hope that's a picture you got.   Have had many bear encounters, only a couple a little scary.    That's a big one.   If their head can get stuck in a garbage can don't try and get it off.  Just leave it on.   

Had a friend many years ago who was adamant he could outrun a grizzly.  So I told him I’d drive the truck at a grizzly’s top speed and he could see if he could out run the truck.  I gave him a head start and then passed him going 60 km.  He shut up about that after. 

[kanucks25]

Can I ask who or what at HF hurt you so bad that every post of yours contains some sort of shot towards them?

 

Can I also ask what makes you think you are any better/smarter/more equipped to analyze hockey/the Canucks than anyone on any other platform HF or otherwise?

Edited June 1, 2021 by kanucks25

[204CanucksFan]

6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have never been part of the tank crowd. Were there times where the Canucks were already out of it that they should have given young players bigger roles at the end of the season to see what they were capable of, win or lose, rather than be so starved to win meaningless games that they kept going with veterans in those key roles?

 

I would say yes. Those opportunities have been missed alot by Benning and the Canucks.

 

The time spent from starting to rebuild to winning a cup is a false narrative that seems to need to be fluffed up by Benning supporters to absolve him of any criticism.

 

The only thing that really matters in terms of judging a rebuild is progress along the way. Winning a cup requires relying on a bunch of factors outside the teams control after all. Building a consistently competitive team relies far less on outside factors.

 

How long until a team became consistently competitive? How long until they were making the playoffs regularly? Was the team taking steps forward overall over that period of time? Was the team incrementally improving their roster? Were they managing cap effectively?

Ok I agree 100% that there have been missed opportunities to let the kids have free reign when the season is lost and that winning a Cup takes many many outside factors.

 

But the team has increased there winning percentage every season since the 2016-17 season, with the exception of this year. But this year is an anomaly due to the fact the team played 56 games in 100 days. Is that not trending in the right direction? Is that not showing an improved roster year after year? Is a 93 point pace plus being one win away from the West Conference Final not being competitive? Is improving your winning percentage year after year while still adding top young prospects to the roster each year not taking steps forward overall?

[oldnews]

I remember when the Travis Yosts of the hockey world blew a head gasket over the Weber/Subban deal.

 

Simply because smarmies in an echo chamber posture as "pundits" and launch endless tweets - doesn't mean you should listen - doesn't mean you shouldn't think for yourself - do your own 'analyzing' - think of the larger picture - watch the games with your own eyes - and look at the objective outcomes - from an integrative perspective (not simply star gazing).

 

The Toronto loss was somewhat predictable.  If 'history' didn't teach people that - 'analyzing' what it takes to win in the playoffs, might have.

 

The Habs outskated, outhit the Leafs.  People cling to oversimplifications like "the Leafs have more talent" - but that's no more explanatory than the oversimplification I just offered.   The Habs took their time and space away.  Toronto's bread and butter puck movement - turned into flagging under pressure, giving the puck away, an inability to dictate the tempo of the games, and ultimately having their confidence broken, yet again.  They were also unable to force the Habs to cheat the game - and therefore the Habs did not spend as much time in the penalty box as the Leafs needed them to.  The Leafs needed to win that series on the powerplay - because at 5on5, they were, at best, a break even team.  The problem with breaking even against a team like the Habs - is that the Habs have Carey Price - and they have these elements that aren't easy to 'define' - like Gallagher's sheer will, or Suzuki's penchant for the moment, or Perry's ability to drive you nuts while scoring timely goals, or the sheer fear that Shea Weber inspires when you consider entering the hard areas against him....I have a lot of respect for Jack Campbell, and a few guys like Kerfoot, Hyman or Mikheyev - guys that elevated their relative games imo - but the Leafs flagged far too often - as they have countless times over the past half decade.  Nylander bailing out for fear of getting hit, Sandin wilting under the pressure of the forecheck (not on him - he's a good young 20 yr old defenseman, but like Dermott and Gardiner in years past, he was dumped in way over his head).   We can go down the list - Thornton had the series skate by him, Marner was mortified by fear of another collapse, Matthews played some decent two way hockey, but has absolutely no 'next gear' - or at least has not been able to find one thus far in his career.  

