Post-Game Talk: 1/9/18 | Canucks 1 at Caps 3 | You got the DUD!!!
- Thread starter ProstheticConscience
- Start date
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
Well the trajectory is awful. We aren’t getting even a little better than last year. We are getting worse. We aren’t even on the way back up yet for a few years. God this is gonna be a decade.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
Meh. Lots made about that but make no mistake Markstrom still tried to stop the puck and it went right thru him.
I'm glad somebody else mentioned this....Del Zotto is getting all the brick-bats, but that first goal was another stoppable puck that just leaked through the goaltender.....and the second goal wasn't much better.
The frustrating thing is that Markstrom did come up with some big saves in this game, but those two goals totally changed the momentum of the game.....instead of going into the dressing room up 1-0 they were down 2-1....and the Caps never lose a lead at home. It's not how many pucks you stop, it's when you stop them. And in the last three games the stinky goals seem to come at the worst time.
But as a 'tankist' I'm secretly glad they're determined to go with these two goalies the rest of year. They won't win too many games with either of them.
Wasn't it agreed upon with WD's firing that the scapegoat card had been played?
Don't see Trevor out and about selling his GM's moves anymore do we.
The Benning support squad seems to be awfully quiet of late.
I'd say Benning is the guy hanging by the thread right now. He may be Trevor's escape card.
24 shot attempts against in 15 minutes of ice time for Gudbranson
EFF ME that is bad.
EFF ME that is bad.
If the Canucks implode and finish 28-31 for the third year in row, I just can't see the Aquilinis' sitting on their hands for another season. This is a business after all.....an under-performing payroll; no playoff revenue for four out of the last five years; faltering attendance and merchandise sales; and eroding corporate support......it all spells trouble for those in charge.....I imagine that Linden would survive the carnage, but why would he want to?.....Trev needs to go back to his fitness business, contact lens business, cycling vacations or whatever else he's into these days. Then they can scour the landscape for a properly qualified hockey executive.
ginner classic
Dammit Jim!
Slight off topic....I quit smoking 11 days ago...you know the one thing I would love right now...like really cherish... is to meet somebody dumb enough to call me 'bruh' or 'bra' or 'brah' to my face. God that would be fun.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
This has been discussed ad naseum. 1.5M per playoff game in revue multiplied by 5-6 home playoff games is literally nothing for Aquilini. His 2018 net worth is estimated at 3.3 BILLION dollars (and growing).
So the 10-12 M he would lose is equivalent to you losing $100 of your savings. Maybe less. (Too tired to do the math).
So the 10-12 M he would lose is equivalent to you losing $100 of your savings. Maybe less. (Too tired to do the math).
Dab
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 3,193
- 3,001
Ericsson is definitely getting up there with Messier. Someone mentioned Prust- not even close to this level of overpaid uselessness.
Give the team credit for making push in the third. Really weren't far off from getting a goal. However throughly and absolutely dominated for much of the game. Second looked like a Capital's practice.
Pretty clear difference in the level of talent, experience and size.
Good
Markstrom - made many great saves and never quit. Deserves something for that. First goal was iffy - had a chance even after the net flopped over on him but let shot dribble through him.
Bad
Granlund - when Sutter comes back he needs to sit. Nothing good is going on here. Play in his own end continues downward spiral and of course no offense outside of some muffin shots
Chaput - effort can't cover up for no ability
Eriksson - just a step ahead of Granlund in terms of being benched. And that's disputable. Verdict is totally in on Loui - he's no good.
Dowd - starting to slide. Looks burnt out already. Fully becoming a member of the all nothing crew at the bottom of the Canuck line up.
Stecher - did make some good rushes and such in the late going but overall he was real bad in his end. Him and Gudbranson are not an effective combo to say the least.
Others (really a very arbitrary line between being bad and being sort of ok in this game)
Hutton - nice that he stood up for himself and played with some edge. Not great but better
Virtanen - did enough good to make up for some dubious neutral zone play. Like to see a break through on the scoring. Seems close but seems too hurried in his finish around the net.
del Zotto - very foolish on the first goal. Sort of meh in the game.
Goldobin - at least provides some excitement. Needs to start scoring. I say keep him in the lineup.
Sedins - so uneven. At times pretty good, at others very bad. Need to be sharper on the PP. Couple of time appeared unready to take a pass.
