ukcanuck wrote:This is a typical argument from you , not everything is black and white. The fact that Crosby and Malkin got hurt on a team with toughness in their lineup is not a good argument against having it on the Canucks....
And they won the Stanley cup WITH all that muscle and the Canucks wilted without that muscle....
You're just too thick UK.
I never said we shouldn't have toughness, I said it's about the right toughness. Again, you're misrepresenting the facts and trying corner me into an argument I didn't make by conjuring up a fake dichotomy.
You see why I say your shitty argumentation is flawed?
The Bruins have the right toughness because their top players like Lucic and Chara are two of the most intimidating players in the league.
If the Canucks could build a team full of big, nasty top 6 forwards and top 4 d-men I'd be all for it, but adding a tough 4th liner or a tough depth d-man does next to nothing for the toughness of a team that needs the RIGHT type of players to fullfil those roles. It's about adding impact players with toughness, and that isn't so easy to do...Kassian type trades don't come around that often and another former 1st round pick had to go the other way...it comes with a price, and it's not $1M or less for a UFA that can do that job.
Still, this does NOT stop pests or big physical players from taking runs at other teams' top players when the opportunity presents itself. Hence why I cited the Bruins and Pens' injuries despite having a lot of toughness on their respective rosters. So this whole idea that the Sedins or anyone else on the Canucks would never take a cheap-shot from the opposition if only the team was tougher, doesn't hold too much water.
ukcanuck wrote:However, the fact is we have already seen plenty of evidence that this team needs MORE old time toughness and LESS of your modern euro hockey...
Sure, whatever that means.
The Canucks are constructed a skill team, therefore adding plugs to the 4th line or bottom D pair doesn't help this team's style. If they are going to continue to play this way, as MG has stated they are, then they have to find the RIGHT type of players that FIT what this team is looking to do.
What are the right type of players for the Canucks?
Well, top 9 forwards who are tough and can be productive, tough two-way 4th liners, and imposing top 4 D-men.
Adding those types of players isn't easy.
Since the time I posted in that thread the Canucks have added a potential top 9 forward in Kassian and a big strong top 4 D in Garrison. Basically, the types of players I said the team would be and should be looking for.
ukcanuck wrote:BTW, while the prototypical powerforward, Milan Lucic not only does all the things that you say you think the Canucks could have more of in their top six, he also does the nasty shit that actually intimidates people. Like running over unsuspecting goalies and pounding the shit out of whoever dares to take issue with it and thats what the great unwashed over here are talking about...
What's your point here?