Kirill Koltsov signs with Russian team

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8362
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Post by Island Nucklehead »

Meers has the bases covered here, so I'll just throw in my two cents.

With the way the cap is, building from within is key to any organization. Therefore, we will live and die with our best players, and the hope that our under-paid skaters can step above their pay grade. Koltsov at 1.7 is a massive overpayment for a guy to sit on our bottom pairing, at the end of the day we'll look to Mitchell, Ohlund and Salo. Look to our priorities. It's already been mentioned that the Ducks steamrolled our boys in the playoffs, so size has to be an issue. Sure, offence is as well, but with the likes of Salo, BXA, Ohlund, Krajicek and potentially Sopel, I don't see a problem with offence comming from the back end.

This simply comes down to numbers. If we had an unlimited budget, we could afford to bring this guy over and let him fight it out with Bourdon/Edler/Rory/Sopes for our last spot. Reality is we don't, and our money is MUCH better suited being spent somewhere were we aren't stacked on offense....say, the Forwards.
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

Farhan Lalji wrote:IF the Canucks had the 06/07' version of Luongo playing with the 02/03, 03/04, (or even 01/02) version of the Canucks......what would the Canucks' legacy have been?
At a minimum, I'd say a damned good shot at an appearance in the finals in 03/04. Maybe a Cup.
Farhan Lalji wrote:If the Canucks were to get Todd Bertuzzi and Anson Carter back (at discounted prices) and go back to their old "run and gun" style of hockey,......would it work?
Likely not, simply for the reason that Bert is really just a shadow of his former self (largely due to his back injury, but also in part due to the rule changes and his own shift to a more perimeter style of game). Nazzy and Mo are also clearly not the players they were four years ago . . . damn I miss Nazzy's wristers.
Farhan Lalji wrote:Is Luongo REALLY that DAMN good?.......to the point where he could save the Canucks from the (numerous) defensive breakdowns that would occur (and to be honest - we saw a shitload in this year's playoffs.....even under the Canucks' "defense first" system).
The thing about Luongo is he'll make that incredible first save on the Selanne breakaway (best save to date in the playoffs, for my money) and turn aside just about every other first shot he can get his eyes on and which doesn't get deflected, BUT he needs heads up defenders to clear the inevitable rebounds. He also needs a d-corps in front of him that won't let opposing forwards camp out in his crease. No goalie can stop the puck when he's screened and can't see the damned rubber.

The problem with Anaheim is, they were esentially our match-up from Hell. They've got the size and speed up front to outmuscle and outposition our d-men and they pounce on those rebounds like there's no tomorrow. The Sharks' offence present similar problems, but their back-end is more susceptible to the Twins cycle and opportunistic play by our other forwards on the counterattack against the flow of play.
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
cerios
CC Veteran
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:43 am

Post by cerios »

Um. No.

Scoring two or less goals 10 times and being shutout three times in the playoffs killed us.

That ain't a problem with the defence.
Our lack of production is a function of 2 things, our system and our pathetic puck movement at the back end. The NHL where forwards are for offence and defencemen are for defence went out with Bobby Orr.
Well, he's played for two seasons now in the NHL. Which is more than can be said for Koltsov.
Yes hes had 2 seasons in the NHL because hes willing to work for 1/5th the price koltsov is getting paid right now. There is simply no comparision between these two players, one has talent the other doesn't.
Wow, thanks for participating Mr. Bowman. Wink
Your opinion of my egotism is kind of irrelevant, as it doesn't change the fact that I am right a hell of allot more often then central scouting.
Well, Hockey's Futures rated him a an 8.0D as of March 22, which puts him behind Edler and Bourdon. And that took me all of 20 seconds to look up . . .

So, wrong again.
Oh please thats the exact same page that was up in 2004, not a single word has changed, hell they haven't even updated his stats for the last 3 years. It should also be noted that the same site has Bourdon listed as an 8.0B, and Krajicek has a rating of 7.0B. And while Bourdon and Krajicek have failed to make any significant progress the same can't be said for koltsov.
What he grew??? He's no longer 5' 11" in skates?

