Jump to content

(Trade) Sam Lafferty to Vancouver


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Cool, call up Alvin and tell him we need more impact players, maybe they hadn't thought of that yet? Man I wish I lived in a fairytale world where you could just bring in impact players all willynilly like you do.

Can't you just call EA sports and they will create a player for you?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ghostsof1915 said:

Can't you just call EA sports and they will create a player for you?

Maybe they can put me in as a make a wish FA? I have ADHD and it makes me forget to do nearly everything my wife asks me to do. It's been a rough ride.. I also shoot right and play defense, problem solved! 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Maybe they can put me in as a make a wish FA? I have ADHD and it makes me forget to do nearly everything my wife asks me to do. It's been a rough ride.. I also shoot right and play defense, problem solved! 

Where were you at training camp?????

  • ThereItIs 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Maybe they can put me in as a make a wish FA? I have ADHD and it makes me forget to do nearly everything my COACH asks me to do. It's been a rough ride.. I also shoot right and play defense, problem solved! 

Tyler Myers? Is that you? Lol. Orginal post edited.

Edited by Rekker
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, stawns said:

Raty and Bains should be the pair, they're great together 

I’d love another “kes and burr” scenario for our team. Both guys formed an immediate bond on the farm team back in the day. They basically come up to the Canucks at the same time and continued that duo for a few seasons till Kes ran our 2nd line and Bur ran with the Sedins…I don’t think Raty and Bains will reach that but a good third line duo…not crazy to imagine imo. 
 

Kinda similar drafting story too. Kes/Raty high picks, Burr/Bains ECHL/undrafted guys. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dizzle said:

 

I assume you mean the task of establishing something as subjective or objective? 

More or less. The distinction between what you can prove through compiling data and what you feel to be true through experience. In this case, when the majority of players a team signs in the offseason have a primary characteristic of being tough to play against, it's a completely reasonable assumption that was the intended task. If your opinion those players aren't hard to play against, that's a subjective opinion vs looking at their hit totals and seeing they were all in the top percentile if their team, which is objective. 

 

Research is kinda fun... 

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

16 minutes ago, Goal_thecup said:

 

Good stuff as usual.

It is an exciting time of year and it is easy to get caught up in the hype of new additions and subtractions, new systems, etc.

I am not a Debbie Downer and this is not meant to lower our generally good feelings heading into the season.

 

But, to perhaps forestall future disappointment and unnecessary hair-pulling, we might recall that this is still just Year 2 of The Plan.

We are still going to be a rather gangly collection of bits starting to form longer-term chemistry and to enjoy some successes.

We are still unraveling prior management's collection of writhing snakes sticking their ugly heads out of the soggy cardboard box of contracts and missteps.

 

Therefore I continue to stay positive and enjoy the moves management is making and seeing the improvements everywhere with the team.

I continue to greet the day with positive energy, looking forward to what it may bring, even though I sat up all night fixing our wonky toilet!

Maybe that's the metaphor: JB left us with a faulty toilet overflowing crap and 'stuff' all over the place that takes considerable time to clean up and sanitize properly.

 

But everyday, everything is a little bit better, even though we are all getting older (especially the players) and we all have our eye on the grim reaper and know that death awaits us all, we now have proper management and coaching, a bunch of new guys, and a clean slate.  (No need to go back and bitch, Nancies.)

GO CANUCKS GO!   and   DROP THE PUCK!

 

 

People Applause GIF by MOODMAN

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

More or less. The distinction between what you can prove through compiling data and what you feel to be true through experience. In this case, when the majority of players a team signs in the offseason have a primary characteristic of being tough to play against, it's a completely reasonable assumption that was the intended task. If your opinion those players aren't hard to play against, that's a subjective opinion vs looking at their hit totals and seeing they were all in the top percentile if their team, which is objective. 

 

Research is kinda fun... 

 

The problem is ... research takes effort, also the ability to let go of opinions, whereas feelings and opinions are easy. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

The problem is ... research takes effort, also the ability to let go of opinions, whereas feelings and opinions are easy. 

 

Sure, completely agree. I think the important distinction is to clarify in an discussion if something is just your opinion or something you believe to be true through data. At least, that's always what I try to do.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how PA/JR have something call, an understanding of hockey, the bottom 6 players need to have a function...Sam Lafferty has a function - PK, tough, Blueger, Suter, all have a function, can PK, can chip in some offence, can win draws, I agree Podz, studicka were not really excelling at one particular function, Hogz is kinda the same 

I do think we need another D man to get not be a bubble team 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Sure, completely agree. I think the important distinction is to clarify in an discussion if something is just your opinion or something you believe to be true through data. At least, that's always what I try to do.

 

Agree with you. I tend to also look for language choices/cues that are indicative of opinion ... or I choose those types of words, which makes clarifying unnecessary. Oftentimes, though, what get m  into trouble is that people really need that distinction.

 

A pet peeve of mine is when people clarify at the beginning or end of a discussion ... "just my opinion." I'm like ... well, whose opinion would it be if it wasn't yours?

 

What was interesting a few pages ago ... someone posted what Toronto paid to get Lafferty - actual data - which proved his value was high, that paying a 5th was good value for us, and rendered opinion irrelevant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Agree with you. I tend to also look for language choices/cues that are indicative of opinion ... or I choose those types of words, which makes clarifying unnecessary. Oftentimes, though, what get m  into trouble is that people really need that distinction.

 

A pet peeve of mine is when people clarify at the beginning or end of a discussion ... "just my opinion." I'm like ... well, whose opinion would it be if it wasn't yours?

 

What was interesting a few pages ago ... someone posted what Toronto paid to get Lafferty - actual data - which proved his value was high, that paying a 5th was good value for us, and rendered opinion irrelevant. 

Keep in mind Toronto had an unqualified dweeb running the team when they made that trade.  I'm really not sure we're can be using Dubas' moves as a gauge of actual value.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Agree with you. I tend to also look for language choices/cues that are indicative of opinion ... or I choose those types of words, which makes clarifying unnecessary. Oftentimes, though, what get m  into trouble is that people really need that distinction.

 

A pet peeve of mine is when people clarify at the beginning or end of a discussion ... "just my opinion." I'm like ... well, whose opinion would it be if it wasn't yours?

 

What was interesting a few pages ago ... someone posted what Toronto paid to get Lafferty - actual data - which proved his value was high, that paying a 5th was good value for us, and rendered opinion irrelevant. 

Disagree on the opinion part. If you make a statement like, Canucks will make the playoffs, that's much different then in my opinion the Canucks will make the playoffs. One implies it's the most likely outcome that Canucks will make the playoffs, and one if purely based off opinion. Clarifying that something is just your opinion is the easiest way to distinguish between an subjective and objective statement through text.

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...