Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 21 of 24 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 315 of 354
  1. #301
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    49,816
    vCash
    1500
    And the weak second line is what allows playoff teams to easily tee off on our first line.

    No second option makes the Canucks an offensive pop gun.

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,690
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    This.

    But I still maintain we could get by with that first line.

    It's the second line that is ****ing brutal. And that is a good thing because any trade Gillis might be able to swing has a better chance of helping our second line than our first.

    Not too likely we'll get top line talent in a trade for a goalie who is disparaged because of his contract.
    No, but you'll almost certainly get at least one top-6 player and possibly a young defenseman with top-4 potential. I don't think it's unreasonable that the Canucks should expect to get a good return for a top-10 goalie. Does his age and contract length impact his value? Certainly, but it doesn't kill his value like some posters on here would want you to believe. He's worth 2 good, but not great young players.

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    7,094
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    Stopped reading right there, sorry. That's just BS. They are not at all mentally soft, in fact they are tough as hell to take the idiotic abuse they do. It's the ******** media that is too stupid to see that when they are stoic about taking hits, it is somehow seen as "soft". They don't retaliate, they don't play North American hockey, whether it's good or bad, they're making a choice. They think they have more chance of success playing a skill game, and they do not back down. I have seen them take punishing hit after punishing hit and they keep coming back, going on the attack, but going on the attack THEIR way.

    What prevents them from succeeding in the playoffs? As explained, they depend COMPLETELY on a passing game. If you watch them as you say you do you would know that. Other coaches have even said that the trick to stopping the Sedins is to cut off their passing lanes. They do not have the room they need to get pucks through to each other. If you watch them you'll see that quite often it is the third pass that breaks a man free. They create openings for linemates this way. If they can't pass the puck, they can't move the opposition out of position. Regular season or not, they play this way. They almost never play a direct contact game; it's not their game. Their game is to suck the defender into chasing THEM then move the puck accurately to the open man. Works much ilke passing out of a double team. The contact is actually kind of irrelevant to this type of play. It's just your North American bias that can't see past the idea of hitting another player to create or prevent a scoring chance. Most North Americans play this way. The Sedins never have. Unfortunately it works in the reg season but doesn't work when passing lanes are gone.
    That's your opinion.....my opinion and the opinion of most unbiased hockey fans and sports journalists is that they are soft. As I said before you are entitled to your opinion.
    The most ridiculous part of this all is that most Vancouver fans think that the Canucks need ANOTHER superstar on their top line. Doesn't that seem strange to you considering there isn't a team in the league with 3 superstars on their top line?
    What you are describing above is hockey, ofcourse the top players get special treatment from the other teams, that's the way it is but most players fight through it and overcome it if they are truly elite players.
    Considering these two have played North American hockey for 12 years when do you think they are going to "get it", they're 32 now. As I've said before those two either have to get more physically and mentally sharp or Vancouver will not be winning a cup with them as their top minute eaters. You can dress it up any way you want to but if a player isn't overcoming pressure from the opposing D, and isn't figuring out ways to change their game for the good of the team because it's difficult to do the things that make playoff players successful, drive the net, dump and chase, bang some bodies, then my friend there's many words to be used but I chose soft. It's a ridiculous statement that the Canucks should have to get a player to do the dirty work for these two 100 point players. It's time for them to nut up.

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    49,816
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bsi View Post
    That's your opinion.....my opinion and the opinion of most unbiased hockey fans and sports journalists is that they are soft. As I said before you are entitled to your opinion.
    The most ridiculous part of this all is that most Vancouver fans think that the Canucks need ANOTHER superstar on their top line. Doesn't that seem strange to you considering there isn't a team in the league with 3 superstars on their top line?
    What you are describing above is hockey, ofcourse the top players get special treatment from the other teams, that's the way it is but most players fight through it and overcome it if they are truly elite players.
    Considering these two have played North American hockey for 12 years when do you think they are going to "get it", they're 32 now. As I've said before those two either have to get more physically and mentally sharp or Vancouver will not be winning a cup with them as their top minute eaters. You can dress it up any way you want to but if a player isn't overcoming pressure from the opposing D, and isn't figuring out ways to change their game for the good of the team because it's difficult to do the things that make playoff players successful, drive the net, dump and chase, bang some bodies, then my friend there's many words to be used but I chose soft. It's a ridiculous statement that the Canucks should have to get a player to do the dirty work for these two 100 point players. It's time for them to nut up.
    Sounds like a Don Cherry rant. And we all know how out of date he is. Your North American bias is blinding you. These guys are Euros and don't give a damn if anyone thinks they should play dump and chase hockey. And btw only the worst, out of touch broadcasters actually believe this stuff any more.

    You have your opinion and obviously no one is changing it. Doesn't mean it shows any insight into their game though. What Canucks fans are concluding is that the Sedins just aren't cut out for playoff success, even though they still produce at a better rate than they are given credit for. The reason though is not because of "softness". That's just an uninformed comment.
    Last edited by ink; 11-17-2012 at 11:06 AM.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    49,816
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by CubbieKid17 View Post
    No, but you'll almost certainly get at least one top-6 player and possibly a young defenseman with top-4 potential. I don't think it's unreasonable that the Canucks should expect to get a good return for a top-10 goalie. Does his age and contract length impact his value? Certainly, but it doesn't kill his value like some posters on here would want you to believe. He's worth 2 good, but not great young players.
    I don't think it's unreasonable at all. And I don't believe Gillis will be railroaded into trading for mediocrity. Your assessment is probably realistic: two good but not great young players. The question is how much upside those players will have. We can't have another Hodgson for Kassian type deal, where the upside of the incoming player is really uncertain and questionable, not for someone of Luongo's calibre.

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    7,094
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    Sounds like a Don Cherry rant. And we all know how out of date he is. Your North American bias is blinding you. These guys are Euros and don't give a damn if anyone thinks they should play dump and chase hockey. And btw only the worst, out of touch broadcasters actually believe this stuff any more.

    You have your opinion and obviously no one is changing it. Doesn't mean it shows any insight into their game though. What Canucks fans are concluding is that the Sedins just aren't cut out for playoff success, even though they still produce at a better rate than they are given credit for. The reason though is not because of "softness". That's just an uninformed comment.
    Ok....we don't agree on the idea of them being soft that's for sure and I don't expect you to change your opinion on that but do you agree that maybe it's time to move on from them? My underlying argument was that as long as they are your top minute eaters the Canucks will have a hard time winning a cup. If they aren't cut out for playoff success then really what's the point in having them in Vancouver? I could see them being of value for ticket sales or just to get in the playoffs in a city like Columbus but Vancouver wants a cup and those two have been there for 12 years without success.
    I hope you aren't taking this personally, but it really frustrates me to see two players with such huge talent just fall apart in the playoffs when the going gets tough. Most players would be doing anything and everything to get better, whatever it took just to improve and contribute to their team. If that means bulking up, changing their style, or whatever they should be doing it. If they don't want to change what they are doing they'll continue to fail at bringing a cup home.
    Anyway, I'm beating a dead horse but I wish you and the Canucks good luck when this finally starts and I hope to see a repeat of the 1994 finals with the same result haha.

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    49,816
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bsi View Post
    Ok....we don't agree on the idea of them being soft that's for sure and I don't expect you to change your opinion on that but do you agree that maybe it's time to move on from them? My underlying argument was that as long as they are your top minute eaters the Canucks will have a hard time winning a cup. If they aren't cut out for playoff success then really what's the point in having them in Vancouver? I could see them being of value for ticket sales or just to get in the playoffs in a city like Columbus but Vancouver wants a cup and those two have been there for 12 years without success.
    I hope you aren't taking this personally, but it really frustrates me to see two players with such huge talent just fall apart in the playoffs when the going gets tough. Most players would be doing anything and everything to get better, whatever it took just to improve and contribute to their team. If that means bulking up, changing their style, or whatever they should be doing it. If they don't want to change what they are doing they'll continue to fail at bringing a cup home.
    Anyway, I'm beating a dead horse but I wish you and the Canucks good luck when this finally starts and I hope to see a repeat of the 1994 finals with the same result haha.
    I'll accept whatever happens with them. I like the experiment. I know very well that the playoffs are prime NORTH AMERICAN style hockey. I've always hated that dump and chase game so I'm happy to try and fail with players that are trying something new.

    Should we move on? I don't really think so. I would rather watch better skill and lose than watch awful hockey and win (like the Blues or Coyotes, or even to some degree, the Kings last year). I really would. I'd rather keep trying to win with a hybrid of skill and grit.

    A fair bit of this is on the lack of imagination of the coaching staff you know. I think someone should be able to harness the talent the Sedins bring to the table. And I know they are trying new things. These guys are 100% heart and so much tougher than they are given credit for.

    I'm with them for the long haul. What I'd like though would be to see upgrades on their wing and on the second line so they don't have to carry the entire load. There aren't many teams that can win with only 2/3 of a top line, a pathetic second line, and erratic third and fourth lines. In fact, in the playoffs, the usual heroes are the 3rd liners, with the guys from the top two lines exploiting the limited opportunities they get. Our problem has been that other than the Sedins there really isn't a lot of talent on the team. Kesler yes, but not consistently enough, not by a long shot.

    So, back to the thread topic, this is one of the reasons why Gillis is holding out for a decent return: he has too. The team needs it or it will stall and fall back to the ground. It may already be too late.

    But if you ask me whether I want to watch a winning dump and chase style or a creative style that just misses ... I'll pick the creative team 100 times out of 100. I like winning but I hate winning ugly.

    That's why my favourite recent teams are the Wings, Penguins, or Hawks. My favourite teams of all time are the Oilers dynasty teams. Mix of talent, skill, grit, timely goaltending, and fast-paced attacking offence.

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    7,094
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I'll accept whatever happens with them. I like the experiment. I know very well that the playoffs are prime NORTH AMERICAN style hockey. I've always hated that dump and chase game so I'm happy to try and fail with players that are trying something new.

    Should we move on? I don't really think so. I would rather watch better skill and lose than watch awful hockey and win (like the Blues or Coyotes, or even to some degree, the Kings last year). I really would. I'd rather keep trying to win with a hybrid of skill and grit.

    A fair bit of this is on the lack of imagination of the coaching staff you know. I think someone should be able to harness the talent the Sedins bring to the table. And I know they are trying new things. These guys are 100% heart and so much tougher than they are given credit for.

    I'm with them for the long haul. What I'd like though would be to see upgrades on their wing and on the second line so they don't have to carry the entire load. There aren't many teams that can win with only 2/3 of a top line, a pathetic second line, and erratic third and fourth lines. In fact, in the playoffs, the usual heroes are the 3rd liners, with the guys from the top two lines exploiting the limited opportunities they get. Our problem has been that other than the Sedins there really isn't a lot of talent on the team. Kesler yes, but not consistently enough, not by a long shot.

    So, back to the thread topic, this is one of the reasons why Gillis is holding out for a decent return: he has too. The team needs it or it will stall and fall back to the ground. It may already be too late.

    But if you ask me whether I want to watch a winning dump and chase style or a creative style that just misses ... I'll pick the creative team 100 times out of 100. I like winning but I hate winning ugly.

    That's why my favourite recent teams are the Wings, Penguins, or Hawks. My favourite teams of all time are the Oilers dynasty teams. Mix of talent, skill, grit, timely goaltending, and fast-paced attacking offence.
    That's fair. I'm actually hoping the Rangers go more on the attack this year now that they have two solid lines of forwards and a mobile D. They did the best with what they had the last few years, adding Nash and having Kreider and Hagelin step up makes the team much more capable of scoring......I hope.

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    49,816
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bsi View Post
    That's fair. I'm actually hoping the Rangers go more on the attack this year now that they have two solid lines of forwards and a mobile D. They did the best with what they had the last few years, adding Nash and having Kreider and Hagelin step up makes the team much more capable of scoring......I hope.
    Yeah you guys have the skill. And Sather, after all, was the architect of those Oilers teams (or the guy who lucked into unbelievable draft picks like Gretzky, Coffey, Messier, and co.) so he is no stranger to the kind of hockey I love to watch.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,690
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I don't think it's unreasonable at all. And I don't believe Gillis will be railroaded into trading for mediocrity. Your assessment is probably realistic: two good but not great young players. The question is how much upside those players will have. We can't have another Hodgson for Kassian type deal, where the upside of the incoming player is really uncertain and questionable, not for someone of Luongo's calibre.
    The more I think about it, something like Gagner and MPS for Luongo and some filler prospect wouldn't be a bad deal for either team.

    The Oilers barely have room left in their top-6, with Hall, RNH, Eberle, Yakupov, and Hemsky all pretty much guaranteed spots in the top-6. That leaves one spot. Gagner could probably center the 2nd line, but he's kind of soft and not great defensively. His offense wouldn't necessarily be needed out of Edmonton's 2nd line C spot. What they could use is a bigger player to get some size in their top-6. MPS has good size, but he hasn't lived up to his lofty potential thus far. He also seems like more of a big guy that plays a finesse game rather than a bruiser. He almost reminds me of Viktor Stalberg, but with a bit more upside. Again the Edmonton top-6 needs more of a bruiser type or someone to help protect their talented scorers. Adding a top-10 goalie potentially turns the Oilers from pretenders to a playoff team.

    For Vancouver, Luongo is expendable due to the emergence of Cory Schneider. While the Canucks could use someone to help keep the opponents in check in terms of cheap-shotting the twins, they could also use a scorer. Adding Gagner and MPS potentially gives them two. Gagner could play wing or center. I'd imagine he'd play some more wing for Vancouver. Putting him on a line with a healthy Ryan Kesler as well as either Burrows or Raymond could create a very productive 2nd line for Vancouver. If Kesler gets hurt again, you slide Gagner over to C. MPS could possibly be tried out as a winger for the twins. He's not a bruiser like I said before, but he's a guy that has potential to be a very solid scorer. Adding two players with the potential of Gagner and MPS gives the Canucks some serious scoring depth. Get them a bruiser type to help round out their bottom-6 and you're looking at a serious Cup-contender.

    Also, when I say filler prospect, I mean probably an AHL guy that's not terribly young, but not old either, and with a reasonable amount of upside but definitely not a top prospect.

  11. #311
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Mission, BC
    Posts
    2,173
    vCash
    1500
    I don't see both as a steep asking price. MPS is stuck in no mans land a Gagner is a decent piece, I always forget how young he is.

    I would love to see what Colorado would say to Lu and Kes for Duschene +

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,690
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pfeifer View Post
    I don't see both as a steep asking price. MPS is stuck in no mans land a Gagner is a decent piece, I always forget how young he is.

    I would love to see what Colorado would say to Lu and Kes for Duschene +
    Why would they do this? They have Varlamov, who's young and has plenty of potential. They don't need a goalie. I doubt they'd trade Duchene and why should they? He's a 21-year old center who's already got 2 seasons in the NHL where he scored more than 50 points. No offense, but I'd concentrate on deals that actually have a shot in hell of happening.

    Edit: Also, I'm aware of Duchene's injury problems last year. If Duchene gets traded at all, it'll be for a big time goal-scoring winger, like Bobby Ryan.
    Last edited by CubbieKid17; 11-18-2012 at 12:29 AM.

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Mission, BC
    Posts
    2,173
    vCash
    1500
    Not saying it would happen but how is bobby Ryan on his own more valuable than a top ten goalie and a selke winning centre?

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,690
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pfeifer View Post
    Not saying it would happen but how is bobby Ryan on his own more valuable than a top ten goalie and a selke winning centre?
    Because Kesler is injury prone, they're stacked at C even without Duchene, and they have a talented young goalie. They need a goal scoring wing like Ryan.

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Mission, BC
    Posts
    2,173
    vCash
    1500
    We are gonna have to agree to disagree on Varlamov but valid point on kes.

Page 21 of 24 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •