Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for?

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

Moderator: Referees

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by dr.dork »

the toucan kid wrote: I mean if you think the game is BORING, that's one thing. (Hint: do something else with your free time) But the 'mental fragility' or 'coach lost the team' stuff is really laughable from posters who should, and ordinarily do, know better.
Farhan knows better. He is the self-confirmed expert on mental fragility, and given that the first sign of mental fragility is tooting your own horn, he might have something there.

AV hasn't lost the room. And this mental fragility mumbo jumbo is a little bit silly given we just came off a 8-1-1 stretch. And if anyone hasn't noticed, those world beating Blackhawks were trounced the night before in Calgary. Plus last night was the first regulation loss at home this year.

But for the record, I still have one hand on the panic button.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

I only "tooted my own horn" because I find it interesting that many posters are saying things that I said a year and a half ago (so I have an ego, big deal? :P ). On that note, I also fessed up to things that I was wrong about but you conveniently neglected to mention that.

The 8-1-1 record is impressive, and it's also something I alluded to (i.e. the Canucks are a tremendously talented team, and will most likely finish the season about 17-30 games above .500). I just don't think the Canucks are a championship calibre team....and it has nothing to do with their talent level. I've felt this way since the 09' loss to the Hawks.

The complete PK meltdown against the Kings last year (stemming from 'blowing a lead in Game 2 against the Kings in that series....which was a result of a few bad PK' goal against), the loss of spirit against the Hawks, Luongo's post-Willie Mitchell season meltdown, etc., etc.

Where does it stop? The Canucks biggest problems, collectively, is between the ears.....and this problem is the biggest amongst our top players.
User avatar
LotusBlossom
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2460
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Metro Vancouver
Contact:

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by LotusBlossom »

Farhan Lalji wrote: Where does it stop? The Canucks biggest problems, collectively, is between the ears.....and this problem is the biggest amongst our top players.
Perhaps you'd like to send the team the name of your sports shrink? ;)
parfois, je veux juste laisser tinber un coude volant sur le monde
User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by the toucan kid »

Where does it stop? The Canucks biggest problems, collectively, is between the ears.....and this problem is the biggest amongst our top players.
The Canucks biggest problem is that it's superstar goalie isn't that anymore. The Canucks are just a team, they lose, they sometimes lose badly, but they're good, and so they will win more than either of those. You guys just get too enraptured in the game to game results, even though some of you claim boredom.
User avatar
woodhog
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:31 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by woodhog »

the toucan kid wrote: you know how meaningless a November performance is, what is this short-sighted impatience?
Yes, the results of a November game are meaningless. However, the way that a team responds to unfavourable results do mean something. When the same adverse tendencies rear their ugly heads in April it's far from meaningless. You said the same things last year early on and look what ended up happening in the playoffs. Last nights response was a sign that perhaps they can't handle adversity. They tend to fold under pressure. Chicago certainly appears to be in their heads.
If something doesn't change you can bet that the result of this season will be similar to last year.
I mean if you think the game is BORING, that's one thing. (Hint: do something else with your free time) But the 'mental fragility' or 'coach lost the team' stuff is really laughable from posters who should, and ordinarily do, know better.
A boring game I can handle (1st period last night). But for almost the entire team to just plain GIVE UP once the game was 3-0 is inexcusable. I don't blame posters for questioning the teams mental state or whether the coach has lost the team (I don't think so). These are valid questions that are usually answered over time (especially the coach question) and there should be room here for the debate. Maybe instead of calling other posters names and citing their observations as laughable you could come up with some more constructive comments and some solid arguments to support your stance.
If you find these comments and debates BORING perhaps you should do something else with your free time.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

the toucan kid wrote:
Where does it stop? The Canucks biggest problems, collectively, is between the ears.....and this problem is the biggest amongst our top players.
The Canucks biggest problem is that it's superstar goalie isn't that anymore. The Canucks are just a team, they lose, they sometimes lose badly, but they're good, and so they will win more than either of those. You guys just get too enraptured in the game to game results, even though some of you claim boredom.
Luongo plays like a superstar IF the defense are playing well. However - at Luongo's salary, more is expected (i.e. ability to bail the team out when the team is playing shitty.....his game in Toronto is an example of that).

It's not about game-to-game results.

If the Canucks had lost 7-1 to another team, I wouldn't have cared. This however, was against Chicago....at home....and so it does concern me quite a bit. Is it just coincidence? Perhaps. Were the Canucks just tired due to their Eastern roadtrip? Maybe....but Chicago was playing its 3rd game in 4th night.

I've been following sports long enough to not get "enraptured in game to game results" (as evidenced by the fact that I said the Canucks will most likely finish 17-30 games over .500 despite last night's result). I just think that there's something there....in terms of the Canucks NOT being a mentally tough team when it matters most. Talented? Yes. Championship calibre? Unfortunately, I don't think so...and it has nothing to do with their talent level.
User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by the toucan kid »

Yes, the results of a November game are meaningless. However, the way that a team responds to unfavourable results do mean something. When the same adverse tendencies rear their ugly heads in April it's far from meaningless. You said the same things last year early on and look what ended up happening in the playoffs. Last nights response was a sign that perhaps they can't handle adversity. They tend to fold under pressure. Chicago certainly appears to be in their heads.
If something doesn't change you can bet that the result of this season will be similar to last year.
Again, there's no evidence that is what happened. They have a mediocre goaltending performance (then and now) and last year had a horrible defense, and purely on skill they got blown off the ice.

As for responding, there hasn't ever been a team that doesn't get blown out. I'm sure we will both lose and win after a blow out this year. None of this means anything about April. We will probably get blown out in a long playoff run, and might lose or win the next game regardless. There's no evidence that this isn't a tightly knit core. There's no evidence that AV is a bad coach. There's no evidence there's no character on the club, in fact many of our guys have been cited for it. There's no evidence they don't work and try hard, again many are cited for it. The only answer here is that fans are petulant and pretty lame. Ta da.
A boring game I can handle (1st period last night). But for almost the entire team to just plain GIVE UP once the game was 3-0 is inexcusable.
They were still playing. These guys don't GIVE UP and that you think they do is childish. Wah Wah.
These are valid questions that are usually answered over time (especially the coach question) and there should be room here for the debate.
Well it's a free country (and I believe a free forum) so any question is valid. The question is whether it's substantial? And no one here has anything substantial to draw on but their own little pout fest.
Maybe instead of calling other posters names and citing their observations as laughable you could come up with some more constructive comments and some solid arguments to support your stance.
The only name I called them (tempered in the post with how I actually do respect most our posters) is a "lemming" that was part of the argument. It certainly wasn't meant to be provocative as an insult alone. The point there was obvious, there are no arguments to support their stances, it's just pure hogwash. You're accusing me of lacking a solid argument? How about finding one first, seriously...

I would ask you pure conjecture, not based on anything at all, is that substantial? Yes, you can voice any stance you want as a fan, but that doesn't make your view credible. This thread is the absolute lowest of sports discussion (admittedly a pretty non-serious platform anyway) and is just venting on an emotional level about disappointment. I get that to an extent. But like I said, just use this same topic every time, because everyone just makes the same tired remarks anyway.
Last edited by the toucan kid on Sun Nov 21, 2010 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by the toucan kid »

Now to Farhan :lol:

I agree with you on the laughable comment of, "coach has lost the team" (just for the record, I never said that)........but....I WAS the one who made the "mental fragility" comment and fully stand by it.
I know you didn't and I didn't say you did.
Why? Simply put - the Canucks have way too many mental issues...as has been proven time and time again. Giving up late goals, core playing not elevating their games when it matters most, stupid penalties, completel meltdowns on Penalty Killing (like we saw against LA last year), etc. etc.
All teams do that over a season. I just don't see any case. We have Ryan Kesler who was a leader on Team USA. We have Luongo who started on the Olympic forum. We have the Twins who put up bushels of points. We have our hard-luck, done-good story in Burrows. We meet every cliche of a team that is well led and sound mentally. Where is the proof of this?

As far as I can see your only argument is that Luongo might be mentality fragile because he knows his skills are going down the tubes. You want to point that out okay, but that won't explain away that physically he moves post to post like a three-wheeled Cadillac.
Unless these issues are confronted somehow, Canucks will still be a 2nd round team....at BEST....and it doesn't even matter if we're play Chicago or not. Other teams will expose these weaknesses...again.
Well you've revealed the fallacy of your argument. You think Chicago is our bogeyman. Well, what if we simply don't end up playing them, is there another team we show this apparent ritual fragility against. We swept the Blues, we beat the Kings...
Where does it stop? The Canucks biggest problems, collectively, is between the ears.....and this problem is the biggest amongst our top players.
Well I wouldn't want to repeat myself...
Luongo plays like a superstar IF the defense are playing well. However - at Luongo's salary, more is expected (i.e. ability to bail the team out when the team is playing shitty.....his game in Toronto is an example of that).
Luongo hasn't looked like a superstar in a long, long time.
If the Canucks had lost 7-1 to another team, I wouldn't have cared. This however, was against Chicago....at home....and so it does concern me quite a bit. Is it just coincidence? Perhaps. Were the Canucks just tired due to their Eastern roadtrip? Maybe....but Chicago was playing its 3rd game in 4th night.
Chicago bogeyman stuff there. Don't try to talk yourself into these things my man.
User avatar
Arachnid
CC Legend
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin
Contact:

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Arachnid »

Meh, Drama Queens 8-)
I love every move Jim Benning makes 8-)
User avatar
Tiger
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1742
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:09 pm
Contact:

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Tiger »

Dunno, but the last series of games has shown the problem again and again. Even in the games we won ( Laffs etc.) this team didn't look like a cup contender. This is not the most talented team though it could have been if MG hadn't held onto Bieksa and overpaid for " damaged goods " on D.. We got Schaeffer and Perreault as forwards instead of BMo . We got a 4 million dollar dman that isn't good enough ( ok maybe he is still recovering ) to take the #5 or 6 spot on D. We got KB screwing up on D and goaltending thats questionable. Offensively the team seems to have dried up when it comes to playing top teams .. and we can't even rebound to beat Phoenix... time for a change? 1/4 way through the season and YES the points in November count the same as the points in April .. To bad we let Willie go to the Kings and BMo go to the Flames and kept our worst problem children. Sorry , I am completely disappointed in this teams lack of consistent effort and think anyone paying to watch this crap has a right to bitch .. They were robbed !!
" If you cant beat them in the alley - you can't beat them on the ice
User avatar
woodhog
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:31 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by woodhog »

There's no evidence that this isn't a tightly knit core. There's no evidence that AV is a bad coach. There's no evidence there's no character on the club, in fact many of our guys have been cited for it. There's no evidence they don't work and try hard, again many are cited for it. The only answer here is that fans are petulant and pretty lame. Ta da.
I never said anything about them not having a tight core, AV being a bad coach, or that there's no character on the club.
The evidence that they didn't work or try hard was on your TV screen when they "played" Chicago. If you didn't see it, you weren't watching the same game that I was.
They were still playing. These guys don't GIVE UP and that you think they do is childish. Wah Wah.
They were going through the motions. They were killing time. They played with no emotion, heart or pride. If you thought that they were trying as hard as they could you must be smoking something a lot better than I have access to.

Again, calling me and or other posters names and writing "ta da" and "wah wah" doesn't win you the debate.
It makes you appear childish.
User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by the toucan kid »

Again, calling me and or other posters names and writing "ta da" and "wah wah" doesn't win you the debate.
It makes you appear childish.
Well not all jokes land well, sir. If you think I'm doing this with a dour grimace on my face you must not pay much attention when I'm trying to convey levity. I don't take this too seriously, and neither should you. Have you ever heard anyone say "Lemmings, seriously, lemmings" with a straight face?
I never said anything about them not having a tight core, AV being a bad coach, or that there's no character on the club.
The evidence that they didn't work or try hard was on your TV screen when they "played" Chicago. If you didn't see it, you weren't watching the same game that I was.
You did in fact say they fold under pressure and don't respond well. Your words. AV being a bad coach was another current in this discussion not related to you specifically.

Again though, they got beat, and beat badly, but does that mean they didn't try or they just didn't have it that night? Nobody has ever been able to play all 82 games well, the best of the best look bad probably at least 10% of the time, so what's this about "not trying" when it's just human to be fatigued from time to time? That fans go straight for the whipping post with these athletes just shows how fickle we often are as a group. I don't know if it's the jealousy that they make so much more money than us or what, but there's always a certain bitterness in fans for sure.
Larry Goodenough
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:43 am

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Larry Goodenough »

the toucan kid wrote:Hey guys, can we save this thread and just place it at the top of the thread list every time the club loses a few in a row?

Lemmings, seriously, lemmings. And it's always the same lame cliches too. You've all been through this a million times, you know how meaningless a November performance is, what is this short-sighted impatience?

I mean if you think the game is BORING, that's one thing. (Hint: do something else with your free time) But the 'mental fragility' or 'coach lost the team' stuff is really laughable from posters who should, and ordinarily do, know better.
Toucan - I couldn't agree more.

Chicago loses 7-2 the night before and Craig Simpson comments on how disturbing it was to see no push back from Chicago's top players during that game.

Then, only one game later, Chicago is still hovering at .500, but they are "dangerous as fuck."

At this point last year, this team was .500 and had 7-2 and 6-1 losses in November to Anaheim and St louis. The year before they had an 8 game losing streak in january. Yet, both years the team had 100+ points and won their division. However, after one weekend, we can definately predict this year's team is doomed?

I'm as frustrated as the next guy after this weekend, but let's find some perspective. "The coach has lost the room" is something that should be posted in the soap opera digest. The real hockey begins after the new year.
Farhan Lalji

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by Farhan Lalji »

Well just for the record, I never said that this team was doomed. Over the past few days, I have said that the Canucks will most likely finish anywhere from 17-30 games above .500 when this season is all said and done.

However....

1) I do NOT think the Canucks are a championship calibre level team....and it has nothing to do with their overall talent level. At best, I believe that the Canucks will be a 2nd round team once again...maybe even being upset in the 1st round this year. Collectively as a group, I just see a lot of mental problems amongst their core players. You reference the 8 game losing streak from two years ago. Yes - Luongo was injured, but how many times did we see the Canucks blow leads (or give up a goal in the last minute) during that losing streak? The Canucks BIGGEST problem is that they take fixate on their problems and make mountains out of mole hills. That 8 game losing streak probably started off with another team coming from behind and winning. Their PK meltdown against the Kings last year was another example. After a less-than-stellar PK effort in game 2 (which caused us to lose that game), the Canucks PK completely fell apart over the next few games....because they were still thinking about Game 2. Ditto against the Hawks (in both playoff years). In 2009 - all of those blown Canucks leads were NOT just coincidence. It was a result of fixation (i.e. Canucks blew leads in Games 1, 2, and 4, and this came to a VERY ugly ending in Game 6...where Chicago was scoring literally minutes/seconds after we took leads). We also saw the meltdown of the Canucks in last year's playoffs where the Canucks completely lost spirit after blowing the lead in Game 2.

Yes - all teams have gaffs and off games, but championship calibre teams don't display these mental and emotional breakdowns on REGULAR occassions when it matters most.

2) Chicago IS still dangerous as hell. They are a young team that is experiencing Stanley Cup hang over right now, and they'll turn it up a notch when the time comes (my prediction). We saw how seriously they take rivalries the other night. I just wish the same could be said about Vancouver.
dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Really? This is the hockey were supposed to pay cash for

Post by dr.dork »

Farhan Lalji wrote: Yes - all teams have gaffs and off games, but championship calibre teams don't display these mental and emotional breakdowns on REGULAR occassions when it matters most.
You can go check for yourself, but either last year detroit won the cup (07-08) or the year they lost in 7 to Pittsburg (08-09) they had a 10 game winless streak. It depends on whether you call 10 games a "regular occasion" or not, but I suppose you can always change your definition of that to suit your needs.

And of course Fleury was written off before he won the cup with Pittsburgh and he has been written off again.

If you define championship caliber teams as teams that have won a championship, then OF COURSE they didn't break down when it mattered most. They won an f'ing championship. But maybe they were a fragile bunch that just got it together at the right time. And if you go back through their winning season you can be assured they were not on the top of their game and giving it %110 on every shift of every game all year long. (If they did they would have been burnt out by January).
Post Reply