GDT: 14-Dec-2013 - Canucks vs. Bruins: 7:00 PM PST on CBC

[Per]

Loved Henrik's reply to to Marchand kissing his ring finger and fake lifting the Cup. Henrik turned his back and skated away without lifting a finger .... just like he did to two President's Trophies. That's showing them Hank!

I'd have pointed to my knee, then at Marchand, then skated away.

[The Brown Knight]

Loved Henrik's reply to to Marchand kissing his ring finger and fake lifting the Cup. Henrik turned his back and skated away without lifting a finger .... just like he did to two President's Trophies. That's showing them Hank!

I'd have pointed to my knee, then at Marchand, then skated away.

That would have been pretty cool.

[Per]

Great video!

[The Brown Knight]

Considering the only way Vancouver sees Boston again in a playoff series is the Finals, I don't think the example really applies, except that you really hate Marchand and it's probably because he beat you. If he would've speed-bagged Sedin and we would have won, would he even be a consideration? Nope. He beat us, and you're still butthurt about it. Your therapist can probably help you with that...

1996 is nearly 20 years, and 2 lockouts ago. Zack Kassian was 5 years old, Nathan MacKinnon was shitting in a diaper. Times have changed.

Also, in that 1996-2002 period, Colorado won 3/5 series between the two teams. Lemieux and his Avs finished off the Wings in the same game he creamed Draper, and went on to win the Cup.

Lol. You bored up there in Yellowknife Isle Nuck?

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that you were trying to troll me.

You're right that I obviously have a hate on for Marchand (for the reasons you stated), but I don't buy your stance that the Nucks don't take action towards Marchand. Who cares if we barely see him? It's pride factor. He speed bagged our top player, clipped Salo, and insulted our fans. Only a man with no balls would share the viewpoint that you have.

Wings = 3 cups during the Yzerman era. Avs = 2 cups during the Sakic era.

If we're seeing things from a Lidstrom era perspective, that's 4 cups for Detroit.

Most (all?) would agree that the Wings' dynasty was greater than the Avs'. Hell, even the New Jersey Devils dynasty from 95-03 was greater than that of the Avs.......as the Devils won 3 cups. But hey - maybe by your logic, the Devils were greater than the Wings since they defeated the Yzerman-lead Wings in the 95' finals......a sweep to boot.

Nice attempt at trolling me Yellowknife resident Isle Knuck.

[Island Nucklehead]

Lol. You bored up there in Yellowknife Isle Nuck?

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that you were trying to troll me.

You're right that I obviously have a hate on for Marchand (for the reasons you stated), but I don't buy your stance that the Nucks don't take action towards Marchand. Who cares if we barely see him? It's pride factor. He speed bagged our top player, clipped Salo, and insulted our fans. Only a man with no balls would share the viewpoint that you have.

Nice attempt at trolling me Yellowknife resident Isle Knuck.

Yep. She's cold up in these parts these days, and Surly Bobs closed down so I can't booze it with Bieksa's old man at the Canucks bar up here... your insane ramblings are all I have.

Is a man without balls really a man? I would counter that only a man with a serious inferiority complex could let a guy like Marchand win. You still don't get it.. your reaction legitimizes Marchand's actions. If you ignore him and let him fester in his own mess, his own coach comes out and tells him he's a goof. If the Canucks start going ballistic and losing their minds, he's done his job and he's under their skin. Thankfully, the Canucks are bigger men than you. They understand they lost in 2011, and nothing they do to Marchand now will change that.

[sagebrush]

Great video!

More Makaveli merriment.

[The Brown Knight]

Yep. She's cold up in these parts these days, and Surly Bobs closed down so I can't booze it with Bieksa's old man at the Canucks bar up here... your insane ramblings are all I have. .

C'mon man. I'm sure if you developed your social skills a little more, you could start up a Chinese-Checkers club with the local Iriquois.

Is a man without balls really a man?

"Whatever the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve" - Napoleon Hill.

I would counter that only a man with a serious inferiority complex could let a guy like Marchand win. You still don't get it.. your reaction legitimizes Marchand's actions. If you ignore him and let him fester in his own mess, his own coach comes out and tells him he's a goof. If the Canucks start going ballistic and losing their minds, he's done his job and he's under their skin. Thankfully, the Canucks are bigger men than you. They understand they lost in 2011, and nothing they do to Marchand now will change that.

I get what you're saying, but we also saw what the media painted the Canucks as after 2011 (I.e. Pussies that couldn't stand up for themselves). At that time, Sedin tried to take the high road with Marchand as well. Throughout the series, the Canucks stood pat while the Bruins pushed them around after the whistle......with the Canucks' expectations that the refs would penalize the Bruins for their thuggery........it didn't happen.

Ultimately - our entire team got labelled as pussies as a result of our passive stance (with the hope that the Bruins would fester in their own mess).

Maybe you're right. The Canucks perhaps are bigger men and wiser men than myself.

