When that happens, the Corner will be turned on.Cornuck wrote: The corner will be turned if the prospects turn into NHL players. Until that time, we're really all in the dark and just hoping someone turns on the light.
Competitive and/or Contending
Moderator: Referees
- Strangelove
- Moderator & MVP
- Posts: 43024
- Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
- Location: Lake Vostok
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
____
Try to focus on someday.
Try to focus on someday.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
The question of projecting has been raised, but no, I will just admit that my hockey knowledge pales before yours and I need extra guidance.Strangelove wrote:I can't help but suspect you're being purposely obtuse...
Playoff performance is not relevant ? Well, that certainly gets full points for a bold assertion.Strangelove wrote:As for "what round of the playoffs"... that is not relevant.
1) Time frame: 2018-2019 -- checkStrangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty.
(time-frame, how good the team will be, how big of a role young players will play)
2) How good the team will be:
a) good enough to make the playoffs -- well, that establishes a minimum
b) "look good" -- not so quantifiable
3) how big a role young players will play -- sorry, I seem to have missed that one. Would the Master of the Archives care to provide a link ?
Well, you have to give to get, I suppose. Here's mine:Strangelove wrote:You dogs are not going to get a more quantified prediction than this on a fucking Canucks message board.
The Canucks will win fewer than 3 playoff games in 2019, and will score fewer than 8 playoff goals.
Now, my predictions are of lesser weight than the Great Strangelove's, of course, because
1) I am not a Canuckscorner Legend
and
2) As previously admitted, my hockey knowledge pales before his
but
They are undeniably measurable.
Now please be fair. I acknowledged that your motives were pure (and, more importantly, relevant); that is, you mean to address the question of how we will assess the success of Jim Benning's rebuild. As do I.Strangelove wrote:They may accuse you of making your prediction only because you want to brag about being right one day.
If my questions annoy you, you needn't respond, but if you are going to go to the bother of responding, why not answer the questions ? Specifically, the follow-up to that statement:Strangelove wrote:In that case Cliffy, would you kindly stop nipping at my heels like some deranged chihuahua?
Ronning's Ghost wrote:....if the Canucks win zero games in the 2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs (whether because they are swept, or fail to qualify), will you, Doc, admit that Benning's rebuild effort has been less than worthy of the appellation "genius" ?
- Strangelove
- Moderator & MVP
- Posts: 43024
- Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
- Location: Lake Vostok
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Hmmm... purposely obtuse, passively aggressive, and a patently insincere praiser!Ronning's Ghost wrote:The question of projecting has been raised, but no, I will just admit that my hockey knowledge pales before yours and I need extra guidance.Strangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty.
(time-frame, how good the team will be, how big of a role young players will play)
I can't help but suspect you're being purposely obtuse...
This is quite a case!!!
Well I most certainly did indicate 'playoff performance is relevant'.Ronning's Ghost wrote:Playoff performance is not relevant ? Well, that certainly gets full points for a bold assertion.Strangelove wrote:As for "what round of the playoffs"... that is not relevant.
What is relevant is where I said:
"My Canucks will look good enough (in said playoffs) to give us all plenty of hope for the future".
("We will all be talking about how far they will go the next playoffs and how long the window will be open")
You dogs are not going to get a more quantified prediction than this on a fucking Canucks message board.
What round they make it to in their first taste of playoff action... is what I called irrelevant.
Purposely obtuse Cliffy?
2a)Ronning's Ghost wrote:1) Time frame: 2018-2019 -- checkStrangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty.
(time-frame, how good the team will be, how big of a role young players will play)
2) How good the team will be:
a) good enough to make the playoffs -- well, that establishes a minimum
b) "look good" -- not so quantifiable
3) how big a role young players will play -- sorry, I seem to have missed that one. Would the Master of the Archives care to provide a link ?
2b) How about "look good enough to get everyone on this board excited about the future"?
3) I've said it many times and I'm not on trial... try re-reading my last dozen posts in this thread.
(also it should be obvious that young players would play a huge role in any success in that timeframe)
True, but you also seemed to (twice) lend credence some of 5thhorseman's accusations.Ronning's Ghost wrote:Now please be fair. I acknowledged that your motives were pure (and, more importantly, relevant); that is, you mean to address the question of how we will assess the success of Jim Benning's rebuild. As do I.Strangelove wrote:They may accuse you of making your prediction only because you want to brag about being right one day.
Tried that.Ronning's Ghost wrote:If my questions annoy you, you needn't respond...Strangelove wrote:In that case Cliffy, would you kindly stop nipping at my heels like some deranged chihuahua?
You persisted.
And you continued to complain to others that I hadn't answered your questions to your satisfaction.
*swats Cliffy with rolled-up newspaper*
____
Try to focus on someday.
Try to focus on someday.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
I honestly, sincerely, just want to avoid any leaps of inference that could be construed as putting words in your mouth. If you spell it out, then that doesn't happen, even by accident.Strangelove wrote:Purposely obtuse Cliffy?
Well that's just setting yourself up for failure. Even if you polled everyone on this board (even though, as you [patiently] explained to me, you hate polls) about whether they were excited about the [Canucks'] future, you would need only one sourpuss holdout to fail.Strangelove wrote:But I already "quantified" plenty.
2b) How about "look good enough to get everyone on this board excited about the future"?
Some might be interested in the question of whether creating excitement in the fanbase is one of the measures of GM success, though. Not me, as it turns out, but maybe some other posters want to toss that one around.
Certainly not ! Though perhaps, feeling a little guilty ?Strangelove wrote:3) I've said it many times and I'm not on trial
I accuse you of nothing beyond refusing to give measurable answers to questions, and I acknowledge (here, again -- as before) that that is certainly your right.Strangelove wrote:They may accuse you of making your prediction only because you want to brag about being right one day.
True, but you also seemed to (twice) lend credence some of 5thhorseman's accusations.Ronning's Ghost wrote:Now please be fair. I acknowledged that your motives were pure (and, more importantly, relevant); that is, you mean to address the question of how we will assess the success of Jim Benning's rebuild. As do I.
I was not aware my questions carried such force. But as you may certainly ignore (or prevaricate upon -- whichever your preference) my questions, I may continue to ask, and to point out when we don't have answers.Strangelove wrote:Tried that.Ronning's Ghost wrote:If my questions annoy you, you needn't respond...Strangelove wrote:In that case Cliffy, would you kindly stop nipping at my heels like some deranged chihuahua?
You persisted.
And you continued to complain to others that I hadn't answered your questions to your satisfaction.
*swats Cliffy with rolled-up newspaper*
TL/DR-vulnerable poster start point:
But really, all this chasing after predictions is just overture to the real question, namely: whatever the results, how do we interpret them ? That is, what kind and degree of Canucks on-ice success will indicate that Jim Benning has done a masterful [Genius-level] job of the rebuild to that point, and what level will indicate that he has not ?
For my own part, (as previously offered), I believe that six playoff victories in 2019, of whatever sort, would indicate success. I also believe that zero playoff victories would indicate failure.
I would be interested in The Great Strangelove's more weighty opinion on the matter, but if he declines to offer it, that is, of course, his prerogative.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
By this time the prospects we have now will be at the right age with the right contracts, the vets can be UFA and they help bring in leadership.
My hope is that the Nucks pick top 5 again this year to give them the depth they need.
If you look at the stats from 10 years ago a lot more players have over a point a game, now it is only a handful. Our top point getters should be 60-80 points and we will be ok. Because I'm such an old guy I still have problems paying a lot of money to someone who only gets 50 points.
By this time the prospects we have now will be at the right age with the right contracts, the vets can be UFA and they help bring in leadership.
My hope is that the Nucks pick top 5 again this year to give them the depth they need.
If you look at the stats from 10 years ago a lot more players have over a point a game, now it is only a handful. Our top point getters should be 60-80 points and we will be ok. Because I'm such an old guy I still have problems paying a lot of money to someone who only gets 50 points.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Reef, get over the big 50 man. Your still young enough to concur whatever you want to.Reefer2 wrote:Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
By this time the prospects we have now will be at the right age with the right contracts, the vets can be UFA and they help bring in leadership.
My hope is that the Nucks pick top 5 again this year to give them the depth they need.
If you look at the stats from 10 years ago a lot more players have over a point a game, now it is only a handful. Our top point getters should be 60-80 points and we will be ok. Because I'm such an old guy I still have problems paying a lot of money to someone who only gets 50 points.
I am like so totally dun, dun, dun with hoping for shitty seasons for a top 10 pick, fuck it!
I'm going to root like hell for a playoff birth this year and the only lottery I want to hear about is the 6/49 or
Lotto Max that I am going to win...........
Damn Straight
Better chance of that, IMHO.
"evolution"
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
How about a compromise, try to make playoffs...micky107 wrote:I am like so totally dun, dun, dun with hoping for shitty seasons for a top 10 pick, fuck it!Reefer2 wrote:Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
By this time the prospects we have now will be at the right age with the right contracts, the vets can be UFA and they help bring in leadership.
My hope is that the Nucks pick top 5 again this year to give them the depth they need.
I'm going to root like hell for a playoff birth this year..
but to add to Reefer's hope to get another high pick, how about we move one dman for a 2018 1st + prospect, that way we have two 1st rounders in what should be a deeper draft next year.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Disappointing the fans another year for one--Boo, hiss....SKYO wrote:How about a compromise, try to make playoffs...micky107 wrote:I am like so totally dun, dun, dun with hoping for shitty seasons for a top 10 pick, fuck it!Reefer2 wrote:Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
By this time the prospects we have now will be at the right age with the right contracts, the vets can be UFA and they help bring in leadership.
My hope is that the Nucks pick top 5 again this year to give them the depth they need.
I'm going to root like hell for a playoff birth this year..
but to add to Reefer's hope to get another high pick, how about we move one dman for a 2018 1st + prospect, that way we have two 1st rounders in what should be a deeper draft next year.
The appropriate trade for one--
"evolution"
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
How about a top 5 pick and another 20-25 puck Skyo.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
So, serious contender in the 2020/2021 season ?Reefer2 wrote:Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
To me, "serious contender" means finishing in the top 6 in the league in regular season points and goal differential, and at least six playoff wins. What does it mean to you ?
More importantly, if the Canucks are serious contenders in the 2020/2021 season, do you think that will mean that Jim Benning has done a good job with the rebuild ? Average ? Genius-level ?
Last edited by Ronning's Ghost on Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Now Reef is agreeing with Doc's timeline.
Good grief? Reef.
Good grief? Reef.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Really Top?Topper wrote:Now Reef is agreeing with Doc's timeline.
Good grief? Reef.
You can't add?
I said after 2020 season.
SL says 1-2 seasons from now but he never clarified what he meant by it.
I on the other hand said after 2020 season they can start seriously contending. As this is 2017 and next season is 17/18 and then 18/19 and then 19/20 so not sure what school you went to my timeline is longer than 1-2 years.
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Good question RG.Ronning's Ghost wrote:So, serious contender in the 2020/2021 season ?Reefer2 wrote:Canucks will become serious contenders after the 2020 season.
To me, "serious contender" means finishing in the top 6 in the league in regular season points and goal differential, and at least six playoff wins. What does it mean to you ?
More importantly, if the Canucks are serious contenders in the 2020/2021 season, do you think will mean that Jim Benning has done a good job with the rebuild ? Average ? Genius-level ?
I do not think any team can just make the playoffs and win the cup the same year. What I expect is the team will learn how to win in the playoffs after 2020 season. Maybe a round then 2-3 rounds in 2021/22 and then who knows.
I remember when Crosby lost in their first big season, the announcer said he was young and learning how to win in the playoffs. That is what I see from the Nucks as well.
Not as quick as everyone wants but it is what it is.
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 8392
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
We might be even worse next season.
- BladesofSteel
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1852
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm
Re: Competitive and/or Contending
Unless this team endures a record number of injuries next year, I don't see them being worse than last.