Moderator: Referees
Wouldn't take a miracle for Virtanen to end up being the better of the two.nuckster wrote:barring a frikin miracle turn-around
Consider ice time, zone starts, and quality of linemates when comparing any young player. No doubt Nylander has higher end skill, but he's been playing with way better linemates, and his PPTOI/GP is 5th on his team (1st has 10 more seconds than him).nuckster wrote:Have to say, it gets under the skin a little when I see that Nylander picked up a hat trick last night and there's ole Virtanen sitting on his 7 points in 30 plus games down on the farm in Utica. You would have to think that Benning, along with the 'Benning is genius crowd', barring a frikin miracle turn-around, will have to conclude that Virtanen is a bust and Benning really 'screwed the pooch' with his 6th over-all selection. We needed Benning to come thru with a decent selection and he bombed. There's Ehlers now (9th pick) and he has 19 goals for the Jets; Nylander with 34 points for the leaves; and Nick Ritchie with 11 goals for the Ducks.
Thing is, even if we had a relative rookie like Nylander on the club, I sincerely doubt that 'shoulda-woulda-willie D.' would have permitted him to play on the top lines anyways - Nylander would likely have toiled on the 4th line, under-produced, and then be seen as a defensive liability and be sent to the farm.
Elmer did score through when he acquired Tryamkin in the 3rd and we'll see what Boeser can deliver some day. Obviously ya win some and lose some, it just seems to be apart of the prevailing culture/history in 'canuckland' though, to be on the losing side of the ledger. Long live misery! Go Canucks go!
) and others will be competing as well. The competition on D next Fall will be interesting as well. Anyhow, it will be sink or swim for ole Jake, in next seasons training camp. We will get an idea then on how bad he wants to be a player or not, to do what is needed to keep a job the NHL. Will he be Jake The Flake, or Jake The Snake?
Not to mention a coach who is not afraid to give his players a longer leash than WIllie.Mëds wrote: No question Jake needs to get his head right. But in no universe is Virtanen getting the same opportunities as Nylander who is playing with probably the best collection of 1st and 2nd year players in the NHL.
Wouldnt it be great to be able to watch a 'run an gun' team as opposed to what we're enamoured with!? Gawd. There's been a number of games where i felt like we were being ripped right off - giving time to a product as a fan that could put us all to sleep... got better things to do with my time, hell a satisfying shit would be better than watching some of this garbage (case in point the recent game with the Coyotes where it took Burrows to register our first shit...err shot, in the second period). Seriously though, how do they expect to sell a product like that??Strangelove wrote:Wouldn't take a miracle for Virtanen to end up being the better of the two.nuckster wrote:barring a frikin miracle turn-around
Nylander is sheltered on a run-n-gun team... half his points have come on a vaunted PP.
Also doesn't backcheck and shies away from physical contact (2 concussions).
All reasons The Cock quite obviously doesn't like him.
Not saying Virtanen will turn out to be the better player
... just saying it's early, wouldn't take a "miracle".
then we finish last: 
Boy, Willie D, Trev and JB must have nightmares every night thinking... "OMG, we totally screwed ourselves."Hockey Widow wrote:Well the leaves only came clean when they hired the cock. Up until then they played the same game we did. Not many teams go about it, the deliberate tank. And it really only works when those superstar, generational type players are available. Edmonton finally got lucky with McJesus, Buffalo had to settle for Eichel. Toronto got lucky that we won three against the SoCal teams or we would have had Matthews, Winnipeg had to settle for Laine. I mean think about how close it was. If we lose those three games, which we should have
Would the Leaves be much worse off with Laine? It's been said countless times that it's not about finishing dead last and trying to lose, it's about stockpiling assets for the future. That the team is terrible just naturally leads to a higher draft position, but as important are the extra 2nd/3rd/4th round picks. If we'd been following this strategy, we might not have a Sutter or a Gudbranson (oh no!) but we'd have 8-10 more prospects in the system right now. Having those assets already in the organization comes in handy when you finally do get your McDavid/Matthews/Laine at the draft.Hockey Widow wrote:Well the leaves only came clean when they hired the cock. Up until then they played the same game we did. Not many teams go about it, the deliberate tank. And it really only works when those superstar, generational type players are available. Edmonton finally got lucky with McJesus, Buffalo had to settle for Eichel. Toronto got lucky that we won three against the SoCal teams or we would have had Matthews, Winnipeg had to settle for Laine. I mean think about how close it was. If we lose those three games, which we should have
So instead of the 6'-5" 220 lb net front presence - Gudbranson we'd have the 5'-11" 175 lb Rasmus Asplund and the 6'-0" 175lb McCann? I'll tell you what, Bubbles would be all teeth with this with all his latest rampaging about us being to soft. More AHL lifer Hunter ShrunkCarrots the better!Island Nucklehead wrote:Would the Leaves be much worse off with Laine? It's been said countless times that it's not about finishing dead last and trying to lose, it's about stockpiling assets for the future. That the team is terrible just naturally leads to a higher draft position, but as important are the extra 2nd/3rd/4th round picks. If we'd been following this strategy, we might not have a Sutter or a Gudbranson (oh no!) but we'd have 8-10 more prospects in the system right now. Having those assets already in the organization comes in handy when you finally do get your McDavid/Matthews/Laine at the draft.Hockey Widow wrote:Well the leaves only came clean when they hired the cock. Up until then they played the same game we did. Not many teams go about it, the deliberate tank. And it really only works when those superstar, generational type players are available. Edmonton finally got lucky with McJesus, Buffalo had to settle for Eichel. Toronto got lucky that we won three against the SoCal teams or we would have had Matthews, Winnipeg had to settle for Laine. I mean think about how close it was. If we lose those three games, which we should have
With our current mandate, the coach is forced to minimize mistakes, which lesses the amount of leash available to the younger players, further pissing off the fans that want some excitement. If Benning and co. were honest and said we were going to be a boring-ass hockey team with no margin for error, that needs to rely on luck and on goaltending to maybe win enough games to be within a sniff of the playoffs, you'd be hard pressed to find many folks signing up for tickets. Yet that's what we have.
What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.Island Nucklehead wrote:Would the Leaves be much worse off with Laine? It's been said countless times that it's not about finishing dead last and trying to lose, it's about stockpiling assets for the future. That the team is terrible just naturally leads to a higher draft position, but as important are the extra 2nd/3rd/4th round picks. If we'd been following this strategy, we might not have a Sutter or a Gudbranson (oh no!) but we'd have 8-10 more prospects in the system right now. Having those assets already in the organization comes in handy when you finally do get your McDavid/Matthews/Laine at the draft.Hockey Widow wrote:Well the leaves only came clean when they hired the cock. Up until then they played the same game we did. Not many teams go about it, the deliberate tank. And it really only works when those superstar, generational type players are available. Edmonton finally got lucky with McJesus, Buffalo had to settle for Eichel. Toronto got lucky that we won three against the SoCal teams or we would have had Matthews, Winnipeg had to settle for Laine. I mean think about how close it was. If we lose those three games, which we should have
With our current mandate, the coach is forced to minimize mistakes, which lesses the amount of leash available to the younger players, further pissing off the fans that want some excitement. If Benning and co. were honest and said we were going to be a boring-ass hockey team with no margin for error, that needs to rely on luck and on goaltending to maybe win enough games to be within a sniff of the playoffs, you'd be hard pressed to find many folks signing up for tickets. Yet that's what we have.
1. Who knows who Benning would have picked 33rd overall. Maybe he takes a guy like Clague, or Dube, or Raddysh.RoyalDude wrote:
So instead of the 6'-5" 220 lb net front presence - Gudbranson we'd have the 5'-11" 175 lb Rasmus Asplund and the 6'-0" 175lb McCann? I'll tell you what, Bubbles would be all teeth with this with all his latest rampaging about us being to soft. More AHL lifer Hunter ShrunkCarrots the better!
Just a heads up, after putting up 1 goal and 6 assists in 29 games with the Panthers, McCann was assigned to the AHL Feb. 1st
