Confirmed with Link: Pettersson Signs 8 Year Deal with the Vancouver Canucks, AAV $11.6M

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,331
7,393
Victoria
1. I don't understand? The Friedman report directly cripples some of the arguments made here.
2. What is the relevance of Nylander?
3. Precedent, the media, and management's own actions suggest otherwise.
4. If he delays signing for unknown reasons until the last moment, he would be doing something within is right to do, but a thing does not follow franchise player precedent.

I don't know why you continue to maintain the position that Pettersson can buck precedent on the timing of signing simply because he has the ability to do so? It's an absurd argument that glosses over management being frustrated (Dhaliwal) with the delay, and them having to make an insurance trade (Lindholm) due to their enigmatic franchise C's radio silence. Which he himself admits was a negotiating ploy... But it was so good a ploy that the team/media/fans might lose him...
1. rumor don't care
2. it was a story like all the others
3. ok
4. don't know why it matters what other franchise players do? who cares, all scenarios have precedent, pastrnak and matthews have done exactly what pettersson just did. doughty off the top of my head went further into the extreme - there is no set precedent for this, that is just made up stage writing

edit - add marner to the doughty part
 

Flik

Canucks fan for life
Sponsor
Apr 29, 2010
7,345
6,320
Vancouver, WA
This thread has to be the dual HFCanucks record for both the longest ever weird circular argument where obviously nobody is going to change their position so why bother, and also the longest time ever staying on topic.

I keep coming back in hoping that somehow this has trainwrecked and people are going to be yelling at each other about Tony Tanti or something, but no, somehow this has to be the one discussion that manages to stay on topic like it's f***ing laser guided or something.

You feelin better about the direction of the thread now? 😂

 

Billy Kvcmu

Registered User
Dec 5, 2014
27,661
16,203
West Vancouver
HIs two biggest weaknesses compare to other superstars are:

1. He does not have the explosiveness in his skating
2. His lower body strength is weak even by league's average

The first one is what it is, I don't think he can obtain that at his age, however; I still think he can build on his lower body strength so he doesn't get know off his skates as frequently as he does now. If he does that, he will hit 100 pts regularly without breaking a sweat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay26

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,331
7,393
Victoria
HIs two biggest weaknesses compare to other superstars are:

1. He does not have the explosiveness in his skating
2. His lower body strength is weak even by league's average

The first one is what it is, I don't think he can obtain that at his age, however; I still think he can build on his lower body strength so he doesn't get know off his skates as frequently as he does now. If he does that, he will hit 100 pts regularly without breaking a sweat.
And what's weird is that a lot of times you can see him in a true blue Puck battle and he can Shield it and protect it and use his body and strength to get away from guys
 

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,331
7,393
Victoria
It’s different when you have the board to work with vs open ice body position battle
i should have been more clear apologies - in my head i was comparing plays along the boards - you see him go down a lot along the boards, seemingly in quick little battles or quick contacts..

open ice yeah i agree
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,058
6,635
Strawman.

If management took a "show us" position first and that Petey showed them, why is it unreasonable for Petey to want to wait until after the season when he would presumably showed even more?

Since you’ve been back it’s like you are incapable of considering reason.


Because he had achieved the leverage he needed. Management went chasing to pay him what he wanted.

The reason on this isn't on your side.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,058
6,635
1. rumor don't care
2. it was a story like all the others
3. ok
4. don't know why it matters what other franchise players do? who cares, all scenarios have precedent, pastrnak and matthews have done exactly what pettersson just did. doughty off the top of my head went further into the extreme - there is no set precedent for this, that is just made up stage writing

edit - add marner to the doughty part


1. Your caring is not relevant.
2. OK.
3. Cool.
4. Matthews and Doughty were expiring UFAs that signed in the summer. Pastrnak was a pending UFA signed later, like Nylander (both were stories).

Marner is the interesting one because he signed at the end of his RFA contract, and he should have signed in 2018, but I suspect he did not because Lou Lamoriello was let go at the end of 2017-18. Dubas took over and gave a big contract to Tavares and let Marner linger for a year.

He's probably the best template for what Pettersson was intending to do. I wouldn't call it the usual expectation though. Was the point though to establish an occurrence rather than the general rule?


Isn't it something that we have to dismiss rumours, contest precedent, label media and fans 'idiots' just to find a spot where one can say Pettersson acted in the usual manner here? Even though he admitted it was all a negotiating ploy. Is it so difficult to see Lindholm as an insurance policy? There's a lot pushing one way.

I'm curious though: If what Pettersson was doing was the normal course of business, then you fully expected him to re-sign, right?
 
Last edited:

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,742
5,966
Because he had achieved the leverage he needed. Management went chasing to pay him what he wanted.

The reason on this isn't on your side.

So many people here have been trying to talk some sense and reason into you. Don't you think that maybe you're missing something here when so many of us have been questioning your reasoning?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hodgy and racerjoe

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,058
6,635
So many people here have been trying to talk some sense and reason into you. Don't you think that maybe you're missing something here when so many of us have been questioning your reasoning?

Of course, I've considered it. Could I be wrong? It's possible. Judging from the majority here, even probable. Then again, I'm not one to determine accuracy from group think...

Rather than have a conversation about the conversation: Why do you think Pettersson chose to sign when he did then? (If he was reasonable to continue to hold out)
 
Last edited:

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,331
7,393
Victoria
1. Your caring is not relevant.
2. OK.
3. Cool.
4. Matthews and Doughty were expiring UFAs that signed in the summer. Pastrnak was a pending UFA signed later, like Nylander (both were stories).

Marner is the interesting one because he signed at the end of his RFA contract, and he should have signed in 2018, but I suspect he did not because Lou Lamoriello was let go at the end of 2017-18. Dubas took over and gave a big contract to Tavares and let Marner linger for a year.

He's probably the best template for what Pettersson was intending to do. I wouldn't call it the usual expectation though. Was the point though to establish an occurrence rather than the general rule?


Isn't it something that we have to dismiss rumours, contest precedent, label media and fans 'idiots' just to find a spot where one can say Pettersson acted in the usual manner here? Even though he admitted it was all a negotiating ploy. Is it so difficult to see Lindholm as an insurance policy? There's a lot pushing one way.

I'm curious though: If what Pettersson was doing was the normal course of business, then you fully expected him to re-sign, right?
Matthews and doughty.. look back in their previous contracts

Every scenario has a precedent, it's utterly useless to push one precedent over another
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,058
6,635
Matthews and doughty.. look back in their previous contracts

Every scenario has a precedent, it's utterly useless to push one precedent over another


Right, but we don't treat each and every scenario as the regular course of business either. Most franchise player signings don't come with drama. For example, Doughty's post ELC contract (if that's what you're referring to) was recognized as a dispute between team and player. Well reported. He wanted to be paid more than Kopitar, and it became a story. Mackinnon re-signed, ho hum whatever. No deviation/drama, no story.

(Are you referring to Matthews coming off of his ELC contract?)
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad