Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

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

Moderator: Referees

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Gino's Knuckle » Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:39 pm

FAN wrote:
Gino's Knuckle wrote:Okay, I guess now we can move to the semantics of determing the divergence between "not gritty enough" and "too soft". I don't know about the rest of you but what I saw in those two series evidenced an absence of heart and an absence of toughness... But whether I am right or wrong using the term "soft", the team does not have the grit or toughness to win the only trophy that actually means anything. You can argue that until you are blue in the face but the facts say otherwise.

It boggles my mind that some people get pissed off whenever they think they're in a semantics discussion (not saying you), it's as if words have no meaning but I digress...

I agree with your point that the team did not have the grit or toughness to win the only trophy that actually means anything (as they were overmatched in those departments compared to the teams that won the Cup the past two years), but you were suggesting that the Canucks were devoid of grit and toughness not just "too soft" or "not gritty enough" which is what I disagreed with. This isn't semantics. It's logic. The Boston Bruins of last year could go up against the Broad Street Bullies in their primes and not be tough enough to win. But that doesn't mean that Bruins were soft does it?


Fair enough, FAN. Maybe "semantics" is minimizing a point that is actually there. If I implied that there was no toughness on the team at all or hyperbolized same, then I will agree that, in that sense, I was/am wrong. I doubt very many would call Bieksa or Kesler soft (at minimum). I just haven't seen and don't see the team on a whole as being tough or even medium (not to say they don't have a few tough players). On a balance I see them as being a softer team. So whether one prefers "soft", "too soft" , "not gritty enough" for my purposes, those definitions are basically the same.

FAN wrote:Regardless, Canucks management had made tremendous efforts to address the grit and toughness problem.


I wouldn't say "tremendous". :D
Gino's Knuckle
CC Rookie
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:19 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby porp » Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:46 pm

Players today aren't like those 20 or 30 years ago. Even 10 years ago.

I'm sure they get end-of-season feedback from the boss, and they get training recommendations from team trainers. And many work out extensively between seasons.

I don't see Grabner improving his overall game anytime soon. Maybe a few years later in his career when his natural talent starts to fade and he has to rely on training and getting bigger.

I *think* Raymond is smart enough to know this, whether he's able to improve himself physically this summer - and more importantly, translating those physical gains into more assertive and confident game decisions... we'll see this training camp. If he isn't a dynamo out there, I'd love for this organization to drop his skinny "I'm too pretty" ass.

Full face masks - junior leagues --> NHL (no full face masks; hell, even half masks are denigrated). No, nothing to do with how certain players don't translate their success into NHL success. /sarcasm

Post-sarcasm; the Canucks might benefit from hiring several CQC special ops vet or several UFC vets to train the players to "take" cheap shots.

It feels too much like the players get cheaped, they start whining. Or they get cheaped, and continue to get cheaped. Close Quarters Combat training might help change the mindset where; someone's going to cheap you in 0.22s, if you can react in 0.20s, you'll fuck them up good without actually being offensive. ie., Daniel scratching the back of his neck, which results in his elbow being up... which just "happens" to be under the nose of someone skating up to him for a bully session.
User avatar
porp
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:15 am

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:28 pm

Gino's Knuckle wrote:I never stated that you insulted me. But your condescension isn’t appreciated.


Then you should have said that.

What you said was "keep it civil" (it was quite civil) and "Lay off the pejoratives" (there weren't any),

I dont doubt I was condencending given how terrible your over all argument has been in this thread.

My apologies on that it can be dificult to avoid at times....


Think I made it pretty clear that my discussion with respect to the team’s softness/lack of grit was in response to someone else’s commentary – that isn’t discrepant, it is just a side topic. Not sure how much more clear I can be with that. I guess we can have separate threads for every different thought, but that seems a little excessive to me.


AGAIN, these things do not exist in a vacume....

If you think they lack the grit to win in the playoffs, why the hell do you care about trading Grabner ???


And like I said, my discussion regarding the “softness” or “lack of grit” was in response to another poster. i.e. side argument. Would you see more logic were I to, as noted above, immediately start a new thread dealing with that side-topic rather than debating it in the same thread in which it was brought up?


What does this even mean?

Are you saying that because you didn't direct the argument at me that it somehow doesn't count and I cant point out the major discrepancy in your logic here?

I agree he is soft. My point was and is and will continue to be that the dimension I feel he brings is worth the trade-off on a team which is already “soft” or “not gritty enough”. You can work on the grit in other moves.


Why would a team that (your statement) "lacks the grit to win" ever consider bringing in a forward who is less gritty and produces fewer points then the forwards currently on the roster.

I'm not sure how manny times I can repeat myself here.....

Top teams do not have soft, defensively irresponsible, 32 point forwards in their top6. If they have players like that they cant wait to replace them.

Hell Chris Higgens is fantastic defensively, plays with a ton of grit, outscored Grabner by over 25%, despite playing in a less ofensive role.

Michael Grabner got 32 points last year while playing in the NYI's top 6,,,,, he simply would not have kept his spot on the roster last season so his trade was 100% moot...

With his performance last season he absolutism would have been waived, his inclusion in the Ballard trade is simply not relevant.

We would not and could not have kept him on the roster and it quite hilarious to see a poster wax poetic about our lack of grit and toughness and then moan about not keeping Grabner....


Since you didn’t seem to get it the first time, let me repost:
Gino's Knuckle wrote: Just because I think the team needs to get tougher does not equate to my requiring that every movement of the team be about toughness. I think we all understand that you can have a general movement toward something (i.e. increasing toughness), without making every move solely on the basis of that goal (i.e. making a trade that might not get you closer to that specific target but one which you feels increases your overall talent etc.). Every move a team makes is in some senses a trade-off. In my opinion keeping Grabner would have been trade-off that I would have preferred (that is not to say I wouldn’t have made other moves to compensate for toughness).


Oh I get it completely....

Patrick Kane doesn't make us tougher but if the Hawks want to send him our way I am all for it.

The problem is we aren't talking about a world class player like Kane, we are talking about Grabner who is at best a supplementary player.

If Kane were a 32 point player I would want nothing to do with him, but because he is a better offensive player then everyone not named Sedin it makes perfect seance to add him, even if you believe the team lacks toughness.

If you can add a guy who is a very clear offensive upgrade to your top6 then it makes sense, but Grabner posted worse numbers then most of our top9 forwards last seasons so again, why on earth would we add a soft player who brings less grit and less offensive production then our current players?



As for the “avoided” point, did you actually watch the beating they took from Boston? Or from LA? Maybe they weren’t “soft” but they sure as hell weren’t gritty enough.


I saw a team that played with more grit then 3 of the best western conference teams, racked up a pile of injuries, flew a gazillion miles, and just didn't have enough left against a very tough Boston team.

I was as disappointed as anyone, but at the end of the day the team killed themselves to win it all last year and they got with in an eyelash.

To claim the same group is "soft" and doesn't have what it takes to win in the playoffs is utterly ridiculous and you should be embarrassed to be a part of the fans who take that position.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Gino's Knuckle » Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:15 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Gino's Knuckle wrote:I never stated that you insulted me. But your condescension isn’t appreciated.


Then you should have said that.


I did. Check your dictionary re "pejorative".

Potatoe1 wrote:What you said was "keep it civil" (it was quite civil) and "Lay off the pejoratives" (there weren't any),

I dont doubt I was conde[s]cending given how terrible your over all argument has been in this thread.

My apologies on that it can be dificult to avoid at times....


Get off your high horse Pot. It's old and tired. Combat an argument with reason rather than contempt. You do that a lot better, and, yes, when you stick to argument rather than condescension, I'll admit you do quite well. See below:

Potatoe1 wrote:
Since you didn’t seem to get it the first time, let me repost:
Gino's Knuckle wrote: Just because I think the team needs to get tougher does not equate to my requiring that every movement of the team be about toughness. I think we all understand that you can have a general movement toward something (i.e. increasing toughness), without making every move solely on the basis of that goal (i.e. making a trade that might not get you closer to that specific target but one which you feels increases your overall talent etc.). Every move a team makes is in some senses a trade-off. In my opinion keeping Grabner would have been trade-off that I would have preferred (that is not to say I wouldn’t have made other moves to compensate for toughness).


Oh I get it completely....

Patrick Kane doesn't make us tougher but if the Hawks want to send him our way I am all for it.

The problem is we aren't talking about a world class player like Kane, we are talking about Grabner who is at best a supplementary player.

If Kane were a 32 point player I would want nothing to do with him, but because he is a better offensive player then everyone not named Sedin it makes perfect seance to add him, even if you believe the team lacks toughness.

If you can add a guy who is a very clear offensive upgrade to your top6 then it makes sense, but Grabner posted worse numbers then most of our top9 forwards last seasons so again, why on earth would we add a soft player who brings less grit and less offensive production then our current players?


Finally, something that is actually on point and addresses the real argument. I again, would argue that were Grabner playing on the Canucks with Kesler, he would not have had last season's 32 points. And if last season's 32 points are relevant so were the prior season's 33 goals. Now that pretty much outdoes anyone on the second line doesn't it? Grabner has shown that he has the ability to use his speed and hands to generate scoring. I think he can and will do so again. You clearly don't. But I hardly see that as a reason for you to get on your soap-box and claim illogical arguments because you don't agree with my premise.

Potatoe1 wrote:I saw a team that played with more grit then 3 of the best western conference teams, racked up a pile of injuries, flew a gazillion miles, and just didn't have enough left against a very tough Boston team.

I was as disappointed as anyone, but at the end of the day the team killed themselves to win it all last year and they got with in an eyelash.

To claim the same group is "soft" and doesn't have what it takes to win in the playoffs is utterly ridiculous and you should be embarrassed to be a part of the fans who take that position.


Personally, I think the injury, travel etc. argument is somewhat of a cop-out. We scored a total of 8 goals in a 7 game series. With that kind of scoring we were very lucky to make it to a game 6, let alone 7. And most importantly to this portion of the discussion, we were pummeled into the ground in the physical department.

If my argument is so ridiculous and such an embarrassment then why don't we have a cup? Oh, that's right, history is a ridiculous embarrassment.
Gino's Knuckle
CC Rookie
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:19 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Strangelove » Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:37 pm

WHY CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?!! :(
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7602
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Strangelove » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:14 pm

By the way "Gino's Knuckle" why are you not posting on your "DonCherry4PM" account?

I noticed you logged on as DonCherry4PM on Saturday, so it's not like you forgot your password.

Wottup with the sock account my man? :drink:
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7602
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby DonCherry4PM » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:29 pm

Strangelove wrote:By the way "Gino's Knuckle" why are you not posting on your "DonCherry4PM" account?

I noticed you logged on as DonCherry4PM on Saturday, so it's not like you forgot your password.

Wottup with the sock account my man? :drink:


Fair question, I hadn't been posting for so long when I came back and tried to log in I had forgotten my password. Got Brian to change it the other day (feel free to confirm with him if you don't believe my story), but already had this discussion going so figured I would keep it under the new handle until it was finished.

Lame, I know, and yet true. :mrgreen:
Last edited by DonCherry4PM on Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby wienerdog » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:37 pm

I'll add this.

I agree with RD in that I do sometimes wish we would feed transgressors their own teeth for lunch.

Keith was a good case in point - it would've been fucking nice to see someone skate up and just level him in response, but in reality, DK would've just skated away. Realistically, the best you could do is hope that one of your "grit" players returns the favour by leveling one of theirs, say, Toews in response.

Kinda like Willy did to him a few years ago, which IIRC didn't get a response from the Hawks.

Sometimes we long for Old Time Hockey, but you can't just goon the other player anymore. If he skates away, you're looking at massive suspensions for that kind of shit.

As for Gino's Knuckle's assertion that we were too soft in the Finals:

By that time, Kesler had blown out his groin, and Hamhuis made a terrible judgement call right out of the gate that took him out of the series. Those are two insanely huge disadvantages for this team.

When "grit" did show up for us, it got Rome suspended for the rest of the Final.

When "grit" showed up for them, it broke Raymond's back and punched Daniel repeatedly in the face with no calls whatsoever.

Say what you like, but these examples alone show that there were some pretty ridiculous decisions being made by the refs and the League re: what was acceptable.

If you look at what Weber did to Zetterberg this last year and what a ridiculous suspension that garnered, I'd argue it's the League that's busted, not the Canucks.

If Burrows, Kesler, Lapierre, etc. stop diving and complaining to the refs, and we add guys like Garrison and (maybe) Doan, we'll be fine moving forward IMO.
wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Strangelove » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:39 pm

DonCherry4PM wrote:
Strangelove wrote:By the way "Gino's Knuckle" why are you not posting on your "DonCherry4PM" account?

I noticed you logged on as DonCherry4PM on Saturday, so it's not like you forgot your password.

Wottup with the sock account my man? :drink:


Fair question, I hadn't been posting for so long when I came back and tried to log in I had forgotten my password. Got Brian to change it the other day (feel free to confirm with him if you don't believe my story), but already had this discussion going so figured I would keep it under the new handle until it was finished.

Lame, I know, and yet true. :mrgreen:


Fair nuff, thanks for the explanation.

And... welcome home. :D

Potatoe1 prolly wouldn't have been so condescending if he knew you were a long-timer.

Having said that, my buddy Potatoe1 actually IS better than almost everyone! :drink:
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7602
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby DonCherry4PM » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:47 pm

Strangelove wrote:And... welcome home. :D

Potatoe1 prolly wouldn't have been so condescending if he knew you were a long-timer.

Having said that, my buddy Potatoe1 actually IS better than almost everyone! :drink:


Thanks.

As for Potatoe, I would tend to agree that his arguments are usually pretty solid when he doesn't get sidetracked with contempt. :D Not to say I didn't bring a little bit of that on myself.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:49 pm

Gino's Knuckle wrote:Get off your high horse Pot. It's old and tired. Combat an argument with reason rather than contempt. You do that a lot better, and, yes, when you stick to argument rather than condescension, I'll admit you do quite well. See below:




I couldn't have been more reasonable.

You just couldn't deal with your terrible arguments being picked apart so you cried and you continue to cry.

Pot is personally attacking me. Pot is condescending. Pot is arrogant. Pot is a meanie. Blah, blah blah.

No one cares, stop crying and buck up or just stop responding.



Finally, something that is actually on point and addresses the real argument. I again, would argue that were Grabner playing on the Canucks with Kesler, he would not have had last season's 32 points.


Kesler palyed about 20 games in top form last season, he would not have been able to carry Grabner last season


Grabner has shown that he has the ability to use his speed and hands to generate scoring. I think he can and will do so again. You clearly don't.


That has nothing to do with it.....

It doesn't matter what Grabner "might" be capable of, the reality is that if you are on a cup contending team and you cant be sent down, then you have to perform well enough to keep your spot.

32 points and soft 2-way play would not have been enough to keep Grabner on the roster last season and that is why it is silly to lament his trade.

Its even more silly when you are a firm believer that the canucks need more grit, which you obviously do.


Personally, I think the injury, travel etc. argument is somewhat of a cop-out. We scored a total of 8 goals in a 7 game series. With that kind of scoring we were very lucky to make it to a game 6, let alone 7. And most importantly to this portion of the discussion, we were pummeled into the ground in the physical department.


We made 7 of the cup final.

We beat 3 great teams and best the 2 biggest and most physical teams in the west.

We went to game 7 with the most physical team in the league.

We had a shit load of injuries (way more then the Bruins).

We traveled 5x as much as the Bruins.

We led the league in hits per game during those playoffs.

5 of our best players had surgery imediatly following the playoffs.

You may be tired of the excuses but I'm pretty sick of people with no clue of how hard it is to win a cup claiming that the Canuck players who basically killed themselves to win a cup lost because they lacked heart / grit / determination....

It is utterly ridiculous.

They lost because they were injured, fatigued, and the other team played incredibly well.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby DonCherry4PM » Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:03 pm

wienerdog wrote:When "grit" did show up for us, it got Rome suspended for the rest of the Final.

When "grit" showed up for them, it broke Raymond's back and punched Daniel repeatedly in the face with no calls whatsoever.

Say what you like, but these examples alone show that there were some pretty ridiculous decisions being made by the refs and the League re: what was acceptable.

If you look at what Weber did to Zetterberg this last year and what a ridiculous suspension that garnered, I'd argue it's the League that's busted, not the Canucks.

If Burrows, Kesler, Lapierre, etc. stop diving and complaining to the refs, and we add guys like Garrison and (maybe) Doan, we'll be fine moving forward IMO.


Agreed that the reffing wasn't exactly fair across the board and I would tend to agree that the league is the issue to the extent that if calls were made in the playoffs like they were in the regular season we would have won a cup. Sadly they weren't and aren't, and IMO the league isn't going to change that anytime soon. Hence, we need to add grit and toughness.

Your examples are sadly true. Boychuck's hit should have at least garnered the attention Rome's did, but I guess that is the way the cookie crumbles. I would add injuries for the Bruins that may not have equaled the Canucks but show they were banged up - Horton, Savard (most of the year), Lucic and Krejci (the latter two with hampering but not game-precluding injuries).

I think adding Garrison and Doan (if that happens) will definitely be progress in the toughness arena, but not at all sure if such will be sufficient. Time will tell I guess.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby coco_canuck » Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:24 pm

Ah yes, the old, tired toughness debate.

As if it's a directly causal black and white situation where a bit more toughness will make all the difference.

Gillis doesn't want the team to get Bigger, Faster and Younger so they can go out and pound the Bruins, he wants a bigger team that can get to the net, win battles in the tough areas and score more dirty goals.

Seemingly unbeknownst to many, the Canucks lost to Boston, and LA this past year, because they couldn't score goals in tight games.

The main reason for that was injuries, but when your offensive horses aren't going, or aren't healthy, then you need players who can excel in playoff hockey, and at the end of day, playoff hockey comes down to scoring more goals than the other team...crazy I know.

That's why two-way forwards who can play in the tough areas are more valuable than softish and fairly one dimensional 2nd liners or tough wingers who can't contribute to the offensive flow.

So some here can keep talking about toughness and grit all they want, but at the end of the day, more than anything, this team needs big, two-way players who win puck battles, whether that be by force or tremendous stick work/instincts.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby DonCherry4PM » Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:26 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:I couldn't have been more reasonable.

You just couldn't deal with your terrible arguments being picked apart so you cried and you continue to cry.

Pot is personally attacking me. Pot is condescending. Pot is arrogant. Pot is a meanie. Blah, blah blah.

No one cares, stop crying and buck up or just stop responding.


I think the only one of those I actually stated was that you were condescending. Personally, I would think that you could make it through some message board debates without relegating to that kind of tone, but if you can't fair enough, my friend. Continue on condescending. :D

Potatoe1 wrote:
Finally, something that is actually on point and addresses the real argument. I again, would argue that were Grabner playing on the Canucks with Kesler, he would not have had last season's 32 points.


Kesler palyed about 20 games in top form last season, he would not have been able to carry Grabner last season
I think they had chemistry together i.e. they could have helped each other out rather than having Kesler "carry" him. I think his speed was an asset that Kesler was able to use.

Potatoe1 wrote:
Grabner has shown that he has the ability to use his speed and hands to generate scoring. I think he can and will do so again. You clearly don't.


That has nothing to do with it.....

It doesn't matter what Grabner "might" be capable of, the reality is that if you are on a cup contending team and you cant be sent down, then you have to perform well enough to keep your spot.

32 points and soft 2-way play would not have been enough to keep Grabner on the roster last season and that is why it is silly to lament his trade.

Its even more silly when you are a firm believer that the canucks need more grit, which you obviously do.
[/quote]

if you want to keep harping on the 32 point season I'll keep harping about the 33 goal one. And along with that standpoint (seeing him as a speedy scorer) comes the ability to take a marginal hit to grit when the increase in scoring is greater than the loss to grit (i.e. cost-benefit analysis). That is my belief. Clearly you don't agree, but your disagreement doesn't equate to my argument being silly or illogical, however much you might wish that to be the case.

Potatoe1 wrote:We made 7 of the cup final.

We beat 3 great teams and best the 2 biggest and most physical teams in the west.

We went to game 7 with the most physical team in the league.

We had a shit load of injuries (way more then the Bruins).

We traveled 5x as much as the Bruins.

We led the league in hits per game during those playoffs.

5 of our best players had surgery imediatly following the playoffs.

You may be tired of the excuses but I'm pretty sick of people with no clue of how hard it is to win a cup claiming that the Canuck players who basically killed themselves to win a cup lost because they lacked heart / grit / determination....


So where are the kings on this scale? Seeing as we only went to 5 with them.

As I already stated our going to game 7 with the Bruins was luck considering that we only scored 7 (I looked it up and my 8 was an overestimation) goals for that entire series. That compared with their 23. As noted in the above posts, the Bruins had injuries of their own.

5x as much? Is that actually documented somewhere? I know we traveled more but I didn't know it was that much.

I am not going to look up how many players usually have surgery right after a trip to the finals, but I doubt that is a significant increase.

It's not that I don't have a clue, in fact it is quite the opposite. I have seen what the teams have that win the Stanley Cup. We don't have that, as proven by our experience.
Last edited by DonCherry4PM on Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Re: Canucks Acquire David Booth & Parts + Various Rumours

Postby DonCherry4PM » Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:35 pm

coco_canuck wrote:Ah yes, the old, tired toughness debate.

As if it's a directly causal black and white situation where a bit more toughness will make all the difference.

Gillis doesn't want the team to get Bigger, Faster and Younger so they can go out and pound the Bruins, he wants a bigger team that can get to the net, win battles in the tough areas and score more dirty goals.

Seemingly unbeknownst to many, the Canucks lost to Boston, and LA this past year, because they couldn't score goals in tight games.

The main reason for that was injuries, but when your offensive horses aren't going, or aren't healthy, then you need players who can excel in playoff hockey, and at the end of day, playoff hockey comes down to scoring more goals than the other team...crazy I know.

So some here can keep talking about toughness and grit all they want, but at the end of the day, more than anything, this team needs big, two-way players who win puck battles, whether that be by force or tremendous stick work/instincts.


Coco, not sure what you inferred from my comments on toughness, but I would agree with nearly everything you said up above except that what you described to me is toughness/grittiness. Hard-nosed, grind it out, tough guys who drive/smash their way to the net and get those ugly goals and if they have skills also some pretty ones too. These same guys deliver punishment to the opposition (they may not use their fists but they hit and crash and bang).
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Lloyd Braun, Raile and 6 guests