stawns Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 3 minutes ago, Wilbur said: I don't know. I don't see intent either, careless perhaps. Looks like a position battle in front of the net. I guess the DoPS really doesn't like that it was too the back of the head. Why do people think lack of intent matters? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 8 minutes ago, stawns said: Why do people think lack of intent matters? isn't that why follow through contact is allowed? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket-68 Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 (edited) 49 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said: A bit surprised at the fine as this kind of stuff does happen unpenalized and doesn't attract discipline through fines. I guess the league has its eye on Hoglander - I can see argument for it being irresponsible handling of the stick but again, that kind of stuff happens often. I assume they're reading intent into this. I would counter argue that there is a sliding scale and on one end are the Canucks and the other is Bettman with "TO, Rangers and next highest bidder" up his ass (recolving door). All kidding aside, Canucks just have to beat everyone (boogie man or imagined) and sip from Lord Stanley's cup. We can bitch about refs, Bettnan, the Aztec Calendar but at end of day team on ice will overcome all. Will our team overcome a bad call game 7 SCF OT that results in a loss, of course not. What are we even doing in a game 7 leaving it up to Beaver!!!!! GAME 7 F-NG KILL THEM IN FIRST PERIOD!!!!! However, overall we are on the same wheel as the rest of the teams. Will the best team win, no (hello 2011) but the team that overcomes all will. If Aquaman truly believed the league was skewed against him and his $1B investment, the brick he would shit along with the 25+ other owners that aren't up Bettman's ass would be Pay-Per-View worthy. Edited February 16 by Rocket-68 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 32 minutes ago, stawns said: Listening to some people talk about Myers is like listening to conservative nutjobs talk about Taylor Swift I don't think its weird to worry about a 34 year old dman declining, is it? isn't that your concern with Millers contract? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 15 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I don't think its weird to worry about a 34 year old dman declining, is it? isn't that your concern with Millers contract? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honkin Hronek Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Stupid question, with how well Juulsen's playing, should we consider going 11-7 and keep him playing for PK duties and defensive matchups? Hog - Lindholm - Petey Suter - Miller - Boeser Dak - Blueger - Garland Mikheyev - Aman Hughes - Hronek Soucy - Myers Zadorov - Cole Juulsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Kirk Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, ManbeastMARK said: It's from his high-stick in the game in Detroit. I'd assume whoever high-sticked Hoglander last night will probably receive the same. This needs to be pinned !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 32 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I don't think its weird to worry about a 34 year old dman declining, is it? isn't that your concern with Millers contract? It's not weird, but the context ain't the same. Myers is a pending UFA who can be walked away from or potentially extended on a short-term basis for less than he's making whereas Miller will be making 8M til he's in his age 36-37 season unless he's bought out or traded. The Miller contract is set in stone whereas Myer's future is very much up in the air. Myers, at present, is showing that he can still contribute though, and his contributions aren't tethered to offense the way much of Miller's contribution is. As a defenseman the expectations are different, you want offense from your D but his primary job is to help the Canucks defend and he's done a better job of that this season under Tochett. If the Canucks decide they want to go a different route going forward they can simply opt out of negotiating with Myers at the end of the season. The concern regarding Miller is how his long-term deal will age, Myers is at the end of his long-term deal. How Myers will age in regards to any extension is anyone's guess, but until he's actually got an extension with the Canucks it's not really a factor is it? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManbeastMARK Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 14 minutes ago, Captain Kirk said: This needs to be pinned !!! I was wrong actually. It's from last night's game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 3 hours ago, Jaimito said: Just shoot the puck for crying out loud. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Man Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, Rip The Mesh said: It is real; Can't believe it. Just because it's Walman, I'd say that was worth every penny. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Man Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 51 minutes ago, Rip The Mesh said: Was it Moj at 3:55 asking a question about Hog? Sounds like Moj, but I don't think he ever covered Canucks in the past? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Kirk Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 3 hours ago, Jaimito said: 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 12 minutes ago, Coconuts said: It's not weird, but the context ain't the same. Myers is a pending UFA who can be walked away from or potentially extended on a short-term basis for less than he's making whereas Miller will be making 8M til he's in his age 36-37 season unless he's bought out or traded. The Miller contract is set in stone whereas Myer's future is very much up in the air. Myers, at present, is showing that he can still contribute though, and his contributions aren't tethered to offense the way much of Miller's contribution is. As a defenseman the expectations are different, you want offense from your D but his primary job is to help the Canucks defend and he's done a better job of that this season under Tochett. If the Canucks decide they want to go a different route going forward they can simply opt out of negotiating with Myers at the end of the season. The concern regarding Miller is how his long-term deal will age, Myers is at the end of his long-term deal. How Myers will age in regards to any extension is anyone's guess, but until he's actually got an extension with the Canucks it's not really a factor is it? All fair. But this is also the best we've ever seen Myers play, and it's not really close. Id be concerned about how long he can keep it going. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordekai Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 7 minutes ago, Silent Man said: Was it Moj at 3:55 asking a question about Hog? Sounds like Moj, but I don't think he ever covered Canucks in the past? Yea pretty sure is Moj. I heard him the other day as well in Tocchet's pre game interview. I guess football season is over (NFL). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 2 minutes ago, Bob Long said: All fair. But this is also the best we've ever seen Myers play, and it's not really close. Id be concerned about how long he can keep it going. That's valid, but I believe he can keep it going til the playoffs are done one way or another I've argued he could be worth retaining, but it'd have to be cheaper and a short term deal imo Both would mitigate risk and decrease expectations from him There are benefits to moving on from Myers as well 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Bob Long said: isn't that why follow through contact is allowed? no, it's because a player can't reasonably be expected to have that kind of control over their stick when it's the follow-through for a shot. Edited February 17 by tas 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EternalCanuckFan Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 (edited) 1 hour ago, stawns said: Why do people think lack of intent matters? If a player is extremely careless with their stick then I could certainly see a stronger case for a fine or even a suspension without any consideration of intent. I guess I just don't see how Hoglander's use of the stick in this situation rises to a level that requires a fine because this kind of stick contact seems to happen pretty regularly and isn't always penalized. I wouldn't defend Hoglander for being at least careless with this high stick, but that's often how high sticking penalties happen. I'm not necessarily against the handing out of a fine for this, but it's more of a question of why this infraction? I think another poster's point about this being to the back of Walman's head is probably a factor that DOPS really didn't like, but since that pretty much just seems to be speculation on our parts, it's hard to understand the standard here. If DOPS started reviewing games and handing out fines for infractions (including just for careless play), then maybe that would lead to some discernable standard and may even start to have a cumulative impact in how players manage themselves. While the fines are relatively small compared to a player's salary, if the league started to hit players with fines repeatedly then that could add up quickly. Not saying this is what I would want to see, but the lack of a discernable standard is likewise frustrating. Singling out this particular high stick by Hoglander just seems a bit odd and suggests a bit of extra attention from the league on Hoglander (e.g. maybe because of his previous slew foot on Kevin Labanc). I just speculated that maybe the league is reading intent into Hoglander's high stick (including attention because of the Griddy by Walman in the previous game) which, aside from the back of head contact, could have motivated the issuing of the fine. We might never know. Edited February 16 by EternalCanuckFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 11 minutes ago, Silent Man said: Was it Moj at 3:55 asking a question about Hog? Sounds like Moj, but I don't think he ever covered Canucks in the past? !00 percent, that is The MoJ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 9 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said: If a player is extremely careless with their stick then I could certainly see a stronger case for a fine or even a suspension without any consideration of intent. I guess I just don't see how Hoglander's use of the stick in this situation rises to a level that requires a fine because this kind of stick contact seems to happen pretty regularly and isn't always penalized. I wouldn't defend Hoglander for being at least careless with this high stick, but that's often how high sticking penalties happen. I'm not necessarily against the handing out of a fine for this, but it's more of a question of why this infraction? I think another poster's point about this being to the back of Walman's head is probably a factor that DOPS really didn't like, but since that pretty much just seems to be speculation on our parts, it's hard to understand the standard here. If DOPS started reviewing games and handing out fines for infractions (including just for careless play), then maybe that would lead to some discernable standard and may even start to have a cumulative impact in how players manage themselves. While the fines are relatively small compared to a player's salary, if the league started to hit players with fines repeatedly then that could add up quickly. Not saying this is what I would want to see, but the lack of a discernable standard is likewise frustrating. Singling out this particular high stick by Hoglander just seems a bit odd and suggests a bit of extra attention from the league on Hoglander (e.g. maybe because of his previous slew foot on Kevin Labanc). I just speculated that maybe the league is reading intent into Hoglander's high stick (including attention because of the Griddy by Walman in the previous game) which, aside from the back of head contact, could have motivated the issuing of the fine. We might never know. Intent can influence the severity of a punishment, agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 5 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said: If a player is extremely careless with their stick then I could certainly see a stronger case for a fine or even a suspension without any consideration of intent. I guess I just don't see how Hoglander's use of the stick in this situation rises to a level that requires a fine because this kind of stick contact seems to happen pretty regularly and isn't always penalized. I wouldn't defend Hoglander for being at least careless with this high stick, but that's often how high sticking penalties happen. I'm not necessarily against the handing out of a fine for this, but it's more of a question of why this infraction? I think another poster's point about this being to the back of Walman's head is probably a factor that DOPS really didn't like, but since that pretty much just seems to be speculation on our parts, it's hard to understand the standard here. If DOPS started reviewing games and handing out fines for infractions (including just for careless play), then maybe that would lead to some discernable standard and may even start to have a cumulative impact in how players manage themselves. While the fines are relatively small compared to a player's salary, if the league started to hit players with fines repeatedly then that could add up quickly. Not saying this is what I would want to see, but the lack of a discernable standard is likewise frustrating. Singling out this particular high stick by Hoglander just seems a bit odd and suggests a bit of extra attention from the league on Hoglander (e.g. maybe because of his previous slew foot on Kevin Labanc). I just speculated that maybe the league is reading intent into Hoglander's high stick (including attention because of the Griddy by Walman in the previous game) which, aside from the back of head contact, could have motivated the issuing of the fine. We might never know. Good post; Shorter players really use their arms and swing them hard back and forth even more then your standard guys to generate speed. Hoggy does very much. This stinks though because there's nothing wrong with it, IMO, and I hope the Hog doesn't let it get to him.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NucksIn50 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 24 minutes ago, Mordekai said: Yea pretty sure is Moj. I heard him the other day as well in Tocchet's pre game interview. I guess football season is over (NFL). Moj is a bandwagon media type…. Canucks are relevant so he figures it’s time to cover the team again… when I heard his voice around Christmas time I kinda rolled my eyes. I have nothing against him personally just found it funny how he alienated the team for the past 8 years lol “ hey Moj “ We are all Canucks I guess 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 2 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said: WE are hated! This one really pisses me off. I didn't expect this at all.... Canucks are becoming relevant again, and they are winning.... so now they are being targeted... Somethings never change... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googlie Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 7 hours ago, IBatch said: Yes. Myers would have to be willing to accept a lot less for the club to consider keeping him. Indeed ..... he'll have to decide if he wants his name on the cup just once, or multiple times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.