 

But 23 year olds - are not responsible - are not to blame - for endless first round exits.   That is on a General Manager and management group - who simply don't appear able to identify their weak spots.  Every team has them.  You need to know your own.  The Leafs overcompensated in a very simplistic way - hoarding 'toughness' and 'veterans' - but the problem is that appeared to be the only weak spot they were able to identify (aside from bringing in Malhotra, who definitely addressed one of their others, as best he could, in one season).

 

It doesn't simply fall on the shoulders of 'stars' imo.   When you have guys like Thornton in the lineup - who can't keep the pace, or Sandin/Dermott who can't handle the heat - those cracks are as critical as alleged star underperformance.  Teams generate offense as teams - it's not in a vacuum - you have units of 5 on the ice at almost all times.  When one or two of those elements are vulnerabilities, it's impacts your top end players as well.

 

Matthews and Marner were not that bad.   Matthews actually played some excellent hockey off the puck - but with it on his stick, he found himself pressured - that's the thing about playoff hockey - the tempo is turned up, the opponent gets in your face, they hit you, they hound you - they take as much of your time and space away as possible - it's the difference between beating up on regular season opponents, and dealing with groups that become harder to play against.   And when you're spending more of your time, effort and energy supporting other players under pressure, defending, you are not necessarily going to run as rampant over your opponents.

 

Price Weber Petry Edmundson Chiarot.

 

Sorry - but anyone that underestimates that battery - that group from the net out - has probably not watched or understood much playoff hockey in their days.

 

If you expect to skate circles around a healthy Habs team - and score all the goals - you deserve the loser fate you suffer.  You disrespected and underestimated your opponent.  And when that realization starts to take root - when you've been outplayed by a group for 40, 60, 80, 100, 120  minutes - the bulk of a few consecutive critical, elimination games, the fear of facing your overconfidence sets in. 

 

If you watched Matthews and Marner closely as that series progressed - they could feel the haunt of the past, and the fate they were facing, and it further paralyzed them.  Some pop-psychology from their coach was not going to be enough.  Some 'mentorship' from a Jumbo was not going to change what was happening on the ice. 

 

They were facing a stiff, determined, confident opponent - that smelled blood - and smelled the opportunity to take advantage of the Leafs being the Leafs.

 

The Leafs are not cursed.   They are the classic lottery build that left themselves exposed in some key positions - again - and for all the talk of their depth, they simply lacked it.   They improved in a couple areas - but they left a couple equally important stones unturned.   Because of that, they were shocked, and unable to adjust - they kept hoping to draw on their bread and butter - but bread and butter is limited in playoff hockey - you have to make more by playing a complete game.  They had a chance - had chances - but no one should have 'expected' them to roll over the Habs.  That is ignorance imo - a healthy Habs team is nothing resembling a pushover.

 

The Habs are a storied franchise - with a 'foundation' to the way they build teams.  Criticize Bergevin for some missteps, but let's be real - that franchise plays Montreal Canadians hockey - and they should not be underestimated or written off with flippant ignorance - as was typically the case.

 

I thought the Habs would take that series - not because I 'hate' the Leafs, not because I underestimate the Leafs strengths - but because I did not believe the Leafs would be able to dictate that series to their strengths.  The were outskated - outhit - out"heavied" by a team with more intent, more heart, and a better all around two way game (as misleading as all the Leafs talent can be - the reality is that playing defensive hockey is a 'talent' - it's absolutely fundamental to the game - as is goaltending.  Half the game is played without the puck - to underestimate Carey Price, Shea Weber et al - is not "analytical" - it's ignorant.   That's what 'Leafs Nation' was in general - they underestimated their opponent - and they got what they deserved as a result = "shocked".

 

Who cares what some "pundits" say if they can't see the relative strengths and weaknesses of both franchises - and realize that "defense wins championships" is a truism for a reason (it's not the entire truth, but it sure as hell is more 'consistently' the truth than 'score all the goals' - if one is being 'analytical' and looking at large samples. 

 

Kudos to the Habs.  They are a sound team when they're relatively healthy - and they performed when it mattered.

Edited June 1, 2021 by oldnews

[BigTramFan]

12 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

 

Sorry to intervene on the Uncle Jim "Love fest" but........somebody has to bring people back down to earth!     Fact of the matter is we're out of the playoffs AGAIN and the rebuild/retool/retardation, continues........under Uncle Jim, so absolutely no one should have the nerve to say JB is doing "a swell" job.   

 

STILL NO RESULTS - NOW GOING INTO YEAR 8.............................and counting!

 

          

I’m no JB fan boy. I have already said my piece about JB signing Virtanen over Toffoli. Dumb move imo. Said it and moved on.

 

Seems like you are still trying to deal with it. Take your own advice:
 

If insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results 

 

Maybe let it go and breathe, you might feel better.

[Patel Bure]

57 minutes ago, Provost said:

 Not even remotely true.  You said that we beat Toronto twice so they aren’t better.  I said that isn’t a remotely reasonable sample size to make that statement... it conveniently ignores our losing record against them going back a while now.

 

One series is also not enough to say one team is better... you can say they were better for that series.  
 

If you look at dozens of games over a span of years... that DOES give you an appropriate sample size to make conclusions from.  Toronto has been a top team in league standings for several years... we have been a bottom team over that span.  Coming up with lame tiny snapshots to tru to argue against objective reality is just pure homerism.

 

They lost in the playoffs again... yep, great I don’t like the Leafs.  We didn’t make the playoffs again... so I am not going to be taking a victory lap for being bad enough that we didn’t even get a chance to lose in the playoffs.

 

Be a grown up, the Leafs are a flawed team... but they are currently better than us.  We are a flawed team that is performing much worse.  Folks mock Toronto’s defence, but it performed a heck of a lot better than ours did.

 

I look forward to a couple of years from now when  (hopefully) we can get back to being regarded as the most likely team to bring the Cup to Canada.

The Leafs are better than us NOW, YES, but....

 

1) The Leafs started their rebuild well before us.   
2) We made the 2nd round of the playoffs in 2020.  George Bush was still President the last time the Leafs won a playoff round.

3) If you look closely at the Canucks’ cap situation, you’ll notice that they could be primed to have a very big run starting in October 1st 2022.   Tons of cap space + a very solid young core on the up and up with many good players on ELC’s = major attraction for high ticket UFA’s.  
 

[5nothincanucksohno]

45 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Very good points. Colorado specifically had up and down (mostly down years), in which they accumulated players like Landeskog, Jost, and Makar. It also didn't hurt that they had Duschene (and got a very good return for him).

 

This greatly helped Colorado with their rebuild/retool. But this context helps us understand that things like these take time. Buffalo/Edmonton, as you have correctly pointed out, have spent AT LEAST 7 years trying to rebuild/retool.

There really isn't a 'right' way to do it.

I think that is an element that many forget when comparing the Canucks to other teams. Benning definitely overvalued certain veteran UFAs and/or signed more than he needed to; however, when he took over, he had very few tradebale assets (i.e. younger potential stars and younger roll players). Colorado had tradeable assets (Sakic made an amazing trade with Duchene but he also had ROR and a bunch of young assets). Toronto was in the same position - they had been bad for a while so when their young core hit the NHL, they had a solid younger supporting cast around them. 

 

Benning has definitely made mistakes but it is a lot harder to build the core and build the supporting cast. Sakic is definitely a better GM and has done a great job in Colorado. The TO GM is horrible in my view - the short, expensive RFA contracts he signed are far worse than any move or moves Benning has made.

 

Benning has found his core, he now needs to improve his assessment of NHL "roll players". If he can't find value add players on shorter term contracts, I don't think he will last much longer. But I am hopeful he can and that he has learned from his past mistakes and will spend cap wisely. 

 

 

[204CanucksFan]

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I remember when the Travis Yosts of the hockey world blew a head gasket over the Weber/Subban deal.

 

Simply because smarmies in an echo chamber posture as "pundits" and launch endless tweets - doesn't mean you should listen - doesn't mean you shouldn't think for yourself - do your own 'analyzing' - think of the larger picture - watch the games with your own eyes.

 

The Toronto loss was somewhat predictable.  If 'history' didn't teach people that - 'analyzing' what it takes to win in the playoffs, might have.

 

The Habs outskated, outhit the Leafs.  People cling to oversimplifications like "the Leafs have more talent" - but that's no more explanatory than the oversimplification I just offered.   The Habs took their time and space away.  Toronto's bread and butter puck movement - turned into flagging under pressure, giving the puck away, an inability to dictate the tempo of the games, and ultimately having their confidence broken, yet again.  They were also unable to force the Habs to cheat the game - and therefore the Habs did not spend as much time in the penalty box as the Leafs needed them to.  The Leafs needed to win that series on the powerplay - because at 5on5, they were, at best, a break even team.  The problem with breaking even against a team like the Habs - is that the Habs have Carey Price - and they have these elements that aren't easy to 'define' - like Gallagher's sheer will, or Suzuki's penchant for the moment, or Perry's ability to drive you nuts while scoring timely goals, or the sheer fear that Shea Weber inspires when you consider entering the hard areas against him....I have a lot of respect for Jack Campbell, and a few guys like Kerfoot, Hyman or Mikheyev - guys that elevated their relative games imo - but the Leafs flagged far too often - as they have countless times over the past half decade.  Nylander bailing out for fear of getting hit, Sandin wilting under the pressure of the forecheck (not on him - he's a good young 20 yr old defenseman, but like Dermott and Gardiner in years past, he was dumped in way over his head).   We can go down the list - Thornton had the series skate by him, Marner was mortified by fear of another collapse, Matthews played some decent two way hockey, but has absolutely no 'next gear' - or at least has not been able to find one thus far in his career.  

 

But 23 year olds - are not responsible - are not to blame - for endless first round exits.   That is on a General Manager and management group - who simply don't appear able to identify their weak spots.  Every team has them.  You need to know your own.  The Leafs overcompensated in a very simplistic way - hoarding 'toughness' and 'veterans' - but the problem is that appeared to be the only weak spot they were able to identify (aside from bringing in Malhotra, who definitely addressed one of their others, as best he could, in one season).

 

It doesn't simply fall on the shoulders of 'stars' imo.   When you have guys like Thornton in the lineup - who can't keep the pace, or Sandin/Dermott who can't handle the heat - those cracks are as critical as alleged star underperformance.  Teams generate offense as teams - it's not in a vacuum - you have units of 5 on the ice at almost all times.  When one or two of those elements are vulnerabilities, it's impacts your top end players as well.

 

Matthews and Marner were not that bad.   Matthews actually played some excellent hockey off the puck - but with it on his stick, he found himself pressured - that's the thing about playoff hockey - the tempo is turned up, the opponent gets in your face, they hit you, they hound you - they take as much of your time and space away as possible - it's the difference between beating up on regular season opponents, and dealing with groups that become harder to play against.   And when you're spending more of your time, effort and energy supporting other players under pressure, defending, you are not necessarily going to run as rampant over your opponents.

 

Price Weber Petry Edmundson Chiarot.

 

Sorry - but anyone that underestimates that battery - that group from the net out - has probably not watched or understood much playoff hockey in their days.

 

If you expect to skate circles around a healthy Habs team - and score all the goals - you deserve the loser fate you suffer.  You disrespected and underestimated your opponent.  And when that realization starts to take root - when you've been outplayed by a group for 40, 60, 80, 100, 120  minutes - the bulk of a few consecutive critical, elimination games, the fear of facing your overconfidence sets in. 

 

If you watched Matthews and Marner closely as that series progressed - they could feel the haunt of the past, and the fate they were facing, and it further paralyzed them.  Some pop-psychology from their coach was not going to be enough.  Some 'mentorship' from a Jumbo was not going to change what was happening on the ice. 

 

They were facing a stiff, determined, confident opponent - that smelled blood - and smelled the opportunity to take advantage of the Leafs being the Leafs.

 

The Leafs are not cursed.   They are the classic lottery build that left themselves exposed in some key positions - again - and for all the talk of their depth, they simply lacked it.   They improved in a couple areas - but they left a couple equally important stones unturned.   Because of that, they were shocked, and unable to adjust - they kept hoping to draw on their bread and butter - but bread and butter is limited in playoff hockey - you have to make more by playing a complete game.  They had a chance - had chances - but no one should have 'expected' them to roll over the Habs.  That is ignorance imo - a healthy Habs team is nothing resembling a pushover.

 

The Habs are a storied franchise - with a 'foundation' to the way they build teams.  Criticize Bergevin for some missteps, but let's be real - that franchise plays Montreal Canadians hockey - and they should not be underestimated or written off with flippant ignorance - as was typically the case.

 

I thought the Habs would take that series - not because I 'hate' the Leafs, not because I underestimate the Leafs strengths - but because I did not believe the Leafs would be able to dictate that series to their strengths.  The were outskated - outhit - out"heavied" by a team with more intent, more heart, and a better all around two way game (as misleading as all the Leafs talent can be - the reality is that playing defensive hockey is a 'talent' - it's absolutely fundamental to the game - as is goaltending.  Half the game is played without the puck - to underestimate Carey Price, Shea Weber et al - is not "analytical" - it's ignorant.   That's what 'Leafs Nation' was in general - they underestimated their opponent - and they got what they deserved as a result = "shocked".

 

Who cares what some "pundits" say if they can't see the relative strengths and weaknesses of both franchises - and realize that "defense wins championships" is a truism for a reason (it's not the entire truth, but it sure as hell is more 'consistently' the truth than 'score all the goals' - if one is being 'analytical' and looking at large samples. 

 

Kudos to the Habs.  They are a sound team when they're relatively healthy - and they performed when it mattered.

Very solid points in this post, definitely a good read. The issue I have, and granted I know Tavares was knocked out in game 1, is that even excluding him Jake Muzzin had more goals than two forwards combining for $22m against the cap, 3 for $33.5m if you include JT which isn't a fair assessment. Obviously losing the team C who is the heart and soul of the team and critically important to overall team depth is debilitating, for comparison I'm not sure we make it past St. Louis last year without our C in Bo Horvat. But Matthews and Marner are clearly overpaid at the moment and have had too much responsibility put on them too early in their careers.

 

You're right Habs deserve tons of credit for what they did in the 1st round.

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, 204CanucksFan said:

Very solid points in this post, definitely a good read. The issue I have, and granted I know Tavares was knocked out in game 1, is that even excluding him Jake Muzzin had more goals than two forwards combining for $22m against the cap, 3 for $33.5m if you include JT which isn't a fair assessment. Obviously losing the team C who is the heart and soul of the team and critically important to overall team depth is debilitating, for comparison I'm not sure we make it past St. Louis last year without our C in Bo Horvat. But Matthews and Marner are clearly overpaid at the moment and have had too much responsibility put on them too early in their careers.

 

You're right Habs deserve tons of credit for what they did in the 1st round.

Tavares was a huge loss.  No doubt about that.

 

And critically - when it comes to Leafs playoff hockey - he's the guy they lean on to play hard minutes - to matchup - to handle high dzone starts, to win faceoffs and protect leads late in games....

 

This is something I have always had a problem with where the Leafs build is concerned.   There was a time when they rented Plekanec and Boyle types for the postseason - arguably a time they did not need those players as much as they do in the present.

 

Marner - is also generally under-rated - a player that they use all the time to kill penalties - those two play critical two way roles for the Leafs.

 

However - how wise is that?   Even if they're capable of those roles, do you want them in them?  For me it was only a matter of time before a Marner ate a one-timer on the penalty kill, or the hard miles caught up with Tavares.   I thought the Leafs did a good job of improving the off puck play of guys like Matthews - but what they did not do is get a dedicated shutdown or penalty killing center to ease off the workload of their top 9 centers.   Spezza may be a valuable secondary scoring presence, but imo they still had a weakness - an inability to get a complementary platoon for their bottom six - that could eat hard minutes in critical situations, and penalty kills.   The Leafs penalty kill wound up flagging later in that series and surrendering critical, back-breaking goals..  Guys like Foligno were 'good playoff' adds imo - but if you're going to go that "all-in" - then go all in.   And the same goes for the depth of their blueline - once again (the lack of was) exposed.   Muzzin - another big loss.   But funny thing - I remember losing guys like Dan Hamhuis, or Daniel Sedin, etc - at critical times in the playoffs for the Canucks - what I don't remember is anyone wanting to listen to 'excuses'.

 

Matthews - should not be 'expected' to produce as much without a Tavares in the lineup.  Imo what that all tranlates into is needing more from the rest of their lineup, from their 'depth' - which they generally did not get.  The Habs had a few young centers - with only Matthews to really deal with, it was easier for the Habs to key in Danault on limiting the Matthews Marner line.  But also, in fairness to the Habs - young guys like Suzuki (and Kotkaniemi) stepped up - played Habs hockey without the puck on their stick, limited chances, and when they weren't able to, you still have Carey Price, Weber, etc to deal with...

 

Like I said about Tampa - look at their blueline last playoffs.   Hedman, McDonagh, Sergachev, Cernak, Shattenkirk - and then still, to fill out that 6th spot - Bogosian, Rutta, Coburn, Schenn (Foote).   The Leafs have run repeatedly with guys like Gardiner in their top 4 - and now, having improved upon that - they still wound up with Sandin and Dermott in their lineup = sorry, but you're not going very far with that, period.  All they did, in spite of their pick spending spree - was add Ben Hutton - who they never utilized - did not consider replacement value enough to insert in the lineup over one of those two.  Just not good enough imo for a team that failed to win a first round series four consecutive years - and certainly not good enough for a team that considered itself a legitimate contender in a "window" where they were allegedly "built to win".   They weren't built well enough to win the North - let alone handle teams like Tampa, Colorado, Boston, etc.

And now they find themselves having depleted their futures, considerably - for desperation to get by the first round.

For me - that's a pretty short-sighted build - one that has not in fact learned from repeated mistakes / improved in a couple areas, but still did not identify critical weaknesses/vulnerabilities.

[Dumb Nuck]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

Hope that's a picture you got.   Have had many bear encounters, only a couple a little scary.    That's a big one.   If their head can get stuck in a garbage can don't try and get it off.  Just leave it on.   

He was on the side of the road, I pulled up beside him in the car to snap the pictures, he didn’t really seem to care but I had my left foot on the brake and my right ready to hit the gas.

[Kragar]

17 hours ago, buddhahoodlum said:

Or to put it differently would you rather have 2 MacKinnon's or 1 McJesus?

2 Mega Macs are far more filling than one Mini M(a)c

 

[Dumb Nuck]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Had a friend many years ago who was adamant he could outrun a grizzly.  So I told him I’d drive the truck at a grizzly’s top speed and he could see if he could out run the truck.  I gave him a head start and then passed him going 60 km.  He shut up about that after. 

Thing out bears, you don’t have to outrun them just the person you’re with.

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Had a friend many years ago who was adamant he could outrun a grizzly.  So I told him I’d drive the truck at a grizzly’s top speed and he could see if he could out run the truck.  I gave him a head start and then passed him going 60 km.  He shut up about that after. 

Would hate to see a scooter-riding, grizzled Alien racing away from an enraged Grizzly. But then I just recently watched The Revenant!

[oldnews]

2 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Thing out bears, you don’t have to outrun them just the person you’re with.

which is why I'd bet you are single.