The guy's a midget. Leave him out for a couple of shifts with Getzlaf, Penner and Perry and he'll wind up in the hospital. Size matters in the NHL. Especially on defence. And this boy just doesn't have it.

He's also undisciplined as hell. That hasn't changed either.
Ok people have to get over this, of course size matters, but it doesn't matter any more then mobility. Our current defence is big, see how well it served us? Why can't people seem to learn? The huge mean defencemen who can't skate is worthless in this NHL. Defencemen like Willy are a thousand times more valuable because they are both tough and reasonably mobile.
http://www.russianprospects.com/public/ ... yer_id=220

Sorta says it all right there. Don't it?
Since you seem to put some stock in that page I will just post another section of the page.
2002-03: Kiril Koltsov remained one of Avangard’s top defensemen throughout the 2002-03 season. He routinely contributed on offense and hardly ever made defensive errors.
He was a +21 this year, obviously a horrible defensive player.
Are you seriously suggesting that this year's squad would have been successful playing Crow's shinny-style chance-swapping hockey???

I'm sorry. Crow's style is only successful with a WCE in its prime or a Forsberg/Sakic combo.

Look at the King's record this season for how it fairs when played by mere mortals.
Are you seriously comparing a team playing crows style with Luongo in net to one playing it with CLOUTIER in net? And your suggesting that I don't know hockey? The Canucks will never win anything playing this system.
Well, it has been almost 11 months since I last publicly asked Dave a question about Kirill, so his views may have evolved over that time. But, for the record, as of last summer DN's verbatim response was:

"Koltsov creates a chance every time he’s on the ice, whether it’s for you or against you is the only question."

At that time, in Dave's view, Krajicek, Bieska and Bourdon were all vastly ahead of Koltsov in terms of NHL readiness.
Please don't lie, I really don't want to go hunting down these kind of retarded quotes in the future. The statement made by Nonis is nearly half a decade old, at the time of that quote Krajicek and Bourdon WEREN'T EVEN IN THE ORGANIZATION and Bieksa wasn't even a minor blip on any radar.
Is Luongo REALLY that DAMN good?.......to the point where he could save the Canucks from the (numerous) defensive breakdowns that would occur (and to be honest - we saw a shitload in this year's playoffs.....even under the Canucks' "defense first" system).
Yes Luongo is that good, he is the best goaltender in the league and the Canucks would have been as good as any team in the last decade with him in net. There is little diference between what Roy did for Colorodo and what Luongo would have done for us. I still don't think people realize just how bad Cloutier was, which kind of makes me chuckle, I hear people saying how bad he is in LA, and how he wasn't that bad when he was here. Reality check, he was that bad when he was here the Canucks just had a greatly underrated defence.
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

cerios wrote: Ok people have to get over this, of course size matters, but it doesn't matter any more then mobility.
By "people" I suppose you mean all of the NHL's general managers and coaches?

After all, if size actually didn't matter any more than mobility then it would stand to reason that the NHL's "successful" teams would have blueline corps comprised of at least an equal number of smaller, quick-footed puck handling defencemen as leviathans. But, then exactly how many NHL Stanley Cup finalists this year had defence corps. composed predominantly of speedy five foot midgets?

Oh yeah, none.

Ducks have . . . nobody under six foot.
Sens have . . . nobody under six foot.

The facts don't support your assertions in any way.
cerios wrote: Defencemen like Willy are a thousand times more valuable because they are both tough and reasonably mobile.
Waitasecond. I though you said our d-men were "old and slow". Your tune seems to be changing . . . ;)

But perhaps you are suggesting that Mitchell is our most mobile defender? :lol:
cerios wrote: Since you seem to put some stock in that page I will just post another section of the page.
Actually, I wasn't putting stock in the page so much as I was putting stock in the opinion of Russia's team coach at these last World Championships, Vyacheslav Bykov. Somehow I trust his opinions on Russian talent a tad more than yours. And to Bykov's mind, as was reported in the Russian press and cited in my earlier post, Koltsov was a clear defensive liability and ranks behind such household names on defence as Vitaly Atyushov, Alexei Emelin, Denis Grebeshkov, Lokomotiv Yaroslavl, Maxim Kondratiev, Lada Togliatti, Ilya Nikulin and Vitali Proshkin.