For better or for worse, I subscribe to the philosophy of Don Cherry (not because it's Cherry saying it, but because it just so happens that I have a similar mindset to a Don Cherry or a Bobby Clarke).

I guess to a certain extent, I can appreciate what the Canucks are trying to do...........but I can't relate to it. The 1994 Canucks......now that's a team I could relate to.

[sagebrush]

Botchford:

Did John Tortorella change the tide of the game by verbally lashing the entire team after a brutal start to the second?

It sure as hell looked that way.

But I think what matters more, is the players believe Tortorella changed the course of the game with a timeout. It could mean more than beating Boston did, or the two points they got because of it.

They have to believe in this coach, and, boy, do they ever as of now.

David Booth was asked where he’d put the rage on the Torts-O-meter.

“That was ten out of ten. It was. He was fired up and he got the guys going. We’re professionals. Sometimes you don’t need it, sometimes you do.

“That was a turning point for us and it changed the outcome of the game.”

Bieksa loved it.

“A lot of times coaches like to save timeouts for icings later in the game. But sometimes the start of the second period can be just as important.

“I don’t like timeouts called at the expected times. I thought it really sent a message. It was only 1-1. It was a good time to get everyone on the same page.”

Kassian said:

“100% it made a difference.”

[The Brown Knight]

Like I said yesterday, Torts was probably the *real* first star last night.

Also - Island Nucklehead - I'll say one more thing here:

If I'm understanding you correctly, you are saying that if a team plays with angrily and emotionally (In direct response to something that an opposing player on an opposing team did), then this will inevitably lead to self-destruction.

I disagree.

Remember how angry the Bruins were when Rome nailed Horton? (And looking back in retrospect, changed the NHL). Remember how angry the Hawks were when Torres creamed Seabrook?

In both cases, I don't think there's any doubt that both teams played better.

Maybe the Canucks aren't built like that and don't have that personality. Who knows.

However - some teams/people do play better when pissed off.

[Topper]

Remember how angry Vancouver was when Keith smoked Daniel........

[The Brown Knight]

Remember how angry Vancouver was when Keith smoked Daniel........

Yep.

However, Island Nucklehead and the Canuck players themselves didn't seem to mind too much.

"We'll just beat the Hawks where it matters most........on the ice."

Glad to see that this strategy panned out so well.

Not to mention, exemplifying to anyone following the Canucks that they were "morally and mentally" advanced than the common man, and weren't pussies in any way or form.

[Blob Mckenzie]

So you'll gladly take the biters, hair pullers and divers but Marchand is the puke. ...........ok

Didn't take you to be a flake there Blob.

While your excessive praise of Marchand is cute......if not strange.......he's having a terrible season this year. Check out his stats. Maybe he misses Tyler Seguin whispering sweet nothings into his ear at nights. Who knows?

You're willing to throw Burrows under a bus and yet here you sit praising Marchand.

Atleast Royaldude has openly admitted that he's a troll and an antagonist on here. What's your excuse?[/quote]

What are you yammering about GM ? Marchand has proven to be a clutch player. Sure he is a douchebag. So what Kesler and Burrows are too. WTF was Kesler doing amping up the crowd when he got into a fight and the linesmen saved his ass from a beating. Burrows bites people, pulls their fur and balls like a bitch on tv and says the ref doesn't like him. In all honesty I don't like any of the above mentioned players but don't be a fucking hypocrite and tell me that Marchand is any worse than Kesler or Burrows or Cooke or Ruutu or Lapierre. Wow look at that four of those pukes played here.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Remember how angry Vancouver was when Keith smoked Daniel........

Yeah i think a few players yelled at Keith. They were pissed off . They told him that was against the rules .

[The Brown Knight]

In all honesty I don't like any of the above mentioned players but don't be a fucking hypocrite and tell me that Marchand is any worse than Kesler or Burrows or Cooke or Ruutu or Lapierre.

Agreed, but by the same token, don't tell me (and other Canuck fans) that Marchand is *better* than Burrows in this regard.

Burrows too, is a well known clutch player. I'm not sure if you're trying too hard to not come across as a homer........and as result, you've swung too far too the other side of the pendulum, but I just think it's senseless to be so praiseworthy of Marchand while being so critical of Burrows and other "rats" on the Canucks. (Present and Past).

Both guys are extremely skilled. Both guys are clutch. Both guys are having sub-par seasons. And both guys are pricks to play against.

[Hockey Widow]

Gotta agree with Blob on this one. I thought what the rat did was overboard, ill timed and failed miserably in its intent. But I laughed out loud too. I think if he had stopped at just once it would have remained funny. The fact he did it again with his team down by three, when the first time didn't get a response, was in the end, just stupid.

We had and have our share of trash talkers and agitators. Love em when they play for you hate em when they don't. The rat is an effective one and one that has some skill. He brings more to the table, like Burrows. Burrows is vilified everywhere else and those that don't see him game in game out don't appreciate what else he brings to the table.

If we had won the cup instead of Boston don't ya think we would have players chirping away?