Post-Game Talk: [GM50] Canucks defeat Hurricanes | 3-2 (Lindholm(2) & Miller) | Lindholm’s Revenge

bobbyb2009

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
1,903
956
Aren't we like something like 16-2-2 or some gaudy number like that?

16 in a row is impressive but there was like 12 games against bottom tier teams where as we had a pretty tough stretch.

Yes, or something, yes!! That is incredible, gaudy, and special, like I said.

AND there is a reason why winning 17 games in a row under any historic conditions has NEVER been done before... no matter your schedule or opposition, you are playing NHL teams and winning that many in a row has not ever been accomplished (?); therefore, doing what only a few teams in history have done, winning 16 in a row would be considered "historic."

Really not sure why it needs to be qualified in any way. First, like I said, our record in the last whatever number of games has been special and I LOVE it.

Second, still not sure why our special accomplishment means we have to qualify the historic accomplishment of them winning 16 in a row. What they did was simply amazing and the fact that only a few teams in all history have done it means it is so impressive that as much as I or others don't like them or the fan base at times, I tip my hat to them and think people are being petty in not acknowledging it or trying to bring down what they did (although I will agree that the conditions of their schedule were well set up for some success, just not any sort of the expected outcome of a historic run).

But whatever, YMMV
 

bobbyb2009

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
1,903
956
Sam Lafferty played a season low 8:20. Joshua was double-shifted a few times.

He was also stapled to the bench a few games ago against St. Louis. Something to pay attention to as the Canucks likely seek more bottom-six depth in their lineup before the TDL.

I have been thinking about this lately. I like him actually, but the calls for the kind of contract people were saying he would get was just a bit over the top to me, in terms of what the team could afford. I am kind of glad his production has tailed off a bit so that we can sign him again. I think signing him with a little bit of term to the kind of contract he has now would be good for our 4th line moving forward. He will likely settle in as a player somewhere between the 8 min guy he was last night and in those games you mentioned, and the game changing bottom 6 guy he sometimes was earlier. And that would be perfect for keeping his skill set around and our cap distribution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josepho

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
12,831
2,277
Second, still not sure why our special accomplishment means we have to qualify the historic accomplishment of them winning 16 in a row. What they did was simply amazing and the fact that only a few teams in all history have done it means it is so impressive that as much as I or others don't like them or the fan base at times, I tip my hat to them and think people are being petty in not acknowledging it or trying to bring down what they did (although I will agree that the conditions of their schedule were well set up for some success, just not any sort of the expected outcome of a historic run).

Yes, it's impressive they managed to match the 2016-2017 Columbus Blue Jackets, who went on to be eliminated in 5 games in that year's playoffs. May the same great fortune await the Oilers.
 

Indiana

Registered User
Mar 17, 2008
271
931
Canada
Enjoy the schadenfreude, you get 2 guesses where it came from:

Guess said:
2 goals in 2 shots for Lindholm. He is instantly a Canuck

LOL. Guy was only shooting shy of 7%. I bet he gets up to 20. That will be like 8 Canucks there. Insanity

And the two goals he scores are mid air tips with nobody guarding him. I swear it's like a hockey God sprinkled magic on this team we had projections by models and "experts" not even calling Vancouver a playoff team

We had media laughing at them getting Hronek last year. Boeser almost traded. Miller almost traded. They had media calling for a rebuild last year lmao

Everything goes right from game one. Almost every single guy brought in has worked

I know I'm a broken record here. What they arw doing is insane and not sustainable. Watch their turnover next year.

They play such low event hockey on offense yet keep scoring. Worst team in rush chances yet have most goals

Not a top ten generating team, but everybody burying 20%.

I wish nothing but sh** on them :)

I wish we didn't crap the bed so hard to start the year and give them 6 points. Would make the division easier to climb

Regression is coming even if it is next year. You do not just have this crazy of a turnaround and historic numbers always average out

KVrB5Ce.gif
 

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
12,831
2,277
Imagine having the best player in the world on your team but all you can do is obsess over a team that has made the playoffs once in the last decade.
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,387
10,054
Lapland
I see that the "regression to the mean" is being suggested for next year now. That is hilarious. The team will be different next year, so yeah the numbers will be different.

They are grasping at straws to build their strawmen.
I am still confused.

Them expecting our shooting% to come down to earth is the stupid take here, right?

What is the correct position to hold that you sit on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indiana

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
6,444
4,651
Vancouver
I am still confused.

Them expecting our shooting% to come down to earth is the stupid take here, right?

What is the correct position to hold that you sit on?
Regression to the mean is a thing, of course it is, over a long enough period of time. But they have been desperately predicting it to happen any day now since the beginning of the season, and failing to take into consideration any other factors. Attributing the Canucks' success to nothing but luck is silly. But now, because the unsustainable PDO appears to be carrying on past the halfway mark of the season, this most recent attempt suggests that the regression may not happen this season at all, but next season the Canucks will regress. That is the stupid take.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,948
3,684
Vancouver, BC
I tend to agree with this. If Petey wants the big contract he's going to show he can make everyone he plays with better. When's the last time he carried a line and made his linemates better? That's what a superstar does
He definitely did that last year.
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,387
10,054
Lapland
I tend to agree with this. If Petey wants the big contract he's going to show he can make everyone he plays with better. When's the last time he carried a line and made his linemates better? That's what a superstar does
Pretty much every year everyone he played with except this year with Kuzmenko and Mikheyev.
 

TruKnyte

On the wagon
Jan 1, 2012
6,170
3,608
Vancouver, BC
Regression to the mean is a thing, of course it is, over a long enough period of time. But they have been desperately predicting it to happen any day now since the beginning of the season, and failing to take into consideration any other factors. Attributing the Canucks' success to nothing but luck is silly. But now, because the unsustainable PDO appears to be carrying on past the halfway mark of the season, this most recent attempt suggests that the regression may not happen this season at all, but next season the Canucks will regress. That is the stupid take.

I mean, odds are it probably will regress next season, although I don't think any of us are claiming otherwise. The team personnel will be different as we can't afford to retain everyone (thanks Benning), and so to compare this year and next year straight up would be stupid.
 

Bourne Endeavor

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
37,666
5,874
Montreal, Quebec
I have been thinking about this lately. I like him actually, but the calls for the kind of contract people were saying he would get was just a bit over the top to me, in terms of what the team could afford. I am kind of glad his production has tailed off a bit so that we can sign him again. I think signing him with a little bit of term to the kind of contract he has now would be good for our 4th line moving forward. He will likely settle in as a player somewhere between the 8 min guy he was last night and in those games you mentioned, and the game changing bottom 6 guy he sometimes was earlier. And that would be perfect for keeping his skill set around and our cap distribution.

For me, he's a 1.5M or less re-sign. Anything more and he drops to the bottom of our list. If they're money left over, you consider it based on what he's asking but more than likely you let him walk. For me, Joshua and Blueger are priority re-signs. Lindholm may change my mind but it's way too early for that.
 

LuckyDay

Registered User
Mar 25, 2011
1,793
1,181
The Uncanny Valley
Imagine having the best player in the world on your team but all you can do is obsess over a team that has made the playoffs once in the last decade.
CKDS
Canucks Derangement Syndrome.
Living rent free in their minds.

OTOH we now have real rival again. Calgary, Colorado, Chicago are all behind us now.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Inter Milan vs Torino
    Inter Milan vs Torino
    Wagers: 5
    Staked: $2,752.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Metz vs Lille
    Metz vs Lille
    Wagers: 3
    Staked: $354.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Cádiz vs Mallorca
    Cádiz vs Mallorca
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $240.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Bologna vs Udinese
    Bologna vs Udinese
    Wagers: 3
    Staked: $265.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Clermont Foot vs Reims
    Clermont Foot vs Reims
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $15.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad