Jump to content

[PGT] Canucks at Wings - 02/10/24


PhillipBlunt

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Blue said:

The trade is off. But who had a rough game ? The trade is on for them. Thats how this fanbase works 

Yeah its a bit over the top for some....

there are 5 groups

1. yeah Canucks are the best regardless

2. canucks is my team and just about perfect

3. Canucks are ok, still probably could be better with some changes. 
4. Canucks need to make changes, players are not good enough, and their trades not the best. 
5. Canucks suck, doesn't matter if they are top in the NHL, they suck...

 

Luckily the vast majority is in group 2 and 3, although everytime we lose a game, a section seems to fall into group 4....

 

The 2-5 poster in Group 5 will never change. The could win the Cup, and they'd still moan about how or why.... 

And they already have their book of excuses and moans ready, should the wheels come off....

 

We are all Canucks...

(even Group 5... maybe)

Edited by spook007
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

You don't understand the finer points of reffing then. It's not a comparison to other points in the game.

I understand them I just heavily disagree with the notion that what we saw from Hughes is an infraction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Captain Kirk said:

Two game suspension for a head on head, yeah right, what a corrupt, biases, old boys school. If Reilly doesn't get a least two games then we'll know the league is fixed.

NHL player safety already preparing for the Canucks in the play offs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Seems odd that the league made such a quick decision on Zadorov’s hit. 

I thought it odd as well. But since we play another early one tmrw they announced it tonight.

 

Still BS, at least it’s only 2 games.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I like about this years team is they adjust after having a couple of bad games , so I'll reserve judgement on the last two performances.

 

You'd think after the last decade of pain that some of you would have adjusted as well to not getting too high with the highs, and low with the lows.

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dizzle said:

Two games for that???? Next thing you know they’re gonna be handing out penalty shots for light shoves…. 

We are already seeing penalties for clean hits, and players going after guys after clean hits. Things are a changing.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

We are already seeing penalties for clean hits, and players going after guys after clean hits. Things are a changing.

Time to get rid of the instagter penalties as that would clean things up again.  Marchant would be settled down more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gurn said:

Goalies get very few points, should they be getting minimum wage?

Or maybe, just maybe there is more to hockey, than points?

Things like a well balanced line up, and players that play well together?

 

Goalies don’t get paid to score goals.  So why even make some a dumb comparison?  Everyone knows players get paid based on production.  You can try and justify what Garland does versus what he gets paid, but any competent GM knows he’s overpaid.  

Edited by Elias Pettersson
  • Haha 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Blue said:

And in this game we battled back for the lead on the road with the backup goalie. 

 

And the only reason we didn't get 2 points was a piss weak call that resulted in a penalty shot. I heard the end of the game on the radio. After seeing it on the highlights, i am in total disbelief. It was a complete fucking joke. We had 2 players get flattened with a cross check in OT and those weren't called. The Rangers and there was another one. And yet they call this.

 

Which is fine i guess. But it shows that we have 3 losses that weren't on merit. So without garbage calls , our record is even better.

 

And yet this is a game that canuckfan82 and Dom are crying about. It's just unreal.

 

Oh and we don't have Saucy. When we went on our win-lose streak , it was without saucy also

Ok you stick with we lost because of garbage calls. Funny you are saying I don’t know hockey when you are blaming the refs. We were up by two and took a penalty in the offensive zone. They let this one get away. I am not going to put the blame on the refs. I am said I thought Miller and Boeser had another quiet night. So what, am I wrong? The team has not played to its staples. Tochett has even said it. So what is wrong about stating that? Stop with the we are crying when even the coach is upset about the losses.  I guess he doesn’t know hockey either. You are a comic at times. Then you have to rant to try to get people to agree with you. Are you that hard up for attention. Keep pleading your case to try to get everyone to side with you. Very comical. 

Edited by Canuckfanforlife82
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, coho8888 said:


maybe because there are some chicken littles in here that are predicting doom and gloom for the rest of the season based on two games.

 

Sort of. I think it is also the haunting of the last 5 years or so. A bit of "on no, here we go again". A couple good games will erase that. Another bad one or to will be an issue for everyone's confidence.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CanuckDownUnder said:

 

Sort of. I think it is also the haunting of the last 5 years or so. A bit of "on no, here we go again". A couple good games will erase that. Another bad one or to will be an issue for everyone's confidence.

I haven’t heard anyone say we suck again. Made up if you ask me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Goalies don’t get paid to score goals.  So why even make some a dumb comparison?  Everyone knows players get paid based on production.  You can try and justify what Garland does versus what he gets paid, but any competent GM knows he’s overpaid.  

:picard:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

:picard:

 

Garland was on the trade block last year.  His agent was even given permission to shop him around.  Nobody wanted him at $5 million.  It was reported that the Canucks would need to retain at least $1.5 million in order to trade him.  I wonder why that is?  I can’t even believe I am having a debate about whether Garland is overpaid or not…

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...