[PGT] Scamalanche at Canucks

[Psycho_Path]

6 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

No, I was agreeing with you. Sorry to be unclear. I thought your posts concerning the incessant whining about referees around page 8 (plus 24 pages of tears) was spot on. I haven't posted since the Feb 17 Jets game where the usuals where crying, whining, and blaming the referees like they have never watched hockey in their lives before. It's absolutely pathetic and disgusting. A disgrace to the sport itself really and I can't in good conscience be party to it. Frankly, it's embarrassing to hockey and as a Canucks fan.

 

I couldn't imagine this group being in a bar with a bunch of fans from other teams. It would be so embarrassing.

 

I'm sure you have a wonderful time watching the canucks get screwed constantly by the refs, eh? For me it's not about whether the Canucks would win or not (we're probably better off with the refs not calling the penalties most of the time right now given how our powerplay typically performs) but moreso about a POS corrupt league fucking over a team that they don't give a shit about (Canucks). It's a joke.

[Barn Burner]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

the two folks who say they have the most experience here are @Gawdzukes and @stawns. I genuinely want to know their perspective on how we should be viewing reffing the the NHL. But so far they don't seem to want to respond 

 

 

The guy, Robb Zepp? Who use to post on CDC, definitely sounded legit. He was drafted by the Flyers and 

actually played a game in the NHL? 

 

Anyway, these punk ass bitches who seem to think they know it all, they're not anywhere near the guy

Rob portrayed. Guaranteed. 

 

That guy's insights were above and beyond anything these "know it alls" offer. If you're going to talk shit, 

back it up. Explain you're almighty wisdom and enlighten us lessor knowns. 

 

Obviously, it's not possible with this group. 

 

The one guy is an absolute antagonist, who never offers any "insight" into what he proposes would be a

real solution. No wonder the guy's got psychological problems...

[Barn Burner]

18 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

7/11 I'd try Juul's on the 4th line for some push back. And hits.

That's actually not a bad idea. Juul's is crushing it. Him on the forecheck would not be good for the opposition. 

[43isprime]

6 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I never said Petey was on the same level as MacKinnon talent wise. I said point wise he was trending higher over his first 5 seasons. I can’t help it if this factual information has triggered you.  Were you this confident on MacKinnon’s abilities when he was putting up 52 points?  
 

And yes it does matter who your linemates are. I don’t recall any superstars in my 35 years of watching hockey who won the Hart trophy who played with guys like Pius Suter and Sam Lafferty. 
 

Mikko Rantanen didn’t break out until the 2017-2018 season. That’s the same year MacKinnon finally got Hart votes. What a coincidence. 

 

You should try comparing their age 20-24 seasons (i.e., the ages at which Pettersson played his first 5 seasons save for his first month in the NHL)...not sure you'll like what you find given that two of those seasons had Mackinnon runner-up for the Hart

 

 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

12 minutes ago, Barn Burner said:

That's actually not a bad idea. Juul's is crushing it. Him on the forecheck would not be good for the opposition. 

Remember that Greenway factor we were looking for, this could help us like that.

[43isprime]

7 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I never said Petey was on the same level as MacKinnon talent wise. I said point wise he was trending higher over his first 5 seasons. I can’t help it if this factual information has triggered you.  Were you this confident on MacKinnon’s abilities when he was putting up 52 points?  
 

And yes it does matter who your linemates are. I don’t recall any superstars in my 35 years of watching hockey who won the Hart trophy who played with guys like Pius Suter and Sam Lafferty. 
 

Mikko Rantanen didn’t break out until the 2017-2018 season. That’s the same year MacKinnon finally got Hart votes. What a coincidence. 

 

I just find it funny that, while Mackinnon had established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league (quite literally) by age 25, you're trying to compare point production over their first 374 and 392 games, trying to prove I don't know what, all the while acknowledging that Pettersson is not the talent that Mackinnon is. 

 

You know one thing Mackinnon didn't have after his 374th game that Pettersson did have by his 392nd game? A massive contract slated to put him among the top-5 highest paid players in the NHL

 

Check what MacKinnon accomplished before signing his 12.6m deal, and what Pettersson had accomplished prior to signing his 11.6m deal (which I'll remind you start only one year apart, and will be only 1m apart for the next 7 years).

 

 

[Barn Burner]

15 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Remember that Greenway factor we were looking for, this could help us like that.

Yeah, and if he's going to be the odd man out when Myers is back, (God forbid! Haha! Half-kidding) then yeah, try NJ on the 4th. 

 

Nothing to lose, and the roster is unlimited in the playoffs. 

[-dlc-]

29 minutes ago, 43isprime said:

 

I just find it funny that, while Mackinnon had established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league (quite literally) by age 25, you're trying to compare point production over their first 374 and 392 games, trying to prove I don't know what, all the while acknowledging that Pettersson is not the talent that Mackinnon is. 

 

You know one thing Mackinnon didn't have after his 374th game that Pettersson did have by his 392nd game? A massive contract slated to put him among the top-5 highest paid players in the NHL

 

Check what MacKinnon accomplished before signing his 12.6m deal, and what Pettersson had accomplished prior to signing his 11.6m deal (which I'll remind you start only one year apart, and will be only 1m apart for the next 7 years).

 

 

MacKinnon fan site is that way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Coconuts]

Two days later and MacKinnon's still rustling jimmies 

[Bob Long]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Two days later and MacKinnon's still rustling jimmies 

 

its like the Butterly effect, expect its him embellishing with his glove. 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

its like the Butterly effect, expect its him embellishing with his glove. 

 

I'm a big fan of Mac, but for sure 

[43isprime]

16 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

MacKinnon fan site is that way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

 

Make fun all you want, but by demanding that much money, Pettersson has brought on the comparison to Mackinnon himself (not that the two are actually comparable in anything but salary).

 

 

[Bob Long]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

I'm a big fan of Mac, but for sure 

 

me too, thats why it was disappointing to see him pull that. But I take it as a sort of compliment, if he thinks that what he needed to do it gain an edge. 

[Bob Long]

6 minutes ago, 43isprime said:

 

Make fun all you want, but by demanding that much money, Pettersson has brought on the comparison to Mackinnon himself (not that the two are actually comparable in anything but salary).

 

 

 

but Nylander 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

me too, thats why it was disappointing to see him pull that. But I take it as a sort of compliment, if he thinks that what he needed to do it gain an edge. 

 

I get it, but I also wouldn't say it's something he's known for 

 

Guys are competitive out there, sometimes they take things too far, and get away with it

 

We've def gotten away with stuff over the years, had a rep for it at one point even

[Gawdzukes]

4 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

the two folks who say they have the most experience here are @Gawdzukes and @stawns. I genuinely want to know their perspective on how we should be viewing reffing the the NHL. But so far they don't seem to want to respond 

 

 

 

How about talking about the hockey part of hockey instead of complaining about reffing ad nauseum every time we lose a game, or even if we win? Maybe accept that it is what it is and always has been and oh, I don't know, limit yourself to 5-8 games a year where you just talk nauseatingly on and on about how we were cheated and everyone is out to get us.

 

How about realizing reffing is a constant (how long have people here been watching hockey anyway?) and you don't need to complain about it every second sentence and every single game. Water is wet, the sky is blue, and women have secrets (Norm from Cheers), and referees are human. These are things we know already and don't need repeating every second sentence. If you guys hate it so much, why even bother watching? That's the frustrating part for the rest of us.

 

Especially in an almost meaningless game 67 where the team very clearly blew it on their own and the reffing had so little to do with it. 

 

How about save all the whining and complaining for a game where it actually matters, like a playoff game, or when we're fighting for a wildcard spot? Or most importantly, and I can't stress this enough, how about save it for a game where the refereeing was actually a main culprit in the loss? Anyone complaining about the refereeing losing this game is completely out to lunch. Both of those calls in the third were actually penalties (even if the one was kind of weak it is still illegal) so the outrage and anger itself isn't even warranted. Like what the hell was Cole doing getting his stick in on Mackinnon's hands? Totally dumb.

 

We were also up 3-0 with 2 seconds left in the second and we gave up a dumb goal. No powerplay involved. We were also up 3-2 with 12 minutes left in the third and they scored ... again without any penalties. The OT goal was an automatic penalty. We got hemmed in our own zone for 2 minutes straight to start the third and took a dumb penalty when we missed an easy opportunity to clear the puck seconds earlier. Place the blame where it belongs, on the team. If you complained when the refs actually caused a loss it would be far more acceptable. Is there any time when you can just admit we lost a hockey game, and it wasn't the refs fault? This is just 100% whining for no reason at all. Like a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum in a crowded restaurant.

 

Try watching a game where Vancouver is not playing. Sit back and watch all the calls that are made, and not made without all the emotion invested. Maybe then you will begin to understand that the game is not ever reffed perfectly and it's just another facet of the game. You try not to get penalties, if you do you kill them off. That simple. No need to flip out.

Edited March 16 by Gawdzukes

[43isprime]

34 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

but Nylander 

 

In that case, hey you know Pettersson's 11.6m looks pretty good next to Huberdeau's 10.5m, AND he's in our division!

 

I'm pretty sure to win the Cup, you have to beat the best.

 

It is apt, therefore, to compare to the best.

 

I don't understand why I need to explain this.

 

 

[Bob Long]

40 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

I get it, but I also wouldn't say it's something he's known for 

 

Guys are competitive out there, sometimes they take things too far, and get away with it

 

We've def gotten away with stuff over the years, had a rep for it at one point even

 

Oh for sure.

[43isprime]

15 hours ago, spook007 said:

Is it really?

About as hillarious as somebody asking the question, when was the last time Pettersson broke open a game, only to told its a week ago, when he totally undressed a hall of famer playing on another playoff team. 
Your dislike of this team and its players is really starting to smell like trolling. 
I'm sure you aren't, but...

 

Can you please give me an example of when I have shown a dislike of the team and its players? 

 

Wait, so these goofs try to justify Pettersson's contract with ridiculous comparisons to Mackinnon, and I'm the troll?

 

Two example of such ridiculous comparisons.

 

1. Pettersson has better point production in his first 392 games than Mackinnon had in his first 374 games. When told Mackinnon was runner-up in Hart voting after his 374th game, the response is - I only compared the points, and the Hart is irrelevant because it's dependent on team quality (forgetting the fact that the Canucks are currently a top 5 team and Pettersson will not be anywhere near runner-up for the Hart this season).

 

2. Pettersson was within 10 points of Mackinnon last season. When told that MacKinnon played 9 fewer games, and that over an 82 game pace, MacKinnon would have outscored Pettersson by more than 20 points, the response is - I only compared total points and points per game doesn't mean as much as you think.

 

[43isprime]

On 3/15/2024 at 11:54 AM, -dlc- said:

Here's the thing. Yes, MacKinnon's a good player but I don't give a f about the guy. He's not on my team and, as a matter of fact, he's on a team I can't stand so he can take a flying leap at a rolling donut.

 

He's a #1 pick and so his bar should be set higher.

He's played twice the number of games of Petey.

Played double the number of years.

 

Don't compare Nate now to Petey....go back to the first 6 years to do it fairly. 

 

Petey's not firing on all cylinders but Nate's not a God like some make him out to be. And his drama was a over the top prima donna crap.

 

I'm going to ignore all the negativity. I saw someone challenge the fact that fans have a right to be negative but do they? I mean look at where we are this year and tell me that we shouldn't maybe heap praise on our team for how far they've come rather than setting totally unrealistic expectations. Like winning every game. Or just never turning back with a lead...teams come at you harder. 

 

Teams blow leads all the time...that's not just a Canucks thing it's just how it is. 

 

So if we can't "whine" about reffing quit whining about the team losing at times. Happens. But some here hit the panic button and act like the team's awful. They're not. Maybe just get behind them.

 

 

Mackinnon was already established as one of the most valuable players in the league by his 6th season, which incidentally, was only his 23 year old season.

 

If you want to compare by age, Pettersson is in his 25 year old season. By the time MacKinnon completed his 25 year old season, he had 2 runner-ups and one finalist for the Hart under his belt.

 

[spook007]

5 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

Podz entered the zone at will tho.

Sure, and its not disliking Podz at all, but that line got owned v Avs, and don't want Petey to spend his talent in the D-zone...

Only one way to find out I guess, but that was why I wanted Lindholm with Petey.

[spook007]

2 hours ago, 43isprime said:

 

Can you please give me an example of when I have shown a dislike of the team and its players? 

 

Wait, so these goofs try to justify Pettersson's contract with ridiculous comparisons to Mackinnon, and I'm the troll?

 

Two example of such ridiculous comparisons.

 

1. Pettersson has better point production in his first 392 games than Mackinnon had in his first 374 games. When told Mackinnon was runner-up in Hart voting after his 374th game, the response is - I only compared the points, and the Hart is irrelevant because it's dependent on team quality (forgetting the fact that the Canucks are currently a top 5 team and Pettersson will not be anywhere near runner-up for the Hart this season).

 

2. Pettersson was within 10 points of Mackinnon last season. When told that MacKinnon played 9 fewer games, and that over an 82 game pace, MacKinnon would have outscored Pettersson by more than 20 points, the response is - I only compared total points and points per game doesn't mean as much as you think.

 

 

If you say you don't show a dislike towards our players, I'll take you word for it...

I'm too old and too tired to go back and look for examples...

 

As for Pettersson contract, maybe instead of comparing it to MacKinnon, we should compare it to other players getting contracts now after cap is rising again...

 

Alternatively we could start to compare Millers contract to everyone else, and I'm sure a lot of contracts would look like garbage...

 

 

Edited March 16 by spook007

[Elias Pettersson]

4 hours ago, 43isprime said:

 

I just find it funny that, while Mackinnon had established himself as one of the most valuable players in the league (quite literally) by age 25, you're trying to compare point production over their first 374 and 392 games, trying to prove I don't know what, all the while acknowledging that Pettersson is not the talent that Mackinnon is. 

 

You know one thing Mackinnon didn't have after his 374th game that Pettersson did have by his 392nd game? A massive contract slated to put him among the top-5 highest paid players in the NHL

 

Check what MacKinnon accomplished before signing his 12.6m deal, and what Pettersson had accomplished prior to signing his 11.6m deal (which I'll remind you start only one year apart, and will be only 1m apart for the next 7 years).

 

 

You must be confused and lost. This is a Canucks fan board. Your crush on Nathan MacKinnon should be directed to an Avalanche forum. 

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, 43isprime said:

 

Can you please give me an example of when I have shown a dislike of the team and its players? 

 

Wait, so these goofs try to justify Pettersson's contract with ridiculous comparisons to Mackinnon, and I'm the troll?

 

Two example of such ridiculous comparisons.

 

1. Pettersson has better point production in his first 392 games than Mackinnon had in his first 374 games. When told Mackinnon was runner-up in Hart voting after his 374th game, the response is - I only compared the points, and the Hart is irrelevant because it's dependent on team quality (forgetting the fact that the Canucks are currently a top 5 team and Pettersson will not be anywhere near runner-up for the Hart this season).

 

2. Pettersson was within 10 points of Mackinnon last season. When told that MacKinnon played 9 fewer games, and that over an 82 game pace, MacKinnon would have outscored Pettersson by more than 20 points, the response is - I only compared total points and points per game doesn't mean as much as you think.

 

You shouldn’t really be that hard on yourself. 

[43isprime]

34 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

You must be confused and lost. This is a Canucks fan board. Your crush on Nathan MacKinnon should be directed to an Avalanche forum. 

 

32 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

You shouldn’t really be that hard on yourself. 

 

I was only responding to your Pettersson-MacKinnon comparison. Ridicule me all you want. Ridiculing someone for providing facts that don't fit your own opinions is about as intellectually bankrupt as it gets.