DANIEL SEDIN AND HENRIK SEDIN | Dear Vancouver,

rune74

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
9,228
552
Probably because I'm actually trying to attempt to discuss the topic of the thread, rather than derail it engaging in a discussion about free agency 10 years ago. But, just like my comment about rational discussion being thrown out the window whenever the Sedins are given any kind of criticism I guess so do the thread topics.

I don't know if you are intentionally ignoring the fact that you tend to drag up 10 year old things in a lot of your arguments or not....

Long story short, these guys gave played a ton for this team and I'm fine with them finishing off here.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,844
85,369
Vancouver, BC
Again, thanks for proving my point about needing to go to extremes to defend the Sedins. It's getting ridiculous.

How is valuing emotional attachment to players as a fan 'going to extremes'?

I think everyone gets that you've never liked these players and have been making proposals to get rid of them for a decade ... and that reflects poorly on you, not everyone else. That you didn't properly appreciate how great these players were for this franchise is a shame.
 

CascadiaPuck

Proud Canucks investor.
Jan 13, 2010
1,779
2,298
Vancouver
How is valuing emotional attachment to players as a fan 'going to extremes'?

Yeah - I don't get it either. If the Canucks and Penguins swapped rosters right now and the Canucks won the Cup in 2017/18, it wouldn't mean anywhere near as much to me as if the team had closed the deal in 2011, when they were a team that consisted of players I'd watched develop and grow into contributors - and who I had inside jokes about with my friends and family, etc. You know - all the stuff that is part of sports fandom for lots of people.

I don't think it takes a particularly heroic effort to understand the difference, but to each their own.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
How is valuing emotional attachment to players as a fan 'going to extremes'?

I think everyone gets that you've never liked these players and have been making proposals to get rid of them for a decade ... and that reflects poorly on you, not everyone else. That you didn't properly appreciate how great these players were for this franchise is a shame.

Suggesting trading the entire roster for an actual good team's roster and not having an emotional attachment winning a cup in that scenario...that's not extreme? Give me a break.

We're talking about the Sedins not valuing winning a Stanley Cup. Their top priority is just playing in Vancouver. It's not to win a Stanley Cup. That's the problem I have. This doesn't reflect poorly on me at all. I want the Canucks to win the Stanley Cup. They failed in this regard, just like everyone else who has put on this uniform. What's a shame is that there are Canuck fans who prefer having two nice guys on the team than winning a Stanley Cup...just like those two guys. This is professional sports, not a country club.

I would be happier seeing the Canucks win a Stanley Cup with Brad Marchand, Milan Lucic, Duncan Keith, Drew Doughty, and Dustin Byfuglien than I would be seeing the Sedins continue to play with the Canucks for a few more years but get no Stanley Cup.
 

Alan Jackson

Registered User
Nov 3, 2005
5,197
59
Langley, BC
Again, thanks for proving my point about needing to go to extremes to defend the Sedins. It's getting ridiculous.

They're the two leading scorers in franchise history and are beloved in the community. They don't need "defending" from anybody, least of all you.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting these players to finish their careers as Canucks, nor is there anything wrong with the twins wanting to do just that.

They're proud Canucks, and as a fan, that's something I admire and respect.
 

CascadiaPuck

Proud Canucks investor.
Jan 13, 2010
1,779
2,298
Vancouver
I would be happier seeing the Canucks win a Stanley Cup with Brad Marchand, Milan Lucic, Duncan Keith, Drew Doughty, and Dustin Byfuglien than I would be seeing the Sedins continue to play with the Canucks for a few more years but get no Stanley Cup.

To each their own.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
They're the two leading scorers in franchise history and are beloved in the community. They don't "defending" from anybody, least of all you.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting these players to finish their careers as Canucks, nor is there anything wrong with the twins wanting to do just that.

They're proud Canucks, and as a fan, that's something I admire and respect.

No, you're wrong. As a professional athlete if your top priority is not to win the league championship for whatever league you're in then you should not be a professional athlete anymore. That's all there is to it.
 

Alan Jackson

Registered User
Nov 3, 2005
5,197
59
Langley, BC
No, you're wrong. As a professional athlete if your top priority is not to win the league championship for whatever league you're in then you should not be a professional athlete anymore. That's all there is to it.

Again, their top priority is to win the Stanley Cup for the city and team that they love. If you can't understand that, perhaps you're not a real fan after all.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Again, their top priority is to win the Stanley Cup for the city and team that they love. If you can't understand that, perhaps you're not a real fan after all.

Except I'm also smart enough to understand that this isn't going to happen. I'm not delusional and think that the Canucks are going to win the Stanley Cup anytime soon. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that a bottom 3 team in back to back seasons is nowhere close to a Cup. Maybe the Sedins are poor at self-reflection?
 

Alan Jackson

Registered User
Nov 3, 2005
5,197
59
Langley, BC
Of course you did, because why engage in a meaningful discussion when you can just post this.

Yeah, that was a cheap shot.

If I'm honest, I'm not sure what meaningful discussion is to be had. You've been dismissive and belittling of these players for years. I'm not going to change your mind, so why bother?

Here's a question - do you think winning a Stanley Cup was Roberto Luongo's top priority when he agreed to a trade back to Florida?
 

Mr. Canucklehead

Kitimat Canuck
Dec 14, 2002
40,705
32,041
Kitimat, BC
Suggesting trading the entire roster for an actual good team's roster and not having an emotional attachment winning a cup in that scenario...that's not extreme? Give me a break. .

No more extreme than suggesting the team you are a fan of intentionally botch their negotiations with Bo Horvat and lose our future captain/core player in order to get some management folks fired.

As usual, you've completely lost the plot (assuming you ever had it) when it comes to anything Sedin related. Unfortunately for the rest of us, you continue to pollute every Sedin thread - good, bad or ugly - with your unique combination of willful ignorance, utter condescension and utter nonsense.

Your bias is showing. It's been showing for years. It showed with your unique points boondoggle. It showed with your laughable Gaborik/Cammaleri propositions. It's showing again here. You have nothing new to offer this subject, so rather than yelling at the clouds about how much you hate the two best players this franchise has ever had (the two only career players this franchise will have ever had, either) just stop talking and move on to a subject you can actually contribute something of value to.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,934
9,625
No, you're wrong. As a professional athlete if your top priority is not to win the league championship for whatever league you're in then you should not be a professional athlete anymore. That's all there is to it.

no you're completely wrong. your argument is not supported by logic or authority. stop making stuff up.

the idea there can only be one goal throughout a player's professional career is a ridiculous standard and ignores the many roles a professional athlete can play in their sport and contribute.

for example, in the twilight of your career you can accept a role as a stabilizing force and mentor for younger athletes on a poor team. that is just fine. admirable even.

it is contributing value to that team and something any professional athlete can do with his head held high.

the notion that the ultimate aspiration for a veteran player on a poor team is to parachute onto a contending team as a spare part to try to push it over the edge for a cup win, is, on the other hand, not necessarily nearly as admirable. if doughty was to demand a trade to a contender next year and get his wish only to fall flat, a great many people would see it as a just reward for his hubris and disloyalty to his "uncompetitive" teammates on the kings.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Yeah, that was a cheap shot.

If I'm honest, I'm not sure what meaningful discussion is to be had. You've been dismissive and belittling of these players for years. I'm not going to change your mind, so why bother?

Here's a question - do you think winning a Stanley Cup was Roberto Luongo's top priority when he agreed to a trade back to Florida?

Except this has nothing to do with any of those previous discussions. This has everything to do with the topic at hand. And in this article the Sedins state that they would prefer to play out their careers in Vancouver than go somewhere else and win a Stanley Cup. They state that winning a Cup elsewhere wouldn't mean as much to them. That's the problem I have. Winning a Stanley Cup should be their main priority, and that clearly isn't.

If we were talking about any other players they would be open to more criticism, but because it's the Sedins, and like I stated with some of you they can do no wrong, it's apparently okay. Hey, that's fine though. If you prefer to have two nice guys on the team rather than a team of players who want to win the Cup, go for it. Don't let me change your preference. But in doing that you should lose the right to criticize Trevor Linden who's also a good guy, for how poorly he's done his job.

And your final question has already been answered:

But my point still stands: if you're a professional athlete and you don't value winning a Cup there's a problem. And it's a valid complaint with other athletes too. Luongo is another example as someone who preferred playing in a certain spot moreso than winning a Cup.

Something that's been conveniently ignored.



No more extreme than suggesting the team you are a fan of intentionally botch their negotiations with Bo Horvat and lose our future captain/core player in order to get some management folks fired.

As usual, you've completely lost the plot (assuming you ever had it) when it comes to anything Sedin related. Unfortunately for the rest of us, you continue to pollute every Sedin thread - good, bad or ugly - with your unique combination of willful ignorance, utter condescension and utter nonsense.

Your bias is showing. It's been showing for years. It showed with your unique points boondoggle. It showed with your laughable Gaborik/Cammaleri propositions. It's showing again here. You have nothing new to offer this subject, so rather than yelling at the clouds about how much you hate the two best players this franchise has ever had (the two only career players this franchise will have ever had, either) just stop talking and move on to a subject you can actually contribute something of value to.

Not at all. I see this team as needing new management in order to get closer to a Cup. If management didn't botch the Horvat negotiations, and the team ends up a few points higher in the standings, and management gets an extension, you're looking at another decade before we can hope to be contenders. My focus is on wanting Vancouver to win a Stanley Cup. Yours may be to have a team full of nice, likeable guys. To each their own I guess.

There's no bias showing at all. I'm not polluting anything. I'm responding to people who are either attacking me or responding to my posts. But apparently if my opinion doesn't jive with the general consensus it's okay to attack me, ignore what i'm saying and come up with strawmans, bring up something from 10 years ago that's not relevant at all to the discussion, or just openly tell me to shut up.

If this is a thread to just fawn of the Sedins where no actual discussion is permitted, fine, just label it as such and we can honestly move on. People can write down their unconditional love for these guys and have their safe space where anything the Sedins do is great.

My understanding is that this is a message board where we discuss things. My opinion, and I've kept it within the confines of the topic at hand which is their article, is that I do not agree with their mindset and approach to the game at this time. My mindset is that pro athletes top priorities should be to win the championship in whatever league they're in. That's the goal. That's the reason you play. I'm not wrong in thinking this, and there are other pro athletes that have come out and stated they don't care where they play, they just want a Cup.

Or are you telling me that Ray Bourque was wrong to ask to be traded out of Boston to pursue a Cup? I guess his bias is showing to, right? :shakehead

And for the record, the only ones polluting the Sedin threads are the ones who can't keep the discussion to the topic at hand. The ones who ignore what I'm saying and just respond with "y2k please shut up" or "Blah blah blah Gaborik/Cammalleri." But hey, to each their own I guess.
 

LeftCoast

Registered User
Aug 1, 2006
9,052
304
Vancouver
The list of players who have chosen to play their entire careers with one team in the NHL includes an aweful lot of HOFers and near HOFers. Some have been fortunate enough to have won cups (Yzerman, Listrom, Datsyuk, Sakic, Bossy, Potvin, Clarke, Makita, Henri, Maurice, Cournoyer, Gainey, etc.). Others have played their entire careers with the same team and never won a cup - Shane Doan, Gilbert Perreault, Andrei Markov, Dave Taylor, and yes, Henrik and Daniel. While other still have chased a Stanley Cup at the tail end of their careers and been disappointing - Jerome Iginla comes to mind. Does anyone remember Marcel Dionne as a NY Ranger? Daniel Alfredsson as a Redwing? Most of the time, these late career moves are not as much an indication of the player's desire to win, but a refusal to "hang em up". Sure, there have been players like Ray Bourque, but most of the past Stanley Cup winners (at least in the cap era) moves at the TDL have been for depth players, not aging stars. While I'm sure Bruins fans were happy for Bourque when he won a cup with the Avs, how do you think Kings fans (both of them?) felt seeing Marcel Dionne playing out his career in the Rangers IHL affiliate? Or Leafs fans when Sundin played out his career here in Vancouver?

Some players simply belong in a certain jersey and if they recognize that and choose to finish out their career with the team they started they should be applauded for their contribution, loyalty and committment to the city and team. It's not surprising that Pauser would choose to diss them instead - he has spent their entire careers being wrong about them. Why stop now?
 

vancityluongo

curse of the strombino
Sponsor
Jul 8, 2006
18,694
6,393
Edmonton
Something that's been conveniently ignored.

Well, at least you answered the Luongo question.

Now: what would you do as GM if you had full autonomy to trade them or ask them to retire? You might have mentioned it in the walls of text somewhere else but I tried reading through the various deflections and strawman arguments and couldn't find it.
 

Alan Jackson

Registered User
Nov 3, 2005
5,197
59
Langley, BC
Except this has nothing to do with any of those previous discussions. This has everything to do with the topic at hand. And in this article the Sedins state that they would prefer to play out their careers in Vancouver than go somewhere else and win a Stanley Cup. They state that winning a Cup elsewhere wouldn't mean as much to them.

Exactly - winning a Stanley Cup wouldn't mean as much if it's not with the Canucks. The Sedins love Vancouver, love this team, and want to win with this team, or not at all. I admire that loyalty.

I missed your previous post regarding Luongo prior to asking about him. Should he just quit? Is he some sort of loser because he's chosen lifestyle/family over winning? Should he be mocked for it? Should we suggest maybe he was never serious about winning in the first place, and that led to some playoff meltdowns?

If winning is all that matters to you, I have a suggestion - cheer for a different team. The Canucks are likely years away from winning a cup, so do yourself a favour and switch allegiances. A cup is a cup, right? It will feel just as good.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Well, at least you answered the Luongo question.

Now: what would you do as GM if you had full autonomy to trade them or ask them to retire? You might have mentioned it in the walls of text somewhere else but I tried reading through the various deflections and strawman arguments and couldn't find it.

I would look to trade them. If they refuse to waive their NMC I would let them play out the rest of the season but wouldn't look to re-sign them.

The only deflections and strawman were coming from your responses to what I wrote.
 

Mr. Canucklehead

Kitimat Canuck
Dec 14, 2002
40,705
32,041
Kitimat, BC
Not at all. I see this team as needing new management in order to get closer to a Cup. If management didn't botch the Horvat negotiations, and the team ends up a few points higher in the standings, and management gets an extension, you're looking at another decade before we can hope to be contenders. My focus is on wanting Vancouver to win a Stanley Cup. Yours may be to have a team full of nice, likeable guys. To each their own I guess.

You can try to put lipstick on a pig all you want - your suggestion was the exact sort of extreme you're railing against.

There's no bias showing at all.

Yes it is.

I'm not polluting anything.

Yes you are.

I'm responding to people who are either attacking me or responding to my posts. But apparently if my opinion doesn't jive with the general consensus it's okay to attack me, ignore what i'm saying and come up with strawmans, bring up something from 10 years ago that's not relevant at all to the discussion, or just openly tell me to shut up.

It's curious; you're awfully quick to point out when you were right about something. But awfully slow to admit when you were wrong. Given that the statement 10 years' previous was about the Sedins, it is exactly relevant to factor in when weighing how much credence to give your arguments now. Because it would have been the exact type of colossal mismanagement that you yourself argue against today.

If this is a thread to just fawn of the Sedins where no actual discussion is permitted, fine, just label it as such and we can honestly move on. People can write down their unconditional love for these guys and have their safe space where anything the Sedins do is great.

It's neither. Discussion is permitted as per the Site Rules. However you need to understand that when you state a position that is patently ridiculous, you can and will be called out on it.

My understanding is that this is a message board where we discuss things. My opinion, and I've kept it within the confines of the topic at hand which is their article, is that I do not agree with their mindset and approach to the game at this time. My mindset is that pro athletes top priorities should be to win the championship in whatever league they're in. That's the goal. That's the reason you play. I'm not wrong in thinking this, and there are other pro athletes that have come out and stated they don't care where they play, they just want a Cup.

The goal is the Cup. I fail to see how the Sedins being here or not for the next 1, 2 or 5 years would run counter to that goal. They could retire today - we aren't making the playoffs. They could play this year - we aren't making the playoffs. It literally makes no difference, other than to give this franchise a veneer of class in that we managed to have two career players (for the first time ever) who exceed 1,000 games and 1,000 points apiece - again, for the first time ever for this franchise.

Or are you telling me that Ray Bourque was wrong to ask to be traded out of Boston to pursue a Cup? I guess his bias is showing to, right? :shakehead

He wasn't wrong at all. He was within his rights to do so, and he's respected for it. The same as the Sedins are in their rights to want to remain in Vancouver, and be respected for it, too. Mats Sundin did the same thing with Toronto until he was kicked to the curb as a free agent. Shane Doan did the same thing. There are others throughout history who have done the same thing; it's not some foreign concept that runs counter to the ambitions of winning a Stanley Cup, as you seem to suggest.

And for the record, the only ones polluting the Sedin threads are the ones who can't keep the discussion to the topic at hand.

And I wonder who started driving the topic off hand, I wonder?


The ones who ignore what I'm saying and just respond with "y2k please shut up"

Admittedly uncharacteristic of me. I was tired. So now I'm engaging with you.

or "Blah blah blah Gaborik/Cammalleri." But hey, to each their own I guess.

Try and minimize this point all you want. But as that, and your unique points argument, are well-documented blunders in your long standing crusade against the Sedins, its germane to point out how wrong you were when telling you once again how wrong you are.
 

rune74

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
9,228
552
Yeah, that was a cheap shot.

If I'm honest, I'm not sure what meaningful discussion is to be had. You've been dismissive and belittling of everyone for years. I'm not going to change your mind, so why bother?

Here's a question - do you think winning a Stanley Cup was Roberto Luongo's top priority when he agreed to a trade back to Florida?

Fixed that for you.
 

Nick Lang

Registered User
May 14, 2015
2,044
532
No, you're wrong. As a professional athlete if your top priority is not to win the league championship for whatever league you're in then you should not be a professional athlete anymore. That's all there is to it.

When have they ever said the aren't trying to win? In fact they state it in the letter.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
You can try to put lipstick on a pig all you want - your suggestion was the exact sort of extreme you're railing against.

Not at all actually.


Yes it is.



Yes you are.

Okay, I'll keep that in mind. Any discussion that's negative towards the Sedin is polluting the boards. Good to know.

It's curious; you're awfully quick to point out when you were right about something. But awfully slow to admit when you were wrong. Given that the statement 10 years' previous was about the Sedins, it is exactly relevant to factor in when weighing how much credence to give your arguments now. Because it would have been the exact type of colossal mismanagement that you yourself argue against today.

Well I've been trying to keep my discussion related to the topic at hand. Didn't want to violate the rules and go off-topic which is why I've been discussing a controversial statement they made in the article they wrote that this thread is about.

But I guess bringing up statements from a decade ago is not considered off topic anymore? Or is that just the case when it's against me?


It's neither. Discussion is permitted as per the Site Rules. However you need to understand that when you state a position that is patently ridiculous, you can and will be called out on it.

Suggesting that a hockey player's top priority should be to win the Stanley Cup is "patently ridiculous" now? Good to know.


The goal is the Cup. I fail to see how the Sedins being here or not for the next 1, 2 or 5 years would run counter to that goal. They could retire today - we aren't making the playoffs. They could play this year - we aren't making the playoffs. It literally makes no difference, other than to give this franchise a veneer of class in that we managed to have two career players (for the first time ever) who exceed 1,000 games and 1,000 points apiece - again, for the first time ever for this franchise.

The goal is the Cup? But you just said it's patently ridiculous. I'm being convinced in this thread that the goal is just to be a nice guy and stay with the team that drafted you. If you get a Cup, great, but if the day comes when you're nearing retirement and a Cup is nowhere in sight for the team you're on, oh well, that was just secondary anyway.


He wasn't wrong at all. He was within his rights to do so, and he's respected for it. The same as the Sedins are in their rights to want to remain in Vancouver, and be respected for it, too. Mats Sundin did the same thing with Toronto until he was kicked to the curb as a free agent. Shane Doan did the same thing. There are others throughout history who have done the same thing; it's not some foreign concept that runs counter to the ambitions of winning a Stanley Cup, as you seem to suggest.

It's a mindset I strongly disagree with.

IIRC Shane Doan was open to a trade at this past trade deadline, so bad example there.

Mats Sundin eventually did move on to a contender though. And he was vilified for nixing a trade in his last year in Toronto. Bad example.

The Sedins are within their right to stay here, because they have a NMC, but they don't have the right to be respected for putting playing in Vancouver above trying to chase a Stanley Cup. I don't respect that at all. I respect players who are willing to do whatever it takes to be the best. Oh well. At least we got some nice guys. No cup, but nice guys who smile. Where's the trophy for that?

And I wonder who started driving the topic off hand, I wonder?

Do you really want me to go back to the first pages of this thread and pick out names?

Or are you suggesting that talking about a controversial statement these guys made in an article that this thread is about, is going off topic?

Admittedly uncharacteristic of me. I was tired. So now I'm engaging with you.



Try and minimize this point all you want. But as that, and your unique points argument, are well-documented blunders in your long standing crusade against the Sedins, its germane to point out how wrong you were when telling you once again how wrong you are.

Actually it wasn't a blunder at all. It was mislabeled. It was a counter to the stupid argument that losing the Sedins would cost us 160 goals because they're both 80 point players. Still not sure what that has to do with the discussion at hand, but apparently bringing up arguments from 10 years ago is on topic, but discussing a controversial statement made in an article that this thread is based on is off-topic.

Strange.
 

Street Hawk

Registered User
Feb 18, 2003
5,348
20
Visit site
I would look to trade them. If they refuse to waive their NMC I would let them play out the rest of the season but wouldn't look to re-sign them.

The only deflections and strawman were coming from your responses to what I wrote.

That's exactly what has happened isn't it? Twins hold a NMC, so they came out and said that they don't want to leave so makes no difference what the team may want.

And I agree that there is no reason to extend them.

What difference does it make what their reasons are for staying. Won't change the fact that they won't leave.

I have accepted it. You should as well so that we can drop this.

This is a different matter if they did not hold NMC. Then trading them should be what management does. But the NMC is there.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad