GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

This forum is to discuss game day happenings. New threads will be posted for each game.

Moderator: Referees

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:19 pm

ukcanuck wrote:I dont have the time or patience to figure out how to pull a Strangelove word eating search, but I'm fairly sure you were all against this sort of thing last season when many were arguing for a "deterrent" on the roster. but yeah, it would be nice to have a guy who can answer the bell and stand up when the cute shit starts.


Most wanted to get tougher, but few wanted to do it by adding a useless plug that was only here to fight.

edit,,

My bad, I'm the 4th guy to say this.

On a side note I thin its kind of funny that some media types are criticizing Kassian for fighting last night when he was playing well. These are the same types who cry any time someone takes a cheap shot at one of our top players.

The reality is Kassian needs to make a name for himself as a guy who can fight the tougher guys in the league. Once that happens he can start taking a pass when the Eagers of the world come calling.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby Strangelove » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:44 pm

coco_canuck wrote:Many wanted a "nuclear deterrent" regardless of his ability to actually play the game.


I don't think "many" wanted *that* good buddy. :D

Check it, early last season my buddy Clam Russel started a thread entitled "Canucks Have No Balls" :lol:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8650

Y'gotta love my buddy Clam!

Warning: There is alotta strawman-building going on early-to-mid thread.

Warning: There is alotta tongue-in-cheek-ness in dat dere thread.

Warning: The Great Strangelove rips Mike Gillis in Royaldudian fashion in dat dere thread. :shock:

Point is, ever since Bert left, pretty much EVERYONE has been screaming for a tough-as-nails power forward.

If Kassian can be That Guy, well EVERYONE will love him.

It had been a STATED goal of GMMG to add that kind of toughness to the Top 6

(as well as overall team toughness)

(without losing any skill whatsoever).

A very difficult task!

Yours truly criticized GMMG in "Canucks Have No Balls" for crappy attempts to add toughness to your Vancouver Canucks.

However yours truly has been on board with the Kassian experiment from Day One.

Now replace Volpatti and Ballard with a coupla ASSHOLES with reasonable skill and you're aces Mr G. :thumbs:

Your Vancouver Canucks have more assholes and bigger balls than they did at the same point last season imesho...
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 6910
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby Topper » Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:47 pm

Bigger, faster, younger.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:08 am

coco_canuck wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:I dont have the time or patience to figure out how to pull a Strangelove word eating search, but I'm fairly sure you were all against this sort of thing last season when many were arguing for a "deterrent" on the roster. but yeah, it would be nice to have a guy who can answer the bell and stand up when the cute shit starts.


You basically don't know what the fuck you're talking about, which is nothing new.

I would like it if you would take the time and due diligence of the good old Doc and look up what I actually said.

I've stated over and over again, what the Canucks need is a tough guy who can play, because a plug skating on the 4th line does little or nothing for a team, i.e. Eager.


I am sorry for your ego there Coco but your stand on team toughness is not really worth "due diligence" and alas, we can't go back to the old Central archives to relive your wisdom on how team toughness played into the two Chicago series when various posters were bemoaning the lack of testicular fortitude then.

but if I remember correctly you consistently argued the following

coco_canuck wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:Eager just as easily could have ended Daniel Sedin's playoffs with the hit he layed on him.


Mike Rupp, Aaron Asham, Max Talbot and Eric Goddard played on the Penguins, giving them one of the toughest, if not the toughest, bottom 6 in the NHL last season.

All that muscle and truculence didn't stop Crosby from being targeted and having his bell rung twice, putting him out for almost an entire year. Malkin took a beating, and ended up tearing his ACL on a hit that was a tad low when he was racing to the end boards to pick up a rebound.

Star players are always targets and always have to face punishment from the opposition. The big bad Bruins lost Savard and Horton to head shots despite all the muscle on their team.

Having an enforcer or a tougher line-up will not act as a deterrent in today's NHL. Since the shift from old-time hockey and the adoption of the instigator, along with the obvious increase in pace of play, star players are always targets regardless of the what sort of conceived deterrence a team may or may not have. It's been one of the big debates of the new NHL, is it right that players seem undeterred about going after stars when the rules seem to protect shit disturbers and dirty plays?

Does that mean the Canucks are tough enough as it stands? I don't think they're quite there yet. I'd like to see another tough top 6 forward and more consistent toughness from our 4th line, but if you think Daniel and Henrik will be any safer from hard hits and dirty plays with a tougher line-up, then you're in for a rude awakening.


you're going to point to this paragraph I am sure but I would question this apparent reversal (twice counting my last post)... If you are correct and none of the above matters, what difference does it make whether or not the Canucks are tough enough?
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby Rayxor » Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:39 am

Uncle dans leg wrote:Most excellent pickies! It shows exactly how bad Eager had his ass wooped

It also shows that Kassian looks a bit on the crazy side. Its one thing to have a tough guy that can play with your top lines, even better with a dash of "why so serious?"
User avatar
Rayxor
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:05 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby coco_canuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:42 am

ukcanuck wrote:
coco_canuck wrote:
Mike Rupp, Aaron Asham, Max Talbot and Eric Goddard played on the Penguins, giving them one of the toughest, if not the toughest, bottom 6 in the NHL last season.

All that muscle and truculence didn't stop Crosby from being targeted and having his bell rung twice, putting him out for almost an entire year. Malkin took a beating, and ended up tearing his ACL on a hit that was a tad low when he was racing to the end boards to pick up a rebound.

Star players are always targets and always have to face punishment from the opposition. The big bad Bruins lost Savard and Horton to head shots despite all the muscle on their team.

Having an enforcer or a tougher line-up will not act as a deterrent in today's NHL. Since the shift from old-time hockey and the adoption of the instigator, along with the obvious increase in pace of play, star players are always targets regardless of the what sort of conceived deterrence a team may or may not have. It's been one of the big debates of the new NHL, is it right that players seem undeterred about going after stars when the rules seem to protect shit disturbers and dirty plays?

Does that mean the Canucks are tough enough as it stands? I don't think they're quite there yet. I'd like to see another tough top 6 forward and more consistent toughness from our 4th line, but if you think Daniel and Henrik will be any safer from hard hits and dirty plays with a tougher line-up, then you're in for a rude awakening.


you're going to point to this paragraph I am sure but I would question this apparent reversal (twice counting my last post)... If you are correct and none of the above matters, what difference does it make whether or not the Canucks are tough enough?


Umm where is a reversal?

Surely you understand the difference between players like Cooke, Torres etc. taking runs at anyone on the opposition and getting space on the ice because a big power forward demands attention and draws an extra defender when he goes to the tough areas.

As I said, you will not magically make cheap shots disappear, but you can add the necessary toughness that plays well in the tough areas and opens space elsewhere.

But since I have to explain this to you, it proves my case that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about for the most part.

That's the only point that you can even remotely tie to reversal, and that wasn't even the case. I stand by every word in that post, and nothing there contradicts what I said about Kassian with the Twins.

Saying the Twins finally have a big winger that makes the opposition think doesn't mean I'm saying they are immune to cheap shots.

You said that I was against having tough guys on the team but clearly I never said such a thing, I made a distinction between the type of player this team needs and the relative importance of toughness comes after the ability to actually play.

So that lazy, shitty accusatory post you threw out just like those bizarre socio-economic accusations at those who disagreed with your lunacy, had no basis in fact, and then you wonder why I put you in your place?

This is a common form of argumentation from you, stringing together assumptions that you've done little to no work on understanding. Your style is accusatory with sparse evidence to back your assertions. It's really funny that you try to present this academic left-wing persona, but your form of argumentation is hilariously flawed and just down right terrible.

Time after time you've proven that you speak before thinking, so I would suggest you try to refrain from being the board clown on such a regular basis

Nice try though.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:33 am

coco_canuck wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:
coco_canuck wrote:
Mike Rupp, Aaron Asham, Max Talbot and Eric Goddard played on the Penguins, giving them one of the toughest, if not the toughest, bottom 6 in the NHL last season.

All that muscle and truculence didn't stop Crosby from being targeted and having his bell rung twice, putting him out for almost an entire year. Malkin took a beating, and ended up tearing his ACL on a hit that was a tad low when he was racing to the end boards to pick up a rebound.

Star players are always targets and always have to face punishment from the opposition. The big bad Bruins lost Savard and Horton to head shots despite all the muscle on their team.

Having an enforcer or a tougher line-up will not act as a deterrent in today's NHL. Since the shift from old-time hockey and the adoption of the instigator, along with the obvious increase in pace of play, star players are always targets regardless of the what sort of conceived deterrence a team may or may not have. It's been one of the big debates of the new NHL, is it right that players seem undeterred about going after stars when the rules seem to protect shit disturbers and dirty plays?

Does that mean the Canucks are tough enough as it stands? I don't think they're quite there yet. I'd like to see another tough top 6 forward and more consistent toughness from our 4th line, but if you think Daniel and Henrik will be any safer from hard hits and dirty plays with a tougher line-up, then you're in for a rude awakening.


you're going to point to this paragraph I am sure but I would question this apparent reversal (twice counting my last post)... If you are correct and none of the above matters, what difference does it make whether or not the Canucks are tough enough?


Umm where is a reversal?

Surely you understand the difference between players like Cooke, Torres etc. taking runs at anyone on the opposition and getting space on the ice because a big power forward demands attention and draws an extra defender when he goes to the tough areas.


Oh I understand the difference, but the power forward drawing extra coverage is not what Kassian did in engaging Eager, it was an "old time Eddie Shore" play that was a throwback to what you have kept trying to sell as archaic and that's the point right there.


As I said, you will not magically make cheap shots disappear, but you can add the necessary toughness that plays well in the tough areas and opens space elsewhere.


At some point, when a Marchand or Cooke is out of control and rabbit punching your star players in a game six of a Stanley cup final it would be nice to have a guy who can finish what got started and the Canucks gave been sorely lacking in his regard and you have argued against that since the first loss against Chicago three or four seasons ago.

But since I have to explain this to you, it proves my case that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about for the most part.

That's the only point that you can even remotely tie to reversal, and that wasn't even the case. I stand by every word in that post, and nothing there contradicts what I said about Kassian with the Twins.

Saying the Twins finally have a big winger that makes the opposition think doesn't mean I'm saying they are immune to cheap shots.

You said that I was against having tough guys on the team but clearly I never said such a thing, I made a distinction between the type of player this team needs and the relative importance of toughness comes after the ability to actually play.

So that lazy, shitty accusatory post you threw out just like those bizarre socio-economic accusations at those who disagreed with your lunacy, had no basis in fact, and then you wonder why I put you in your place?

This is a common form of argumentation from you, stringing together assumptions that you've done little to no work on understanding. Your style is accusatory with sparse evidence to back your assertions. It's really funny that you try to present this academic left-wing persona, but your form of argumentation is hilariously flawed and just down right terrible.

Time after time you've proven that you speak before thinking, so I would suggest you try to refrain from being the board clown on such a regular basis

Nice try though.

Laugh out loud you are nothing if not predictable... How did I know your response would be to attack me on a personal level?

That is your M.O there Coco, can you say Ad Hominem?

If you are going to attack me, why not come with the truth....
It's got nothing to so with my intelligence or ability to construct a argument
my crime is I have the bad manners to argue with you.

Egomaniac.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby coco_canuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:49 am

ukcanuck wrote:Oh I understand the difference, but the power forward drawing extra coverage is not what Kassian did in engaging Eager, it was an "old time Eddie Shore" play that was a throwback to what you have kept trying to sell as archaic and that's the point right there.


Wow, woosh!

This is what I said:

As he continues to develop, Kassian's linemates will begin to get more and more room on the ice. This bodes well for the Sedins as they get older.


I said as Kassian develops, I didn't say he will create space by fighting...it's about evolving into a forceful player.

ukcanuck wrote:At some point, when a Marchand or Cooke is out of control and rabbit punching your star players in a game six of a Stanley cup final it would be nice to have a guy who can finish what got started and the Canucks gave been sorely lacking in his regard and you have argued against that since the first loss against Chicago three or four seasons ago.


Are you trying to be thick?

I said having a plug 4th liner who can do nothing but fight wouldn't even fucking dress in the playoffs...do you remember Hordi sitting on his ass that series?

One plug 4th liner who can "finish what got started" does sweet fuck all for team toughness, but sure, continue that argument.

ukcanuck wrote:That is your M.O there Coco, can you say Ad Hominem?

If you are going to attack me, why not come with the truth....
It's got nothing to so with my intelligence or ability to construct a argument
my crime is I have the bad manners to argue with you.

Egomaniac.


I respond in kind UK, you continually throw accusations at other posters without backing it up, that's a shitty form of argumentation. I call you an idiot straight up instead of cloaking it in disingenuous qualifications.

When you throw a passive aggressive post, as you're prone to do, saying I'm contradicting myself, thus questioning the integrity of my post, expect to be called an idiot if you're wrong, which you are.

It's nothing to do with bad manners. It's your flawed argumentation and accusations based in piss-poor assumptions. But since you're clearly not intelligent enough to see this I understand why you think it's all about bad manners.

Like I've said repeatedly, you really don't know what you're talking about, and you don't have the slightest clue in crafting a cogent argument.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:58 am

coco_canuck wrote:
Mike Rupp, Aaron Asham, Max Talbot and Eric Goddard played on the Penguins, giving them one of the toughest, if not the toughest, bottom 6 in the NHL last season.

All that muscle and truculence didn't stop Crosby from being targeted and having his bell rung twice, putting him out for almost an entire year. Malkin took a beating, and ended up tearing his ACL on a hit that was a tad low when he was racing to the end boards to pick up a rebound.


No one has ever said that having an Mike Rupp, Aaron Asham, Max Talbot and Eric Goddard would guarantee that the Sedins won't get hurt, but it helps and having players like these on your roster might just have made a difference in the last four playoffs...

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....

Star players are always targets and always have to face punishment from the opposition. The big bad Bruins lost Savard and Horton to head shots despite all the muscle on their team.

And they won the Stanley cup WITH all that muscle and the Canucks wilted without that muscle....

Having an enforcer or a tougher line-up will not act as a deterrent in today's NHL. Since the shift from old-time hockey and the adoption of the instigator, along with the obvious increase in pace of play, star players are always targets regardless of the what sort of conceived deterrence a team may or may not have. It's been one of the big debates of the new NHL, is it right that players seem undeterred about going after stars when the rules seem to protect shit disturbers and dirty plays?

Stars have always been targets and always will and we know from experience NOT trying to protect them WILL lead to their either being injured or effectiveness countered...this is beyond question in the case of the Canucks. when left unprotected the Sedins have been silenced every time it has counted...

Does that mean the Canucks are tough enough as it stands? I don't think they're quite there yet. I'd like to see another tough top 6 forward and more consistent toughness from our 4th line, but if you think Daniel and Henrik will be any safer from hard hits and dirty plays with a tougher line-up, then you're in for a rude awakening.[/quote]

I guess I'm in for a rude response from you at the very least :)

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...

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...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:14 pm

ukcanuck wrote:
coco_canuck wrote:
Other than fucking up the face of a noted NHL tough guy, albeit one with laughable sense, it pretty much tells the rest of the conference that the Canucks have a forward who can play on the top two lines and answer the bell with the opposition's toughest player.

As he continues to develop, Kassian's linemates will begin to get more and more room on the ice. This bodes well for the Sedins as they get older.

I dont have the time or patience to figure out how to pull a Strangelove word eating search, but I'm fairly sure you were all against this sort of thing last season when many were arguing for a "deterrent" on the roster. but yeah, it would be nice to have a guy who can answer the bell and stand up when the cute shit starts.


Yeah you said "As he continues to develop, Kassian's linemates will begin to get more and more room on the ice. This bodes well for the Sedins as they get older." And I agree with that.

But you also said "Canucks have a forward who can play on the top two lines and answer the bell with the opposition's toughest player."

This flies in the face of your previous arguments against deterrence!

Yes you also point out that its in the top six, meaning NOT a goon who won't make a playoff lineup, but if you got off your high horse and read what people who have argued with you over the last four years have been saying, you would see that no one is actually suggesting we go get Dave Semenko out retirement.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby coco_canuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:26 pm

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....


:lol:

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?
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby coco_canuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:33 pm

ukcanuck wrote:But you also said "Canucks have a forward who can play on the top two lines and answer the bell with the opposition's toughest player."

This flies in the face of your previous arguments against deterrence!


Uh, no it doesn't. Again, you with your assumptions in tying things together.

It simply means the Canucks have a potential top 6-9 winger who can play and fight the other team's tough guy when emotions get high. When a player like that roams the ice, the other teams tough guys are more likely to challenge and go after someone like Kassian. The aggressiveness would still be there, but an enforcer who can't play many minutes is mostly ignored.

Get the difference?

Doesn't mean it's a nuclear deterrent, it means the Canucks have a player who can take care of the physical part of the game while still playing significant minutes. Thus a more impact player.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby vic » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:41 pm

Magnus Paajarvi will get into the lineup Tuesday in place of Ben Eager, whose eye is swollen following a fight during Sunday's game against Vancouver.


http://www.rotoworld.com/content/player ... 686&spln=1

:thumbs:
User avatar
vic
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:29 pm

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:21 pm

coco_canuck wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:But you also said "Canucks have a forward who can play on the top two lines and answer the bell with the opposition's toughest player."

This flies in the face of your previous arguments against deterrence!


Uh, no it doesn't. Again, you with your assumptions in tying things together.

It simply means the Canucks have a potential top 6-9 winger who can play and fight the other team's tough guy when emotions get high. When a player like that roams the ice, the other teams tough guys are more likely to challenge and go after someone like Kassian. The aggressiveness would still be there, but an enforcer who can't play many minutes is mostly ignored.

Get the difference?

Doesn't mean it's a nuclear deterrent, it means the Canucks have a player who can take care of the physical part of the game while still playing significant minutes. Thus a more impact player.


Uh, yes it does, you're on record as saying deterrence doesn't work. It doesn't protect the star players as the examples you gave are supposed to highlight.

You have in the past said that the extracurriculars draw unwanted penalties and that many cheap shot artists won't answer the bell anyway etc.

You've said also that old time hockey is no longer effective as the rules have changed things.

I'm not stretching to link these statements together to come up with the impression that you would not find Kassians display of old time hockey effective, yet here you are saying that its nice to see ( in addition to the obvious add on that having a Kassian develop into a prototypical power forward would be great)

But here is where you are wrong.

First and foremost, the more things change the more they stay the same.
hockey is a blood sport and intimidation ALWAYS works.

Old time hockey was about Finishing fights, preemptive strikes and "nuclear deterrence" it never meant having a meathead in the line up alone.

The rule changes have stopped the clown show bench clearing brawls but team toughness is still the same animal.

Secondly, I am not nor have I ever put forward an argument for a singular goon sitting in the bench with the express purpose of getting even and basically no one on here has done that.

However whenever anyone has posted a desire for players capable of the toughness that kassian displayed in dropping the gloves, you continually fall back on the same tired accusation "we don't need a fourth line plug or goon and your an idiot for suggesting it"

However that is NOT what people who disagree with you have been saying and its you who make assumptions and try to pin an erroneous argument on them and then deride them for it.

So here it is, the Chicago Blackhawks wrote the book on how to defeat the Canucks skill and since then every team we have faced has tried the same thing and until Gillis finds that old time ingredient to get in the line up the opposition will continue to find success when the chips are down.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: GDT Jan 20 - Canucks vs Oilers 6PM PST Sportsnet

Postby rats19 » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:26 pm

I just want to say to coco and Uk.. you both realize the argument you are having is ridiculously close to be the same argument ...Dont get me wrong I love to watch good old time combatants have at er...its just that when they are on the same team it kind of steals a bit of the ...how u say...hutspah!!

rat :P
You are who you hang with.....
User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4553
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over there.....

PreviousNext

Return to Game Day Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest