[Signing] Canucks re-sign J.T. Miller

[Chris12345]

19 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I never said we can't become a contender, I hope we do! But we are not one now, sorry.

Yea no one in the Pacific is a contender. Just an absolute trashy division.

[BPA]

Just looking at some betting sites….Canucks aren’t even in the top 10.  So obviously those sites don’t think Canucks are “contenders”. 
 

It’s like comparing Toronto Raptors vs Golden State Warriors.  Could Raptors win it all?? Sure…anything can happen in the playoffs.  But that still doesn’t make them a “contender”.

 

 

 

Current Betting Odds..

 

 

Colorado Avalanche5.00

Florida Panthers10.00

Toronto Maple Leafs10.00

Tampa Bay Lightning11.00

Carolina Hurricanes12.00

Edmonton Oilers15.00

Calgary Flames19.00

New York Rangers19.00

Pittsburgh Penguins19.00

Vegas Golden Knights19.00

Minnesota Wild21.00

Boston Bruins29.00

Los Angeles Kings31.00

St Louis Blues31.00

New York Islanders36.00

Nashville Predators41.00

Washington Capitals41.00

Dallas Stars46.00

New Jersey Devils51.00

Vancouver Canucks51.00

[DeNiro]

45 minutes ago, AV. said:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/763002-2011-12-stanley-cup-contenders - published in July 2011, predicted to finish 7th best in the whole NHL

https://thehockeynews.com/news/the-hockey-news-2011-12-nhl-predictions - published in September 2011, predicted to finish 4th in the Western Conference, expected to have had a "truly elite" season going into 2011/12

https://allhabs.net/looking-into-the-crystal-ball/ [fan blog] - published in October 2011, predicted Kings to finish 1st in their division and the WCF.

Just a handful of people who thought positively about their 2011 off-season and expected them to take that big step.  Again, they underperformed during the regular season, but once they brought in Sutter and Carter, they started performing as expected.  Their subsequent success in the following seasons would prove they didn't fluke a victory.

Fan blogs and articles? Come on…
 

No legit mainstream media were calling them contenders. 
 

Either way no one calls an 8th seed a contender, you’ll never hear it no matter how much hype they had in previous years.

[DeNiro]

Just now, BPA said:

Just looking at some betting sites….Canucks aren’t even in the top 10.  So obviously those sites don’t think Canucks are “contenders”. 
 

It’s like comparing Toronto Raptors vs Golden State Warriors.  Could Raptors win it all?? Sure…anything can happen in the playoffs.  But that still doesn’t make them a “contender”.

 

 

 

Current Betting Odds..

 

 

Colorado Avalanche5.00

Florida Panthers10.00

Toronto Maple Leafs10.00

Tampa Bay Lightning11.00

Carolina Hurricanes12.00

Edmonton Oilers15.00

Calgary Flames19.00

New York Rangers19.00

Pittsburgh Penguins19.00

Vegas Golden Knights19.00

Minnesota Wild21.00

Boston Bruins29.00

Los Angeles Kings31.00

St Louis Blues31.00

New York Islanders36.00

Nashville Predators41.00

Washington Capitals41.00

Dallas Stars46.00

New Jersey Devils51.00

Vancouver Canucks51.00

Tends to happen when you miss the playoffs two years in a row.

 

If they make the playoffs Im sure those odds change quite a bit.

[BPA]

Just now, DeNiro said:

Tends to happen when you miss the playoffs two years in a row.

 

If they make the playoffs Im sure those odds change quite a bit.

I’m sure it will if the Canucks make the playoffs (as it will only be limited to 16 teams).  But before even a game is played, look at those odds.  That’s what betting sites that make money thinks.

[JM_]

30 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

I have a feeling no news is bad news.

But, is it better for this year to have Poolman on LTIR, or on the team 'maybe healthy'?

 

Either way, he is basically untradeable until proven healthy.

Plus the poor guy was hurting or he would've played for sure.

Too personal for management to release anything I suppose.

my hope would be he is healthy and can play, just doesn't sound good. 

[AV.]

7 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Fan blogs and articles? Come on…
 

No legit mainstream media were calling them contenders. 
 

Either way no one calls an 8th seed a contender, you’ll never hear it no matter how much hype they had in previous years.

Tell that to Eric Tulsky.

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1972354
 

EDIT:  From the article itself

Now, let's be clear: the Kings didn't come out of nowhere. They weren't a Cinderella story or a traditional underdog. Ownership had no problem spending money, general manager Dean Lombardi assembled a balanced lineup, and the franchise was on an upward trajectory. In fact, expectations were reasonably high following an eventful 2011 offseason.

 

Edited September 5, 2022 by AV.

[DeNiro]

Just now, BPA said:

I’m sure it will if the Canucks make the playoffs (as it will only be limited to 16 teams).  But before even a game is played, look at those odds.  That’s what betting sites that make money thinks.

Yep most people aren’t gonna bet money on a team that has missed two seasons in a row.

 

Odds tend to lag behind actual success.

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, AV. said:

Tell that to Eric Tulsky.

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1972354

“Eric Tulsky then a Philadelphia Flyers blogger”

 

I said mainstream…

[AV.]

Just now, DeNiro said:

“Eric Tulsky then a Philadelphia Flyers blogger”

 

I said mainstream…

I take it you have no idea who Eric Tulsky is?

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, AV. said:

Tell that to Eric Tulsky.

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1972354
 

EDIT:  From the article itself

Now, let's be clear: the Kings didn't come out of nowhere. They weren't a Cinderella story or a traditional underdog. Ownership had no problem spending money, general manager Dean Lombardi assembled a balanced lineup, and the franchise was on an upward trajectory. In fact, expectations were reasonably high following an eventful 2011 offseason.

 

Yes they were predicted to make the playoffs and possibly make some noise. That doesn’t equal contender.

 

Nobody predicted the dominant run they would go on, not even the stats nerds.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

This thread / a handful of posters (negative Nancy’s) =
 

[JM_]

"contender" is a very subjective term. I see it as any team in the top 8 of the overall standings have a legit chance at the cup. Legit, because you can never predict how matchups may go, or the effect of injuries over 4 series. 

 

In two seasons I can see this team being a top 8 team, after having two more years of first or second round playoff experience. 

 

I think JR/PA do as well, otherwise they wouldn't have signed Miller, instead of trying to move him for prospects. 

 

Edited September 5, 2022 by JM_

[DeNiro]

Just now, AV. said:

I take it you have no idea who Eric Tulsky is?

I’m well aware who he is.

 

He was not mainstream at the time which disproves your example that mainstream were claiming they were contenders.

[alt kilgore]

Just now, aGENT said:

I never said we can't become a contender, I hope we do! But we are not one now, sorry.

May be off on a tangent but it’s amusing reading this thread this endless debate about if a team is a “contender” or not.

 

 Deb pointed out that the literal definition is simply a person or team that is contending for a prize/trophy/cup. 
 

Which would mean if you squeak into the playoffs you have firstly contended for a playoff spot and won that and now have earned the right to contend for the Stanley Cup. That seems like a logical conclusion.
 

but I get it, in the NHL world, many don’t use that word unless a team makes it to the final four, maybe even the final two. OR are you a contender before that? Is it the top teams in the standings at the end of the regular season? Some who may or may not make it to the final four.
If one of those teams goes out in the first round does that retroactively strip  them of that title? 

conversely, does a team who barely scraped into the playoffs get that title gifted to them if they make the final four?

 

 Its all so confusing. 

personally I think it can be used both ways. I certainly felt we are contenders for the Cup in the bubble while watching those games.
But I understand, “contender” means to many a “projected possible SCF finalists based on the state of that teams current make up and balance of players and health “  and its just that that is too long to say each time.  There should really be another word for that.

 

 Carry on

 

[Fanuck]

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Odds tend to lag behind actual success.

I've found the opposite actually,  there's just too much money to be won/lost for the odds makers not to be 100% up to the minute on every aspect of every game and every team.  My buddy who our group of friends jokingly call the 'compulsive gambler' (he isn't as far as I know) told me the moment the JT signing went officiall the odds changed - slightly,  but they changed. 

[-DLC-]

9 minutes ago, BPA said:

I’m sure it will if the Canucks make the playoffs (as it will only be limited to 16 teams).  But before even a game is played, look at those odds.  That’s what betting sites that make money thinks.

What site is this?

[DeNiro]

10 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

I've found the opposite actually,  there's just too much money to be won/lost for the odds makers not to be 100% up to the minute on every aspect of every game and every team.  My buddy who our group of friends jokingly call the 'compulsive gambler' (he isn't as far as I know) told me the moment the JT signing went officiall the odds changed - slightly,  but they changed. 

Sure the odds will change here and there. Obviously our odds are better with JT than without him that goes without saying.

 

No site is gonna give us good odds with so many question marks and uncertainty to answer though.

 

Like with most fans it’s kind of just a wait and see right now. If they start off strong and look like the team from the second half of last season I’m sure those odds will get another bump.

 

Edited September 5, 2022 by DeNiro

[KirkSave]

Every time the Leafs head into a new season with Dubas and their "elite" core 4. Their fans be like.

 

 

Maybe if they traded one of them for a proper starting goalie...plus you got to win a round or 2, right @DeNiro!

[-DLC-]

7 minutes ago, kilgore said:

May be off on a tangent but it’s amusing reading this thread this endless debate about if a team is a “contender” or not.

 

 Deb pointed out that the literal definition is simply a person or team that is contending for a prize/trophy/cup. 
 

Which would mean if you squeak into the playoffs you have firstly contended for a playoff spot and won that and now have earned the right to contend for the Stanley Cup. That seems like a logical conclusion.
 

but I get it, in the NHL world, many don’t use that word unless a team makes it to the final four, maybe even the final two. OR are you a contender before that? Is it the top teams in the standings at the end of the regular season? Some who may or may not make it to the final four.
If one of those teams goes out in the first round does that retroactively strip  them of that title? 

conversely, does a team who barely scraped into the playoffs get that title gifted to them if they make the final four?

 

 Its all so confusing. 

personally I think it can be used both ways. I certainly felt we are contenders for the Cup in the bubble while watching those games.
But I understand, “contender” means to many a “projected possible SCF finalists based on the state of that teams current make up and balance of players and health “  and its just that that is too long to say each time.  There should really be another word for that.

 

 Carry on

 

Thing is, I understand how the hockey world uses it.

Except some here add footnotes because when we got through 2 rounds, it was "a weird year". Bubble. Blah blah blah. It was a TOUGH year, because they faced adversity never seen before. Played in empty stadiums and had all kinds of restrictions.

 

But we don't count when our team wins because it doesn't fit the narrative.

 

This team is better than some of our armchair analysts realize. And I can't wait to remind them as we get rolling....because you know I will. It's an unknown at this point and those thinking they know just look stupid to me. I mean, if I go back in their post history I'm sure they've been right about many things until they've been proven wrong.

 

NONE of us know what this team will do. Period. Fact.

 

*slams the gate, swears on her way out