It's a little hard to be taken seriously when you sanctimoniously hold out Koltsov as "the best defenceman in the world outside of the NHL" after he had been cut from Russia's World Championship team in favour of eight - count 'em, eight - non-NHLers.

Unless, of course, you're also saying you have a better grasp on Russian talent than Bykov.
cerios wrote: The Canucks will never win anything playing this system.
Sorry, but they already have.

Seven seasons with Crow: One NW Division Championship. One playoff round victory.
One season with AV: One NW Division Championship. One playoff round victory.

Given those numbers, I'll put my money on AV any day of the week.

Say, how much did you make betting on the Kings this season? Was it as much as you've made betting against the Devils since '95? ;)
cerios wrote: Please don't lie, I really don't want to go hunting down these kind of retarded quotes in the future. The statement made by Nonis is nearly half a decade old, at the time of that quote Krajicek and Bourdon WEREN'T EVEN IN THE ORGANIZATION and Bieksa wasn't even a minor blip on any radar.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I hate to break it to ya, pal. But the quote was in response to a question to DN at the 2006 State of the Franchise presentation to season ticket holders at GM Place last summer - a number of posters on this site attended along with several hundred other 'Nucks faithful. Funny, you weren't there . . .

And yes, Krajicek and Bourdon were in the organization last summer (despite your emphatic use of caps suggesting the contrary) and DN did go on at length and rather glowingly about them. And Bieska was more than a blip on the radar at that point. DN, in fact, guaranteed that night that Kev would have a roster spot come October during. (Of course, that night DN also said that Tommi Santala was the next Artem Chubarov, and we all know how well that prediction went . . .)

Mattola and I posted some rather exhaustive notes of the entire Q+A on this site that were stickey'd for a couple of months. It was probably the most detailed report on DN's presentation on the web. I'll see if I can track down a link to our notes . . . not to humiliate you in any way, of course. ;) But I have a professional obligation to respond to your rather serious allegation.
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
cerios
CC Veteran
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:43 am

Post by cerios »

After all, if size actually didn't matter any more than mobility then it would stand to reason that the NHL's "successful" teams would have blueline corps comprised of at least an equal number of smaller, quick-footed puck handling defencemen as leviathans. But, then exactly how many NHL Stanley Cup finalists this year had defence corps. composed predominantly of speedy five foot midgets?
Where did I say that size wasn't an asset? All I said was that mobility was just as important. Its somehow supposed to be surprising that the two best teams in the league have defences that are both large and mobile? In what reality?
Waitasecond. I though you said our d-men were "old and slow". Your tune seems to be changing . . . Wink

But perhaps you are suggesting that Mitchell is our most mobile defender? Laughing
Our defence as a whole is old and slow, Mitchell who is defiantly our best defender and probably our best defencemen is pretty damn mobile for a guy with his physical presence. Are you trying to suggest that Mitchell is slow? Our most agile defencemen this year was probably Bieksa, who while not slow isn't going to be competing in any contests for his puck carrying ability anytime soon.

Our Defence needs both a mobility upgrade and a toughness upgrade.
Actually, I wasn't putting stock in the page so much as I was putting stock in the opinion of Russia's team coach at these last World Championships, Vyacheslav Bykov. Somehow I trust his opinions on Russian talent a tad more than yours. And to Bykov's mind, as was reported in the Russian press and cited in my earlier post, Koltsov was a clear defensive liability and ranks behind such household names on defence as Vitaly Atyushov, Alexei Emelin, Denis Grebeshkov, Lokomotiv Yaroslavl, Maxim Kondratiev, Lada Togliatti, Ilya Nikulin and Vitali Proshkin.
Now your just showing your ignorance of russian hockey, any one of the guys on that list could have played in the NHL last year. However its irrelevent, Bykov stated before the tournament that he would be taking a veteran heavy team and that players like Koltsov were exactly what he wasn't looking for. Your also showing your ignorance since Koltsovs exclusion from the team was considered a huge snub, something akin to Yzermen not making team Canada.

Do we have any Russian posters who can provide some domestic links to Russian media on the subject?
Sorry, but they already have.

Seven seasons with Crow: One NW Division Championship. One playoff round victory.
One season with AV: One NW Division Championship. One playoff round victory.

Given those numbers, I'll put my money on AV any day of the week.
Ya your right, it was clearly the new system and AV's doing, Luongo is clearly the beneficiary of AV and not the reverse.
Say, how much did you make betting on the Kings this season? Was it as much as you've made betting against the Devils since '95? Wink
Wow you really are stuck in 95 aren't you? Its not the same league, get over it. It should also be noted that I wanted crow gone in 2005 and I was never a fan of the man. Having said that, I reiterate Crows system was just as well suited to the new NHL as AV's is. AV's other traits make him a better coach, not his system.
I hate to break it to ya, pal. But the quote was in response to a question to DN at the 2006 State of the Franchise presentation to season ticket holders at GM Place last summer - a number of posters on this site attended along with several hundred other 'Nucks faithful. Funny, you weren't there . .
No I wasn't there, as I got rid of my season tickets. I will retract my statement with an apology, however noting that I found the same quote from him in a 2003 interview concerning Koltsov.
User avatar
levelheaded
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1345
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:25 pm
Location: Toronto, but heart's in Vancouver

Post by levelheaded »

Say, how much did you make betting on the Kings this season? Was it as much as you've made betting against the Devils since '95? Wink
Wow you really are stuck in 95 aren't you? Its not the same league, get over it. It should also be noted that I wanted crow gone in 2005 and I was never a fan of the man. Having said that, I reiterate Crows system was just as well suited to the new NHL as AV's is. AV's other traits make him a better coach, not his system.[/quote]

And Edmonton trapping to within a game of winning the cup last year was what? While I admit a mid-nineties New Jersey style is no longer effective, a defensively responsible group should have a fair degree of sucess in the New NHL.
orts
CC Veteran
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 9:53 am

Post by orts »

Meerschaum wrote:And to Bykov's mind, as was reported in the Russian press and cited in my earlier post, Koltsov was a clear defensive liability and ranks behind such household names on defence as Vitaly Atyushov, Alexei Emelin, Denis Grebeshkov, Lokomotiv Yaroslavl, Maxim Kondratiev, Lada Togliatti, Ilya Nikulin and Vitali Proshkin.
More evidence of a blissful oblivousness to Russian hockey:

Lokomotiv Yaroslavl and Lada Togliatti are teams, dude :)
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

cerios wrote:Our Defence needs both a mobility upgrade and a toughness upgrade
Hey, I'm all in favour with getting bigger and faster. But Koltsov doesn't add anything meaningful on the toughness side of the equation due to his small size.

Now, Koltsov is aggressive. But, that's not necessarily a good thing if he puts himself out of position looking for the hit - which he does. Mix that undisciplined play with his small size and I'm afraid you have another Rick Rypien waiting to happen - in other words, a constantly injured player.

Once again, it ain't Kirill's offence that I have a problem with. It's his size, play in his own end, discipline concerns and total lack of NHL experience that are the issue when considering whether or not to blow $2 million plus in cap space on a totally unproven commodity.

If he were 6'3", took less dumb penalties and played better in his own end, yeah he might be worth taking a flyer on. But, even then it would be a huge risk for the cap hit, given his poor performance in the AHL and lack of experience playing against NHL caliber opponents.
cerios wrote:Our defence as a whole is old and slow, Mitchell who is defiantly our best defender and probably our best defencemen is pretty damn mobile for a guy with his physical presence. Are you trying to suggest that Mitchell is slow?
Yes, Mitchell is our best shutdown man. And, I guess he's more mobile than . . . well . . . Mattias. But when I think of Willie, toughness, solid positional play and great stickwork come to mind. Not carrying the puck up the ice.
cerios wrote:Now your just showing your ignorance of russian hockey, any one of the guys on that list could have played in the NHL last year.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Fact is GMs weren't seeking these guys out to play in the best league in the world. And there's a reason.
cerios wrote:Koltsovs exclusion from the team was considered a huge snub, something akin to Yzermen not making team Canada.
So, now on top of being "the best defenceman on the planet outside of the NHL" he's also another Yzerman???

Man, I can only hope Garth Snow shares your opinion.
cerios wrote:Ya your right, it was clearly the new system and AV's doing, Luongo is clearly the beneficiary of AV and not the reverse.
And how many playoff series did Luongo win with the Panthers and Isles?

Oh wait, those teams never made the playoffs . . . ;)

Much as I love having Roberto on the 'Nucks. He's clearly not a one-man solution. He needs a quality system in which to thrive. This year, he finally got that.
cerios wrote:I will retract my statement with an apology.
Apology accepted. Once again, I certainly hope for the benefit of the franchise that there are some GMs out there who share your undeniable enthusiasm for Koltsov instead of my skepticism.
Last edited by Meerschaum on Thu May 24, 2007 3:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
User avatar
Puck
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1096
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:40 pm
Location: Victoria, BC

Post by Puck »

Cerios,

In all honesty, where/how are you watching these prospects in order to so succesfully evaluate them? (Better than Central scouting, you said) I'm interested in where you are getting your data.
orts
CC Veteran
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 9:53 am

Post by orts »

Meerschaum wrote: Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Fact is GMs weren't seeking these guys out to play in the best league in the world. And there's a reason.
Caveat: I have no real idea of the kind of talent that actually exists in the Russian leagues these days. But I recall someone saying recently (on cbc, maybe? or here) that the NHL was not interested in having their top teams play friendlies against the top teams from European leagues because there was the possibility that they'd lose, and the NHL's reputation might suffer for it. Parity ain't just within the major North American league; players are better everywhere. Recall the recent victories of the Swiss at the Olympics and Worlds. How many NHLers are on their team?

I also have no idea whether NHL GMs were "seeking these guys out" to play in the most high-profile league in the world. But considering that you thought "Lokomotiv Yaroslavl" was a player, I can't imagine that you know either! And quiet negotiations go on all the time. Moreover, money is as likely to keep them in Russia as lack-of-talent these days. Chubarov is over in Russia, and we can't get him back, much as we miss him. If I were in their shoes -- making pretty much the same amount (or more) of money, not having to learn a new language, and not having my name purposely mangled by Don Cherry -- I'd stay too.

I'm not necessarily taking cerios's side entirely here; but I think it ought to be admitted that none of us really know what the hockey world is like in Europe (money and talent-wise), not even those of us who follow Gero's fascinating and informative blog. For some players, there may be little to choose between the Russian super league and the NHL.
User avatar
jchockey
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:46 am
Location: Vancouver, BC

Post by jchockey »

Okay, so Koltsov has talent. But he's also 5'11" and after bolting back to Russia halfway through the year with the Moose, his dedication is still in question.

You say you're a pretty good judge of talent, better than Central Scouting, which makes me wonder why you don't have a job as a scout yet. No exposure, maybe? I'm sure there are good judges of talent on the boards here who will disagree with you on Koltsov.

In terms of value, Koltsov's talent MAY be up there. But really, would any team throw a high round pick at you if they have to dedicate another $3m to get him to come to the NHL? DN already seems pretty sure of himself that he won't throw that kind of money at him.

Marc Chouinard is an established NHLer. Sure. But an established NHL regular? I don't think so. Here's a guy who's never played a full 82-game schedule, due to injuries and healthy scratches. His 74 games played with Minnesota in 05/06 was a career high, and his 30 points in that season were also a career high. Before that, the past four seasons he's only average 50 games played and 11 points. Hardly worth $1.1m a season. He had a great 05/06, and landed a million dollar contract. Him and Koltsov are in the same boat in that they've really only had one good season.

And the fact that Chouinard was picked 32nd overall is a bit strange too. Here's a player that never really excelled at the Major Junior level, but yet was picked quite high. Perhaps you can shed some light on this?
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

[quote="orts"] But considering that you thought "Lokomotiv Yaroslavl" was a player, I can't imagine that you know either! quote]

Bonus points on catching the cut and paste error! :oops: That'll teach me to try and avoid typing in those fricken nutty spellings of Russian names.

I usually travel to Russia a couple of times a year on business and no, I don't recommend it at all as a vacation destination. It's pretty much my least favorite place on earth (and I've spent time in the Sudan, Somalia and Sierra Leone). I usually take in a game or two while I'm there. I certainly haven't seen anything close to an NHL caliber of play on those trips. It also isn't anywhere near the level it was back in the old Evil Empire days when the Red Army, Dynamo Moscow and Dynamo Riga teams would routinely clock NHL teams when they came on North American tours.

The top flight Russian talent will always come to the NHL, cause they'll be paid the big bucks and - the odd Alexi Yashin aside - generally deserve those high end wages. I think the issue with quite a few of the second tier Russian players is that while they might be serviceable journeymen in the NHL, they simply ain't value propositions when you compare the bid and the ask for them in an artifically capped NHL salary structure to the . . . well, looser legal, financial and moral environment in present day Russia.

Consider Chubarov. Just a great defensive shut down guy. Strong as hell on the puck. Good in the circle. Sadly, cursed with hands of stone. I absolutely loved what this guy brought to the 'Nucks game-in-game-out. But is he a value proposition for the 'Nucks today, compared to the cash he would earn in Russia?

Of course not. You'd have to have rocks in your head to pay any third or fourth liner like him north of $2 m in a capped world.

That's really where things stand. The top players in the RSL aren't in the "gotta have 'em" category, for most NHL GMs. Instead, they're in the "for that money, not a chance. I'd rather go with the kid from Regina" category.

It isn't that they're rotten players. They're just not good value.

Such is the impact of the cap on the league.
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
randymeeks
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 535
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:43 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Post by randymeeks »

IF the Canucks had the 06/07' version of Luongo playing with the 02/03, 03/04, (or even 01/02) version of the Canucks......what would the Canucks' legacy have been?

A big reason why the Canucks lost all those years (IMO), is because the team lost all confidence in their goaltending. As result, it had a rippling effect. The nervousness/insecurity of the team lead to second-guessing on offense, while also leading to poor decision making and positional play (not to mention, that they were being out-hit and out-worked...but that's not goaltending related).

With that in mind.....I wonder.

-The Canucks HAVE Roberto Luongo right now.

-The Canucks HAVE Morrison and Naslund right now.

-The Canucks HAVE the Sedin twins right now.

If the Canucks were to get Todd Bertuzzi and Anson Carter back (at discounted prices) and go back to their old "run and gun" style of hockey,......would it work?

Is Luongo REALLY that DAMN good?.......to the point where he could save the Canucks from the (numerous) defensive breakdowns that would occur (and to be honest - we saw a shitload in this year's playoffs.....even under the Canucks' "defense first" system).


One guy at work here in Edmonton made it sound like the Canucks would have won a Cup with Luongo in the net in that era. And maybe he was right.

I was playing the what-if-the-Canucks-got-Bertuzzi-and-Carter-this-off-season game in my head. With Luongo in net, we would have some success. But would it actuall translate into any Stanley Cup success? Our defence is solid. Scoring goals wouldn't be our Achilles Heel although injuries could be a problem. Even though I don't see it happening, it would be fun to see what were to happen.
38 years without a Stanley Cup and counting.
User avatar
Jyrki21
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON
Contact:

Post by Jyrki21 »

Meerschaum wrote:I usually travel to Russia a couple of times a year on business and no, I don't recommend it at all as a vacation destination. It's pretty much my least favorite place on earth (and I've spent time in the Sudan, Somalia and Sierra Leone).
I thought you said Toronto took that title?
Image
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

Holy philosophical quandary, Batman!

That's a tough call, Jyrki.

Toronto or Magadan?

Scylla or Charybdis?

Toronto or Magadan?

Rock or hard place?

Toronto or Magadan?

Gunned down by the mob or suicidally enraged by the unjustified arrogance?

Hmmmn. Tough, tough call.

I'd honestly have to say that Russia is the worse destination from a business, financial, culinary and "life and limb" perspective. Toronto, by contrast, is more of a spiritual and hockey wasteland.

While going to Russia can endanger your skin and your wallet, going to Toronto will blacken your soul.

Waitasecond . . . you know, they might actually be the same place??? Maybe that's why Scarborough is called "Scarberia." It's some weird space time distoriton thing . . .
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
Post Reply