Boeser - in spite of some tough checking and hard play against him created chances for himself and others
Really the only thing to look forward to is the lottery. Trouble is that other teams below us have the same idea and got an earlier start. Sorry to say that any win now is to be avoided given the way others are blatantly sandbagging.
Pretty clear difference in the level of talent, experience and size.
Good
Markstrom - made many great saves and never quit. Deserves something for that. First goal was iffy - had a chance even after the net flopped over on him but let shot dribble through him.
Bad
Granlund - when Sutter comes back he needs to sit. Nothing good is going on here. Play in his own end continues downward spiral and of course no offense outside of some muffin shots
Chaput - effort can't cover up for no ability
Eriksson - just a step ahead of Granlund in terms of being benched. And that's disputable. Verdict is totally in on Loui - he's no good.
Dowd - starting to slide. Looks burnt out already. Fully becoming a member of the all nothing crew at the bottom of the Canuck line up.
Stecher - did make some good rushes and such in the late going but overall he was real bad in his end. Him and Gudbranson are not an effective combo to say the least.
Others (really a very arbitrary line between being bad and being sort of ok in this game)
Hutton - nice that he stood up for himself and played with some edge. Not great but better
Virtanen - did enough good to make up for some dubious neutral zone play. Like to see a break through on the scoring. Seems close but seems too hurried in his finish around the net.
del Zotto - very foolish on the first goal. Sort of meh in the game.
Goldobin - at least provides some excitement. Needs to start scoring. I say keep him in the lineup.
Sedins - so uneven. At times pretty good, at others very bad. Need to be sharper on the PP. Couple of time appeared unready to take a pass.
Boeser - in spite of some tough checking and hard play against him created chances for himself and others
Really the only thing to look forward to is the lottery. Trouble is that other teams below us have the same idea and got an earlier start. Sorry to say that any win now is to be avoided given the way others are blatantly sandbagging.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
Coach TG.
“I didn’t mind our game”
He has swapped out players every game , some benched some scratched. Amount of minutes change etc and he has 1 win in a month. So basically I could do his job.
“I didn’t mind our game”
He has swapped out players every game , some benched some scratched. Amount of minutes change etc and he has 1 win in a month. So basically I could do his job.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 63,100
- 24,447
The Canucks franchise value was, I don’t even remember, but compared to now, it’s value has lost like 300M probably. Maybe I’m exaggertinf the number I have no idea where to look, but I remember seeing the franchise value down A LOT.
No businessman, no matter how rich, is going to let it continue to plummet.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
After me2 wrote: "Neither of them were getting traded at the deadline, signed 3 years and 2 years."
As your sarcasm is intended to point out players with term are sometimes traded, even at the trade deadline. For example, Hansen's contract wasn't over when the Canucks traded him to San Jose last spring.
Otoh, as you're no doubt aware there are some situations where players can be traded for at the deadline but not early in the season. The situation is generally based on the team's cap hit.
Since the cap hit of a player is calculated based on each day he's on the roster, when a team has enough cap space to fit in a player for the last part of the year, then they can acquire a player late in the season and thereby improve their team, even though if theymonth or two of the year, the team can acquire the player even though they wouldn't have had room to fit in under the cap if they had him earlier in the season. In this way the team can get a bump in ability to have a team that if one were to add up the cap hits for the season would be over the cap, but because they only have a count a small portion of the aav of the newly acquired player they still fit.
So they have a team which wouldn't be able to fit under the cap, fitting under the cap because part of the team is only there for the last part of the season.
The problem with that generally is that then they have the player for the next season-and a team that can't fit him under the cap for the full season without dumping other players. However, if the newly acquired player is on an expiring conract, that is if he's a rental, then the next year just disappears because the team doesn't extend him.
Of course not all deadline moves are of rentals. For example, the Canucks' two moves this past spring were not. Hansen still had this year remaining on his contract and even though the Senators could have treated Burrows as a rental, they signed him to an extension instead. (It's possible, perhaps even likely, that Burrows had been promised an extension as an inducement to waive his ntc.) Similarly, Kevin Bieksa was on an expiring contract when the Ducks acquired him, but iirc they had already negotiated his extension before he agreed to waive, so it can't really be said he was traded as a rental.
The other thing is that if the players being referred to were Gagner and MDZ, then it has to be considered that the Canucks, being a team which was very unsuccessful the last two years, probably had to overpay to sign them. If that's the case, and with them not improving their calibre of play, it's unlikely any team would want to acquire their contracts. There can probably be players acquired that don't need to be overpaid. In those cases, the only real likelihood of moving the player is as a rental to a playoff bound team that can dump their contract at the end of the season.
The question then is, are Gagner and MDZ players of the sort that a team would want to acquire to gear up for a playoff run? Imo they aren't. I think of of the playoffs as more defensive, with less attention paid to the rule book. Neither of these players brings much grit nor much defensive ability, so in my opinion they are worth less in playoff games than they would be during the regular season.
All this is a long-winded suggestion that the Canucks might have trouble if they wanted to dump those contracts. They may have to take back a bad contract or give the other team something additional as an inducement to take on those contracts. I don't see them having an easy time moving these players much before the deadline of the season in which their respective contracts expire and even then there may not be much of a market for either of them.
As your sarcasm is intended to point out players with term are sometimes traded, even at the trade deadline. For example, Hansen's contract wasn't over when the Canucks traded him to San Jose last spring.
Otoh, as you're no doubt aware there are some situations where players can be traded for at the deadline but not early in the season. The situation is generally based on the team's cap hit.
Since the cap hit of a player is calculated based on each day he's on the roster, when a team has enough cap space to fit in a player for the last part of the year, then they can acquire a player late in the season and thereby improve their team, even though if theymonth or two of the year, the team can acquire the player even though they wouldn't have had room to fit in under the cap if they had him earlier in the season. In this way the team can get a bump in ability to have a team that if one were to add up the cap hits for the season would be over the cap, but because they only have a count a small portion of the aav of the newly acquired player they still fit.
So they have a team which wouldn't be able to fit under the cap, fitting under the cap because part of the team is only there for the last part of the season.
The problem with that generally is that then they have the player for the next season-and a team that can't fit him under the cap for the full season without dumping other players. However, if the newly acquired player is on an expiring conract, that is if he's a rental, then the next year just disappears because the team doesn't extend him.
Of course not all deadline moves are of rentals. For example, the Canucks' two moves this past spring were not. Hansen still had this year remaining on his contract and even though the Senators could have treated Burrows as a rental, they signed him to an extension instead. (It's possible, perhaps even likely, that Burrows had been promised an extension as an inducement to waive his ntc.) Similarly, Kevin Bieksa was on an expiring contract when the Ducks acquired him, but iirc they had already negotiated his extension before he agreed to waive, so it can't really be said he was traded as a rental.
The other thing is that if the players being referred to were Gagner and MDZ, then it has to be considered that the Canucks, being a team which was very unsuccessful the last two years, probably had to overpay to sign them. If that's the case, and with them not improving their calibre of play, it's unlikely any team would want to acquire their contracts. There can probably be players acquired that don't need to be overpaid. In those cases, the only real likelihood of moving the player is as a rental to a playoff bound team that can dump their contract at the end of the season.
The question then is, are Gagner and MDZ players of the sort that a team would want to acquire to gear up for a playoff run? Imo they aren't. I think of of the playoffs as more defensive, with less attention paid to the rule book. Neither of these players brings much grit nor much defensive ability, so in my opinion they are worth less in playoff games than they would be during the regular season.
All this is a long-winded suggestion that the Canucks might have trouble if they wanted to dump those contracts. They may have to take back a bad contract or give the other team something additional as an inducement to take on those contracts. I don't see them having an easy time moving these players much before the deadline of the season in which their respective contracts expire and even then there may not be much of a market for either of them.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 63,100
- 24,447
Can tell Green is just trying to get Virtanen and Goldobin’s average ice time up, as one game every 5-10 games he’ll play them 16mins. Then he reverts playing them 10mins that are absolutely meaningless minutes the games afterwards.
So, how have we improved on Willie exactly? Sweet we line match, Dow it really matter with the roster thatbis mish-mashed with washes up vets and young kids?
So, how have we improved on Willie exactly? Sweet we line match, Dow it really matter with the roster thatbis mish-mashed with washes up vets and young kids?
I seem to remember it being around 800m at its peak, Between 3-5 overall in the league
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 63,100
- 24,447
Yeah that’s the number I was thinking too. Maybe it hasn’t fallen 300M, maybe it has but that seems like a lot. All I know is I remember seeing that number a lot, lot less.
Wouldnt surprise me to see a 200m drop so far, maybe even more. Sports evaluations are always a crapshoot anyway. No sympathy for Aquilini
Soups On
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2012
- 3,798
- 2,024
Looks like I'm wrong on Eriksson. I thought last year was an anomaly.
All he does on the rush is dump it in and since he's not that good of a skater anymore, he can't even get a good forecheck going. He used to carry that puck in and take it east-west so the other forwards would be able to get open in high danger area or behind the net. BUT HE KEEPS DUMPING IT IN AND LOSING POSSESSION. So frustrating.
If Chicago can sit Seabrook, Vancouver can sit Eriksson
Baertschi/Vanek Gagner Boeser
Sedin Sedin Goldobin
Vanek/Baertschi Sutter Virtanen
Gaunce Dowd Granlund
Please come back Bo.
All he does on the rush is dump it in and since he's not that good of a skater anymore, he can't even get a good forecheck going. He used to carry that puck in and take it east-west so the other forwards would be able to get open in high danger area or behind the net. BUT HE KEEPS DUMPING IT IN AND LOSING POSSESSION. So frustrating.
If Chicago can sit Seabrook, Vancouver can sit Eriksson
Baertschi/Vanek Gagner Boeser
Sedin Sedin Goldobin
Vanek/Baertschi Sutter Virtanen
Gaunce Dowd Granlund
Please come back Bo.
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
Hence why Aquaman is willing to not extend Benning, you can imagine how much the brand is hurting his bank account.
I can't say he's good but I just dunno how to evaluate a coach with this roster.
This post may be wasted here, but isn't it about time all sides of the Vancouver fan base came sat back and faced fact? This isn't really hard to accept. Once you drop the psychological defense systems and the pray for success of fandom you have to realize this team is not very good. It's not rebuilt. It's not a player or two from becoming a contender. Pettersson and one more top 5 draft pick isn't going to put the team over the top and back into being a force in the NHL.
The current Canucks are composed of 2 guys (the Sedins) whose prime left them and they are still decent players who can put up some points, but they are slow and no longer a force and the opponents score more than they do so the foes are not worried about them. Add to that a D-man who is going the same route in Edler.
Then you have a large number of guys who ended up here as a result of other teams deciding they were no longer of use. Granlund, Baertschi, Sutter, Eriksson, Gagner, Vanek, Dowd, Pouliot, Del Zotto, Gudbranson, Markstrom, Nilsson. These guys are not hot commodities. What could you get in a trade for any single one of them that is so much better than anything you have. Their value would likely return no more than you'd lose and probably less.
Then you have a 5th round draft pick in Hutton who is playing above that level, but is not a top 4 D-man along with Stecher, who wasn't even drafted, fitting the same description. Then you have AHL journeyman Biega who forced his way onto the team 2 years ago and fits the role of the reserve defender as well as it can be described. So three bottom pairing D-men.
The only true asset on D is plastic, Tanev. His plasticity lowers his value on the trade block even if he is a top NHL defensive D-man.
Gaunce is a great 4th line player, but could be replaced with an equal who might have a little more offensive punch. I'd keep him because he serves a necessary role well, but he wouldn't be a great loss.
Again let's face facts when discussing Goldobin and Virtanen. They are seriously long shots to become any type of impact player for the Canucks. Every team has players like them in their system and they are still in the AHL on most teams or serving a sheltered role where they get their ice time, but play with offensive minded players who utilize their specific talents and protect against their deficiencies, but I'm not sure they would be any better any where else. San Jose had said enough with Goldy and we saw Jake struggle at the AHL level where Goldy is a star. Are either of these 2 REALLY showing that they are serious threats to be mainstays on an NHL roster? Goldy is a season from pulling a Tryamkin and Jake is nearing trade bait as a part of a bigger deal.
Horvat and Boeser are draft picks from 2 different regimes and they form the future of this team. Baertschi is the best of the rest up front, but he isn't a player other teams would be standing in line to acquire. He is a fringe guy guy who can fill a role, but he's not the kind of guy that is a serious contributor in a youth movement.
Pettersson and Juolevi fit that role much better if they live up to their expectations. Everybody is convinced they will, but that is still unproven beyond fan glasses. Elias is the better bet and Juolevi becoming a top 2 defender is really reaching at the moment.
No, this team is a long ways from a successful rebuild. The so called complements to a full solid NHL D corps can't even survive down one member. If they were this solid group that so many boasted they were and thus, made Tanev tradeable (and some threw Hutton on the trade table as well), they would be sailing along just fine with Tanev out of the lineup. If the forward crew was only a Pettersson away from playoff caliber we wouldn't have seen the devastation that has befallen them with Horvat out of the lineup.
Sutter is not a foundation piece he is a bottom 6 guy who fills a necessary role at that level and he will be useful as long as that's the role they give him. Gaunce would have filled that center position better than any of these asked to fill that role since he went down. Gaunce is a shutdown defensive type guy who can feed wingers. No one seems to want to put him there.
Benning's messing around for 4 years has the Canucks close to where they were when he came on board. The Sedins will be gone and Horvat, Boeser, and hopefully (fingers crossed) Elias will be the center of the core. The complementary pieces are still in the wind. Baertschi can fit in the middle of the lineup, 2nd/3rd line, but he is not top 3 and without Horvat/Boeser type line mates he will fade into the background on the 2nd line. He's not going to carry a 2nd line as we have already seen since he's been a Canuck. They need to find 3 more solid top 6 guys immediately. They need a Dahlin type D-man beyond all shadows of a doubt. Juolevi is not that guy. A couple more top D-men are also necessary and these 4 would comprise the top 4. Had Benning made the right early round picks some of this group would already be on board and if he kept his high round picks , he might have garnered a couple more who would be rounding into form about now.
These players won't come by the means he has acquired his players over the past 4 seasons. How many of his picks are playing for the Canucks now? Who from the 1st 2 drafts are making an impact? From year one Demko is the diamond, but you absolutely never know with keepers. He alienated another (Tryamkin) who left and signed back in the KHL for 3 years and traded away 2 others (McCann and Fortsling) playing bigger roles in the NHL than the one he kept (Jake).
Boeser is it for year 2. Gaudette is the only other hopeful and he has yet to turn pro and as a 5th round pick will have to defy a lot of odds to become one of those top 6 so desperately needed. Only blind fandom refuses to accept that fact. I hope he does so too, but facts say we better not pencil him in just yet.
The hope from draft 3 is Juolevi. He's not enough to meet the defensive top needs.
Aside form 1st rounder Pettersson, year 4 gives us the same kind of hopes and aspirations every other NHL team's fan base sees in their youngest prospects. Good numbers in Jrs. and wow what they are going to add to the future. Lind and Gadjovich lead the Canucks' top hopefuls. I have already seen them show up in some fans' prospective rosters for next year. If you are steady followers of this site, you have seen this as well and a couple of you are ones who have done such. It would be really nice if you turn out to be right, but the odds of all the guys I've listed from the 4 drafts all becoming integral factors in the Canucks lineup moving into the next era of the Cancucks climb back to Cup contenders is astronomical. It could happen, but it's highly unlikely.
The current Canucks are composed of 2 guys (the Sedins) whose prime left them and they are still decent players who can put up some points, but they are slow and no longer a force and the opponents score more than they do so the foes are not worried about them. Add to that a D-man who is going the same route in Edler.
Then you have a large number of guys who ended up here as a result of other teams deciding they were no longer of use. Granlund, Baertschi, Sutter, Eriksson, Gagner, Vanek, Dowd, Pouliot, Del Zotto, Gudbranson, Markstrom, Nilsson. These guys are not hot commodities. What could you get in a trade for any single one of them that is so much better than anything you have. Their value would likely return no more than you'd lose and probably less.
Then you have a 5th round draft pick in Hutton who is playing above that level, but is not a top 4 D-man along with Stecher, who wasn't even drafted, fitting the same description. Then you have AHL journeyman Biega who forced his way onto the team 2 years ago and fits the role of the reserve defender as well as it can be described. So three bottom pairing D-men.
The only true asset on D is plastic, Tanev. His plasticity lowers his value on the trade block even if he is a top NHL defensive D-man.
Gaunce is a great 4th line player, but could be replaced with an equal who might have a little more offensive punch. I'd keep him because he serves a necessary role well, but he wouldn't be a great loss.
Again let's face facts when discussing Goldobin and Virtanen. They are seriously long shots to become any type of impact player for the Canucks. Every team has players like them in their system and they are still in the AHL on most teams or serving a sheltered role where they get their ice time, but play with offensive minded players who utilize their specific talents and protect against their deficiencies, but I'm not sure they would be any better any where else. San Jose had said enough with Goldy and we saw Jake struggle at the AHL level where Goldy is a star. Are either of these 2 REALLY showing that they are serious threats to be mainstays on an NHL roster? Goldy is a season from pulling a Tryamkin and Jake is nearing trade bait as a part of a bigger deal.
Horvat and Boeser are draft picks from 2 different regimes and they form the future of this team. Baertschi is the best of the rest up front, but he isn't a player other teams would be standing in line to acquire. He is a fringe guy guy who can fill a role, but he's not the kind of guy that is a serious contributor in a youth movement.
Pettersson and Juolevi fit that role much better if they live up to their expectations. Everybody is convinced they will, but that is still unproven beyond fan glasses. Elias is the better bet and Juolevi becoming a top 2 defender is really reaching at the moment.
No, this team is a long ways from a successful rebuild. The so called complements to a full solid NHL D corps can't even survive down one member. If they were this solid group that so many boasted they were and thus, made Tanev tradeable (and some threw Hutton on the trade table as well), they would be sailing along just fine with Tanev out of the lineup. If the forward crew was only a Pettersson away from playoff caliber we wouldn't have seen the devastation that has befallen them with Horvat out of the lineup.
Sutter is not a foundation piece he is a bottom 6 guy who fills a necessary role at that level and he will be useful as long as that's the role they give him. Gaunce would have filled that center position better than any of these asked to fill that role since he went down. Gaunce is a shutdown defensive type guy who can feed wingers. No one seems to want to put him there.
Benning's messing around for 4 years has the Canucks close to where they were when he came on board. The Sedins will be gone and Horvat, Boeser, and hopefully (fingers crossed) Elias will be the center of the core. The complementary pieces are still in the wind. Baertschi can fit in the middle of the lineup, 2nd/3rd line, but he is not top 3 and without Horvat/Boeser type line mates he will fade into the background on the 2nd line. He's not going to carry a 2nd line as we have already seen since he's been a Canuck. They need to find 3 more solid top 6 guys immediately. They need a Dahlin type D-man beyond all shadows of a doubt. Juolevi is not that guy. A couple more top D-men are also necessary and these 4 would comprise the top 4. Had Benning made the right early round picks some of this group would already be on board and if he kept his high round picks , he might have garnered a couple more who would be rounding into form about now.
These players won't come by the means he has acquired his players over the past 4 seasons. How many of his picks are playing for the Canucks now? Who from the 1st 2 drafts are making an impact? From year one Demko is the diamond, but you absolutely never know with keepers. He alienated another (Tryamkin) who left and signed back in the KHL for 3 years and traded away 2 others (McCann and Fortsling) playing bigger roles in the NHL than the one he kept (Jake).
Boeser is it for year 2. Gaudette is the only other hopeful and he has yet to turn pro and as a 5th round pick will have to defy a lot of odds to become one of those top 6 so desperately needed. Only blind fandom refuses to accept that fact. I hope he does so too, but facts say we better not pencil him in just yet.
The hope from draft 3 is Juolevi. He's not enough to meet the defensive top needs.
Aside form 1st rounder Pettersson, year 4 gives us the same kind of hopes and aspirations every other NHL team's fan base sees in their youngest prospects. Good numbers in Jrs. and wow what they are going to add to the future. Lind and Gadjovich lead the Canucks' top hopefuls. I have already seen them show up in some fans' prospective rosters for next year. If you are steady followers of this site, you have seen this as well and a couple of you are ones who have done such. It would be really nice if you turn out to be right, but the odds of all the guys I've listed from the 4 drafts all becoming integral factors in the Canucks lineup moving into the next era of the Cancucks climb back to Cup contenders is astronomical. It could happen, but it's highly unlikely.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Game 4 Providence Bruins @ Hartford Wolf Pack - Hartford Wolf Pack leads series 2-1Wagers: 2Staked: $49.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 4 Belleville Senators @ Cleveland Monsters - Cleveland Monsters leads series 2-1Wagers: 2Staked: $125.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Game 5 Syracuse Crunch @ Rochester Americans - Series tied 2-2Wagers: 2Staked: $1,100.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
SEMIFINAL GAME 2 - Minnesota @ Toronto - Toronto leads 1-0Wagers: 2Staked: $170.00Event closes- Updated:
