Page 5 of 9

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:47 pm
by Chef Boi RD
Just trying to fuel the fires of intellectual debate, Blobby Old Milwaukees.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:56 pm
by Strangelove
RoyalDude wrote:Should the Canucks tank it and put themselves in a position to draft Vancouver raised Sam Reinhart?



Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:50 pm
by BurningBeard
RoyalDude wrote:Should the Canucks tank it and put themselves in a position to draft Vancouver raised Sam Reinhart?
You've watched too many Edmonton Oilers' seasons and it's damaged your brain.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:13 am
by Todd Bersnoozi
RoyalDude wrote:Should the Canucks tank it and put themselves in a position to draft Vancouver raised Sam Reinhart?
*LOL* I wouldn't mind, but I doubt it'll happen though. The Nucks are a middle of the pack team and will battle hard for one of the last playoff spots. Plus, I'm sure the Aqua-man wants his team to make the playoffs for his playoff revenue. If the team is not even in contention and finishes among the last with that payroll, u know heads will roll.

Wow, is Sam Reinhart the consensus #1 pick? His old man played 1 year for us and he was probably one of the best d-men to ever wear our jersey. Most fans hoped he would of played for us a bit longer. He's raising good NHL prospects like a bunny rabbit. :P

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:28 am
by dbr
RoyalDude wrote:Just trying to fuel the fires of intellectual debate, Blobby Old Milwaukees.
:lol:

By the same logic I guess people who get the death penalty and are put down by lethal injection are just trying to advance medical science..

Seriously though, I don't think people who advocate tanking realize just how awful the worst teams in the league are right now, and also how far back we'd have to claw just to get to where we are now let alone to the top of the heap (and how much harder it would be if we did what it would take to be the 30th overall team).

What's worse is that if we intentionally got rid of enough players to be that bad, we wouldn't have a hope in hell of replacing them in free agency (and the good players we did have would probably walk unless we paid through the nose to keep them.. think about what guys like Mikko Koivu and Rick Nash and Travis Zajac and so on cost their desperate employers).

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:58 am
by Arachnid
dbr wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:Just trying to fuel the fires of intellectual debate, Blobby Old Milwaukees.
:lol:

By the same logic I guess people who get the death penalty and are put down by lethal injection are just trying to advance medical science..

Seriously though, I don't think people who advocate tanking realize just how awful the worst teams in the league are right now, and also how far back we'd have to claw just to get to where we are now let alone to the top of the heap (and how much harder it would be if we did what it would take to be the 30th overall team).

What's worse is that if we intentionally got rid of enough players to be that bad, we wouldn't have a hope in hell of replacing them in free agency (and the good players we did have would probably walk unless we paid through the nose to keep them.. think about what guys like Mikko Koivu and Rick Nash and Travis Zajac and so on cost their desperate employers).
Intellectualism and BikerDude do not mix well...I can't believe he would advocate to tank like a hapless cOiler...

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 6:58 am
by 2Fingers
The Canucks are an entire 2nd line from being legit plus a true #1 d-man.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 7:12 am
by Chef Boi RD
Reefer2 wrote:The Canucks are an entire 2nd line from being legit plus a true #1 d-man.
Pretty much agree with this. A quick fix rental trade for a Camelleri type won't amount to a hill of beans, we are too far away from contending to justify thus type of trade, but I fully expect Gillis to do something desperately stupid like this further fucking the future health of this club. He is not the man for the job. He has held onto this core group for too long. We need a Bold GM, Mike is hampered by his Players Agent loyalty

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 7:18 am
by Chef Boi RD
Shop any parts or all of Kesler, Burrows and Bieska to teams with a good young talent pool. I'd start with Kesler cause I think an amicable divorce is in the cards and both teams will benefit. I mention Burrows and Bieksa cause of their ages, the price on their heads are pretty decent but that window will be closing soon.

Bold moves?

Or more Derek Roy trades?

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 8:16 am
by 2Fingers
RoyalDude wrote:
Reefer2 wrote:The Canucks are an entire 2nd line from being legit plus a true #1 d-man.
Pretty much agree with this. A quick fix rental trade for a Camelleri type won't amount to a hill of beans, we are too far away from contending to justify thus type of trade, but I fully expect Gillis to do something desperately stupid like this further fucking the future health of this club. He is not the man for the job. He has held onto this core group for too long. We need a Bold GM, Mike is hampered by his Players Agent loyalty
I disagree, I think we have some good prospects and I don't want to see any stupid trades to get someone for only a few months. I would like to see a real opportunity being given to some of them next season and we wait for them to mature.

But I will still say this team right now has no 2nd line.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:21 am
by Topper
Reef, do you believe there was any effort from any of the lines last night? Are you certain your handle references your aquarium and not your short term memory loss?

So folks were up in arms when I suggested the time was ripe to trade Burrows. I am having a good laugh at all the folks bitching about him now.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:40 am
by herb
Topper wrote:So folks were up in arms when I suggested the time was ripe to trade Burrows. I am having a good laugh at all the folks bitching about him now.
I agreed with you then and what we have been witnessing is proof that he should have been shopped aggressively.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:52 am
by Topper
I like Burrows and what he brings to the team, I also think his current funk will get sorted, but I believe he is on the downwind leg of his career and the time was ripe before signing him to his current deal.

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:54 am
by 2Fingers
Topper wrote:Reef, do you believe there was any effort from any of the lines last night? Are you certain your handle references your aquarium and not your short term memory loss?

So folks were up in arms when I suggested the time was ripe to trade Burrows. I am having a good laugh at all the folks bitching about him now.
Do you look like your picture on here because you sometimes (or a lot of times) post like it?

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:04 am
by Topper
Good answer. - LOL

Watching the young guys on Dallas and Florida the last couple of games gets me thinking of BoHo, Shank and Gaunce and I shiver with antici........ PATION!