Elliotte Friedman? Omfg!

[Baratheon]

6 hours ago, iceman1964 said:

Yup...  My first game was listening to the radio in the back of a old station wagon moving to 100 Mile house, then black and white TV..  yeah I know, dinosaur right?  Yes I meant me lmao! 

There's something cool about listening to the game on the radio.  One thing that I really appreciate is how the arena sounds are louder on the radio.  You can hear the crowd and on ice sounds way more.  I wish the TV broadcasts would do the same but I suppose there's some production reason why they don't.

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

There's something cool about listening to the game on the radio.  One thing that I really appreciate is how the arena sounds are louder on the radio.  You can hear the crowd and on ice sounds way more.  I wish the TV broadcasts would do the same but I suppose there's some production reason why they don't.

Some of my best hockey memories were laying in bed as a kid and listening to Jim Robson and Tom larscheid on the radio

[iceman1964]

On 11/6/2023 at 8:24 AM, MeanSeanBean said:

We are 100% over achieving, this isn't even in question. 

 

We have 3 players in the top 10, more then any other team in the league including the cup defending Titans who are first place in the NHL. We have 7 players in the top 10 for +/-. We have a plus 26 goal differential, which is top of the league by a considerable margin given that number 2 and 3 in the league are 21 and 16. 

 

Their PDO (essentially a statically way to record how many goals are being scored for and against you) is well over the statically average for sustainable play and this definitely reflects luck being a part of their current goal scoring/saving streak. Over the full course of last year, 80% of the teams had a PDO between 99 to 101, with the top teams sitting only slightly higher. The Canucks PDO is currently at 108.9 which indicated that while we are playing extraordinary hockey, there is also clearly a large portion of puck luck also playing a part in this teams start.

 

No one was expecting this team to be a top team in the league, it was always going to be a race to make the playoffs. The team is 100% over achieving as one of the top teams in the league right now and having a tantrum that a hockey pundit points that out is silly.

Tantrum? Lmao.. lol ok if that's how your taking it, however I disagree, we're playing to almost what we're capable of, but I guess we have a bunch of bums overachieving, no one any good at all if you take some people's word for it..  just because media says stuff, doesn't mean it's true but lots of suckers out there that will believe anything their told. Critical thinking and fact checking? Why on earth would people do that for??

 

[Baratheon]

37 minutes ago, stawns said:

Some of my best hockey memories were laying in bed as a kid and listening to Jim Robson and Tom larscheid on the radio

Did you listen to Dan Russell as well? Haha I used to listen to him post game and then Neil Macrae in the morning.  And people think the media are negative now.  Those two make Drance look like a cheerleader!

[MeanSeanBean]

3 hours ago, iceman1964 said:

Tantrum? Lmao.. lol ok if that's how your taking it, however I disagree, we're playing to almost what we're capable of, but I guess we have a bunch of bums overachieving, no one any good at all if you take some people's word for it..  just because media says stuff, doesn't mean it's true but lots of suckers out there that will believe anything their told. Critical thinking and fact checking? Why on earth would people do that for??

 

I mean... You did start with "OMFG! Like NOT!". That reads like a tantrum or a 12 year old girl to me. Maybe both, I dunno. We are all Canucks afterall, I don't judge.

 

Also where in my post did I call them a bunch of over achieving bums? Also how are you possibly going off about critical thinking when you're disregarding basic statics. Either this Canucks team has a similar goal scoring profile as Gretzky's Oilers in the 80s when goalies had .78 save records, or we are currently over achieving... 

 

The Canucks are currently scoring over 4.5 goals per a game. Last year the Oilers led the league by over 25 goals and scored at a rate that was under 4.0. You can fact check that, if you want.

 

Why don't you take your own advice and critically think for a second, I mean OMFG! like COME ON!

Edited November 8, 2023 by MeanSeanBean

[iceman1964]

7 hours ago, MeanSeanBean said:

I mean... You did start with "OMFG! Like NOT!". That reads like a tantrum or a 12 year old girl to me. Maybe both, I dunno. We are all Canucks afterall, I don't judge.

 

Also where in my post did I call them a bunch of over achieving bums? Also how are you possibly going off about critical thinking when you're disregarding basic statics. Either this Canucks team has a similar goal scoring profile as Gretzky's Oilers in the 80s when goalies had .78 save records, or we are currently over achieving... 

 

The Canucks are currently scoring over 4.5 goals per a game. Last year the Oilers led the league by over 25 goals and scored at a rate that was under 4.0. You can fact check that, if you want.

 

Why don't you take your own advice and critically think for a second, I mean OMFG! like COME ON!

Your bringing up the oilers? With THAT goal tending disaster and a 2 trick pony at that? One of mcd and Drais goes down for any length of time, their done, if we were to lose one of our top guys we could do a f of a lot better than them any day if the week in the same circumstances.

And with that, you didn't have to say bums, we have some of the best talent in the world on this roster and when they play their game as they can, what did people think would happen if we upgraded the secondary guys which happened, we were playing well at the end of last season with a lesser roster, this is so far from over achieving it's laughable, our upgrades aren't even used to the team yet, their new obviously and we can do tons better, then what is it going to be called? Uber overachieving? 

   Unless we get injured, we'll get better, and we have to, the first period against the oilers was terrible, give that kind of slack to the Bruins or Vegas and it's a loss, if anything compared to a cpl of months down the road will make this look like under achieving, let alone what would happen if we super sized Garland in a trade for a bigger guy who can skate and score.

Nowhere near our potential yet... Too funny! 

 

[MeanSeanBean]

3 hours ago, iceman1964 said:

Your bringing up the oilers? With THAT goal tending disaster and a 2 trick pony at that? One of mcd and Drais goes down for any length of time, their done, if we were to lose one of our top guys we could do a f of a lot better than them any day if the week in the same circumstances.

And with that, you didn't have to say bums, we have some of the best talent in the world on this roster and when they play their game as they can, what did people think would happen if we upgraded the secondary guys which happened, we were playing well at the end of last season with a lesser roster, this is so far from over achieving it's laughable, our upgrades aren't even used to the team yet, their new obviously and we can do tons better, then what is it going to be called? Uber overachieving? 

   Unless we get injured, we'll get better, and we have to, the first period against the oilers was terrible, give that kind of slack to the Bruins or Vegas and it's a loss, if anything compared to a cpl of months down the road will make this look like under achieving, let alone what would happen if we super sized Garland in a trade for a bigger guy who can skate and score.

Nowhere near our potential yet... Too funny! 

 

Yes, I'm bringing up the Oilers in the context of one of the greatest scoring teams of all times back when the Great one was still playing and last year's highest goal scoring team, to show how incredibly unrealistic your entire post is. But instead you double down and state this team is going to get better.

 

Your ignorant fandom is cute, I'll give you that. How about this, if we continue our pace and finish with over 60 wins this year (it is technically possible Boston did it last year and a whopping 2 other teams have in the history of the NHL) then I'll admit I was wrong. 

 

Unless that happens, this team is 100% over achieving by definition of the word.

Edited November 8, 2023 by MeanSeanBean

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Your ignorant fandom is cute, I'll give you that. How about this, if we continue our pace and finish with over 60 wins this year (it is technically possible Boston did it last year and a whopping 2 other teams have in the history of the NHL) then I'll admit I was wrong. 

 

Until that happens, this team is 100% over achieving right now.

 

I think it has more to do with our team being in shape early and ready to go to start the year. The teams that do that can make some hay early in the season. 

[MeanSeanBean]

8 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I think it has more to do with our team being in shape early and ready to go to start the year. The teams that do that can make some hay early in the season. 

Sure, don't disagree with that. Toc has pushed all the right buttons and the guys came to play. But do you expect them to keep this pace up and finish with a top 3 all time NHL record like they are currently track at? Because if not, they are currently over achieving.

[MeanSeanBean]

15 hours ago, Baratheon said:

There's something cool about listening to the game on the radio.  One thing that I really appreciate is how the arena sounds are louder on the radio.  You can hear the crowd and on ice sounds way more.  I wish the TV broadcasts would do the same but I suppose there's some production reason why they don't.

I grew up on the radio. I'd say just as often I listen to the game as watch them. I can rewatch games on Sportsnet, but I can't relisten to them. So if I listen to the game I can go back and watch if it was a game worth seeing the next day and can skip commercials, stoppages, and intermissions. Blast through a game mighty quick, and when I'm listening to a game I can work in the shop or put in work in my home gym.

[Bob Long]

10 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Sure, don't disagree with that. Toc has pushed all the right buttons and the guys came to play. But do you expect them to keep this pace up and finish with a top 3 all time NHL record like they are currently track at? Because if not, they are currently over achieving.

 

Oh god no, things will normalize. I think you need to remove the home opener and the SJ stats to have a better idea of what this team is.

 

With the good start I think we are capable of reaching 50 wins. I can see this team going somewhere around 41-29 the rest of the year, maybe a little better if injuries aren't a big factor and we can get a couple of upgrades.

 

[Puckster]

The way I see this

Our TEAM seems to be motivated for reasons beyond me,

Is our coach finally lighting a fire under some lazy butts, like some guys are actually back checking?? So whats with that?

Is our new captain pushing the guys?

Is the Locker room holding guys accountable for lackLuster play?

Miller is a wrecking ball and his line is responding in kind?

 

The Team seems to be happy and putting out maximum effort seems to be contagious

[iceman1964]

1 hour ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Yes, I'm bringing up the Oilers in the context of one of the greatest scoring teams of all times back when the Great one was still playing and last year's highest goal scoring team, to show how incredibly unrealistic your entire post is. But instead you double down and state this team is going to get better.

 

Your ignorant fandom is cute, I'll give you that. How about this, if we continue our pace and finish with over 60 wins this year (it is technically possible Boston did it last year and a whopping 2 other teams have in the history of the NHL) then I'll admit I was wrong. 

 

Unless that happens, this team is 100% over achieving by definition of the word.

 

 So yeah we disagree, I believe this roster is capable of playing a lot better, it's only a matter of time, how much better? If one could ratio it, I'd say at least 15-20%.. the 20% side if we upgrade from Garland like i mentioned last post. 

 Think about it for a second, you can't simply go on signing new guys and expect them to know our guys and fit in like a cup team that's been playing together for awhile, that's why I stand by my argument of we can still improve a lot and then get to our potential, we're not there, if you think we are, whatever, your entitled to think that but time will tell.

[MeanSeanBean]

1 minute ago, iceman1964 said:

 

 So yeah we disagree, I believe this roster is capable of playing a lot better, it's only a matter of time, how much better? If one could ratio it, I'd say at least 15-20%.. the 20% side if we upgrade from Garland like i mentioned last post. 

 Think about it for a second, you can't simply go on signing new guys and expect them to know our guys and fit in like a cup team that's been playing together for awhile, that's why I stand by my argument of we can still improve a lot and then get to our potential, we're not there, if you think we are, whatever, your entitled to think that but time will tell.

20% better then the already highest goal differential in the league (by a pretty comfortable margin)... I wish I had your kool-aid, that's clearly the strong stuff.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, MeanSeanBean said:

I grew up on the radio. I'd say just as often I listen to the game as watch them. I can rewatch games on Sportsnet, but I can't relisten to them. So if I listen to the game I can go back and watch if it was a game worth seeing the next day and can skip commercials, stoppages, and intermissions. Blast through a game mighty quick, and when I'm listening to a game I can work in the shop or put in work in my home gym.

We used it watch the games with the volume off and listen to the radio.   It was best way to experience the game back then ... all 20inch'es of rabbit ear glory lol.   Didn't get a lot of games either - just CBC and BCTV.    Aside from the playoffs, you simply couldn't watch that many during the regular season.    Home games yes.   But that was about it aside from CBC.   So the radio was used well into the 90's... 

[iceman1964]

40 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

20% better then the already highest goal differential in the league (by a pretty comfortable margin)... I wish I had your kool-aid, that's clearly the strong stuff.

How many top teams have we played so far?  Our goal diff is inflated from playing weak teams, if we're any good at all we SHOULD have that goal diff, if we didn't we wouldn't be having this side of the conversation, like 7 goals first game? Right there was why we were ahead of 2 other teams in the standings when we won/lost the same amount of games about 4-5-6 in, I remember looking to see where we were, we had our share of gaffs in all our games, fortunately Demko and Smitty stood their ground, without that, we'd be locked at middle again but my point stands that with the end of last season when we were pouring it on with a lesser roster, we were on a roll which I assume you witnessed for yourself, this year with a better roster it shouldn't surprise anyone we're doing well, maybe not this well but we haven't played very long together but the hunger is there in spades and a lot of players came in biting at the bit so it doesn't surprise me at all, but again the competition hasn't been that on their best games either since a lot of teams are in the same boat with new players on board as well

This is not our best game, we have more in the tank or do you think we're playing perfect and have been? I don't think so... Playing better than we have in a long time? Yes, playing with a better roster due to a upgraded secondary and D? Yes, no one can argue that, better can be better though, if you can't see that we're wasting our time talking about it, in the meantime, let's see how they do with the elite teams and see how it goes.. I think we can play a lot better and not just by goals for, the Stanley cup belongs to the team with the best 200' game that has depth, we're playing the 200 better because we have the right coaches, but we have developing depth, not guys ready to make the jump easily, obviously that's going to happen soon but not yet. 

This is the reason I was happy with TOC being hired, he knows the type of game that it takes to win and you can be sure him and JR talked about it, we're bigger/grittier than last season, we badly needed that, do we need more? Yep, not much but some, i.e. Garland gone and we could afford to sign a bigger/grittier skilled guy in his place, even one guy helps in this league, but hence we brought in Laffy Cole and Soucy lately. 

 Anyway, we'll see.. simple as that.. if people think we're overachieving now, I can only imagine what they'll say when we get more games in with the new guys, too bad we couldn't ask the players the same question, I'm pretty sure they'd say they still have work to do in some areas and not overachieving, just playing as they're capable of but room to grow.

[iceman1964]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

We used it watch the games with the volume off and listen to the radio.   It was best way to experience the game back then ... all 20inch'es of rabbit ear glory lol.   Didn't get a lot of games either - just CBC and BCTV.    Aside from the playoffs, you simply couldn't watch that many during the regular season.    Home games yes.   But that was about it aside from CBC.   So the radio was used well into the 90's... 

At 10 years old or something, we got a TV so obviously I never heard of "rabbit ears", I was like wtf??? My dad just laughed.. then explained what they were and why we needed them and had to go and buy them, makes me laugh everytime its mentioned.

Now we can watch games on our phones ffs lol and no party lines! (If you remember those?!  Lmao! 

Edited November 8, 2023 by iceman1964

[MeanSeanBean]

1 hour ago, iceman1964 said:

How many top teams have we played so far?  Our goal diff is inflated from playing weak teams, if we're any good at all we SHOULD have that goal diff, if we didn't we wouldn't be having this side of the conversation, like 7 goals first game? Right there was why we were ahead of 2 other teams in the standings when we won/lost the same amount of games about 4-5-6 in, I remember looking to see where we were, we had our share of gaffs in all our games, fortunately Demko and Smitty stood their ground, without that, we'd be locked at middle again but my point stands that with the end of last season when we were pouring it on with a lesser roster, we were on a roll which I assume you witnessed for yourself, this year with a better roster it shouldn't surprise anyone we're doing well, maybe not this well but we haven't played very long together but the hunger is there in spades and a lot of players came in biting at the bit so it doesn't surprise me at all, but again the competition hasn't been that on their best games either since a lot of teams are in the same boat with new players on board as well

This is not our best game, we have more in the tank or do you think we're playing perfect and have been? I don't think so... Playing better than we have in a long time? Yes, playing with a better roster due to a upgraded secondary and D? Yes, no one can argue that, better can be better though, if you can't see that we're wasting our time talking about it, in the meantime, let's see how they do with the elite teams and see how it goes.. I think we can play a lot better and not just by goals for, the Stanley cup belongs to the team with the best 200' game that has depth, we're playing the 200 better because we have the right coaches, but we have developing depth, not guys ready to make the jump easily, obviously that's going to happen soon but not yet. 

This is the reason I was happy with TOC being hired, he knows the type of game that it takes to win and you can be sure him and JR talked about it, we're bigger/grittier than last season, we badly needed that, do we need more? Yep, not much but some, i.e. Garland gone and we could afford to sign a bigger/grittier skilled guy in his place, even one guy helps in this league, but hence we brought in Laffy Cole and Soucy lately. 

 Anyway, we'll see.. simple as that.. if people think we're overachieving now, I can only imagine what they'll say when we get more games in with the new guys, too bad we couldn't ask the players the same question, I'm pretty sure they'd say they still have work to do in some areas and not overachieving, just playing as they're capable of but room to grow.

I fundamentally disagree with you entirely. Petey is playing like the best forward in the league, Hughes is the best defensemen, and Demko is playing like the best goalie. It's possible that those 3 can keep it up, though I likely. But will Boeser stay on pace for 60 goals? Will we continue to be one of the stingiest defensive team with a 7D playing in our top 4? I highly doubt it. 

 

But seriously, where do you get your kool-aid? It's only Wednesday but I'm thinking about the weekend already. 

[PistolPete13]

On 11/7/2023 at 3:43 PM, stawns said:

Some of my best hockey memories were laying in bed as a kid and listening to Jim Robson and Tom larscheid on the radio

“I’d like to pass along a special hello to shut- ins and those who can’t get out to the games”

Jim was the best of the best.

 

He also did the Vancouver Mounties baseball games back in the day. Did a superb job.

[PistolPete13]

6 hours ago, iceman1964 said:

How many top teams have we played so far?  Our goal diff is inflated from playing weak teams, if we're any good at all we SHOULD have that goal diff, if we didn't we wouldn't be having this side of the conversation, like 7 goals first game? Right there was why we were ahead of 2 other teams in the standings when we won/lost the same amount of games about 4-5-6 in, I remember looking to see where we were, we had our share of gaffs in all our games, fortunately Demko and Smitty stood their ground, without that, we'd be locked at middle again but my point stands that with the end of last season when we were pouring it on with a lesser roster, we were on a roll which I assume you witnessed for yourself, this year with a better roster it shouldn't surprise anyone we're doing well, maybe not this well but we haven't played very long together but the hunger is there in spades and a lot of players came in biting at the bit so it doesn't surprise me at all, but again the competition hasn't been that on their best games either since a lot of teams are in the same boat with new players on board as well

This is not our best game, we have more in the tank or do you think we're playing perfect and have been? I don't think so... Playing better than we have in a long time? Yes, playing with a better roster due to a upgraded secondary and D? Yes, no one can argue that, better can be better though, if you can't see that we're wasting our time talking about it, in the meantime, let's see how they do with the elite teams and see how it goes.. I think we can play a lot better and not just by goals for, the Stanley cup belongs to the team with the best 200' game that has depth, we're playing the 200 better because we have the right coaches, but we have developing depth, not guys ready to make the jump easily, obviously that's going to happen soon but not yet. 

This is the reason I was happy with TOC being hired, he knows the type of game that it takes to win and you can be sure him and JR talked about it, we're bigger/grittier than last season, we badly needed that, do we need more? Yep, not much but some, i.e. Garland gone and we could afford to sign a bigger/grittier skilled guy in his place, even one guy helps in this league, but hence we brought in Laffy Cole and Soucy lately. 

 Anyway, we'll see.. simple as that.. if people think we're overachieving now, I can only imagine what they'll say when we get more games in with the new guys, too bad we couldn't ask the players the same question, I'm pretty sure they'd say they still have work to do in some areas and not overachieving, just playing as they're capable of but room to grow.

 Good points all. 
 

Soilers were a six top team until Canucks made them our chew toy. 

You know the team is on a roll when everyone we beat has an inferior record.

[iceman1964]

6 minutes ago, PistolPete13 said:

 Good points all. 
 

Soilers were a six top team until Canucks made them our chew toy. 

You know the team is on a roll when everyone we beat has an inferior record.

"You know the team is on a roll when everyone we beat has an inferior record"

Followed by..  And even Tyler Myers is playing well.

[Kevin Biestra]

12 hours ago, IBatch said:

We used it watch the games with the volume off and listen to the radio.   It was best way to experience the game back then ... all 20inch'es of rabbit ear glory lol.   Didn't get a lot of games either - just CBC and BCTV.    Aside from the playoffs, you simply couldn't watch that many during the regular season.    Home games yes.   But that was about it aside from CBC.   So the radio was used well into the 90's... 

 

Hello to pensioners, the blind...