I don't think they planned on being as bad as they were but everyone knew they were going to be poop and they were.. but Vancouver thinks they will have a competitive team and they're a mess but leafs are the idiots. That's what I find funny about the way you guys talk about the leafs, when Vancouver is a struggling team aswell..
- ClarksonDavid

Vancouver is far from a "mess" and they do have a competitive team, not a Cup contending competitive team, but still a competitive team. Their problem is A) they're a poorly coached team B) quality forward depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years C) poor defensive depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years D) a non NHL ready prospect system from poor drafting in the Gillis years E) the age gap between current young players and or prospects and the Sedins.

I don't think the Canucks are a playoff team but keep in mind they were in a wildcard position up until February when the injuries, legit and fake, started to occur.

I am talking about last year that's it and you're bringing up the past you cast even admit how poopty you guys were just make the injury excuse and take jabs about the leafs. Leafs have been terrible for a long time I know that, I have never said otherwise.
- ClarksonDavid

I will let you have the last say. I have said enough.

The Oilers didn't tank for McDavid or maybe they did, I just thought they tanked about 5 years or more ago and haven't been able to get out of it.
- hillbillydeluxe

They tanked for Hall, their managerial incompetence and luck got them a franchise player (finally) in McDavid.

Vancouver is far from a "mess" and they do have a competitive team, not a Cup contending competitive team, but still a competitive team. Their problem is A) they're a poorly coached team B) quality forward depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years C) poor defensive depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years D) a non NHL ready prospect system from poor drafting in the Gillis years E) the age gap between current young players and or prospects and the Sedins.

I don't think the Canucks are a playoff team but keep in mind they were in a wildcard position up until February when the injuries, legit and fake, started to occur.
- LeftCoaster

It's simply not acceptable. Yes, the odds have changed but having teams lose intentionally is bad for the image and integrity of the sport. It needs to stop. If LA works hard to make the playoffs and misses out and wins the lottery...well in my opinion that is better than a perennially loser getting rewarded for incompetence.
- CanuckDon

I hear what you are saying and no way do I support tanking but I do think the worst teams need to have the best chance to acquire top end talent for a healthy league.

Vancouver is far from a "mess" and they do have a competitive team, not a Cup contending competitive team, but still a competitive team. Their problem is A) they're a poorly coached team B) quality forward depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years C) poor defensive depth from poor drafting in the Gillis years D) a non NHL ready prospect system from poor drafting in the Gillis years E) the age gap between current young players and or prospects and the Sedins.

I don't think the Canucks are a playoff team but keep in mind they were in a wildcard position up until February when the injuries, legit and fake, started to occur.
- LeftCoaster

I again agree with what you are saying mostly except that I would say they are trying to be a competitive team, not that they are one.

I support the idea of having a competitive team while rebuilding but so far we haven't seen the competitive part, a bottom 6 and a bottom 3 team sandwiched with losing in the first round to a pretty terrible team in which an 18 year old and a 4th liner were the difference makers.

Thanks God for Horvat or it would of been a lot more embarrassing.

Love it.

Blog's got (frank) all to do with the Leafs. No Leafs fans in sight. Ref comes in. Unprovoked and unnecessary jab at the Leafs. And we're off.
- walshyleafsfan

so lets see. youre saying its all our fault here in our own room (and staying in our own room I should add) that all you leafs trolls, while trolling in our room get offended by a single mention of the leafs? Is that what youre saying? Its somehow all our fault in our own room for our "savage" attacks

if theyd beat it on outta here there'd b no issue. There's only 1 reason they are here and thats to troll troll troll.

Love it.

Blog's got (frank) all to do with the Leafs. No Leafs fans in sight. Ref comes in. Unprovoked and unnecessary jab at the Leafs. And we're off.
- walshyleafsfan

Maybe your skin is to thin.

I hear what you are saying and no way do I support tanking but I do think the worst teams need to have the best chance to acquire top end talent for a healthy league.
- belcherbd

And I dont Disagree with you either but they need to take the next step. Instead of finishing last and dropping to 4th (worse case) let's see the them drop to 10th or something. They need to eliminate the intentional tank

I am talking about last year that's it and you're bringing up the past you cast even admit how poopty you guys were just make the injury excuse and take jabs about the leafs. Leafs have been terrible for a long time I know that, I have never said otherwise.
- ClarksonDavid

youre here talking about the leafs in a canucks forum and you wonder why people have negative things to say about the team youre pushing here. We dont want it here and it shouldnt be here...perhaps you'll see a rosier response over in the leafs forum

I again agree with what you are saying mostly except that I would say they are trying to be a competitive team, not that they are one.

I support the idea of having a competitive team while rebuilding but so far we haven't seen the competitive part, a bottom 6 and a bottom 3 team sandwiched with losing in the first round to a pretty terrible team in which an 18 year old and a 4th liner were the difference makers.

Thanks God for Horvat or it would of been a lot more embarrassing.
- belcherbd

To me our current situation primarily comes down to the Gillis drafting years, he selected 37 times in his tenure here, out of those picks two players are currently with the team as NHL regulars, they've combined for 225 NHL games....that's pathetic!

A generational gap is hard to fix and be competitive at the same time.

To me our current situation primarily comes down to the Gillis drafting years, he selected 37 times in his tenure here, out of those picks two players are currently with the team as NHL regulars, they've combined for 225 NHL games....that's pathetic!

A generational gap is hard to fix and be competitive at the same time.
- LeftCoaster

100%

To me our current situation primarily comes down to the Gillis drafting years, he selected 37 times in his tenure here, out of those picks two players are currently with the team as NHL regulars, they've combined for 225 NHL games....that's pathetic!

A generational gap is hard to fix and be competitive at the same time.
- LeftCoaster

I agree it's pretty dismal and certainly has left very few players in the system because of his poor drafting, draft position and lack of meaningful picks.

I do have a hard time of looking at it n such a vacuum though, his draft picks played in 951 NHL games so far still not impressive but I think more accurate idea of how those picks have done.

Asked the same question on the flames board so I'll ask it here too

If you had to chose one Canuck to overachieve expectations and one to underachieve who would you chose

Over I'll say tryamkin ...he had the body and skill to be good

Under I'll say markstrom ...he's just a glorified ramo to me

Asked the same question on the flames board so I'll ask it here too

If you had to chose one Canuck to overachieve expectations and one to underachieve who would you chose

Over I'll say tryamkin ...he had the body and skill to be good

Under I'll say markstrom ...he's just a glorified ramo to me
- Redmile247

Actually it's quite the reverse. I'm not expecting to be blown away by Tryamkin but I am expecting Markstrom to step up and grab the no 1 spot from Miller this season.

I get your Ramo/Markstrom comparison... but the difference for me is that Ramo could only manage 2.6 GAA and a .909 % behind an excellent (potentially) Flames defense.

Markstrom in 32 games last year had a pretty good showing of his upside and potential IMO. At 2.7 GAA and a .915% behind just a god-awful Canucks defense last season tells me that Markstrom has a quite a bit higher ceiling than Ramo.

Plus I feel that being away from Melanson is going to help Markstrom's game. But I'm probably in the minority there.

Asked the same question on the flames board so I'll ask it here too

If you had to chose one Canuck to overachieve expectations and one to underachieve who would you chose

Over I'll say tryamkin ...he had the body and skill to be good

Under I'll say markstrom ...he's just a glorified ramo to me
- Redmile247

Over I'd say Hurtton - he already did last year, big time, but there are a lot of holes in his game. Still, he's one of our few D that you can reasonably expect offence from, based on his skill set, not his points totals from last year.

Under I'd say Miller - he and Marstrom were fairly even last season, but only one will be a Canuck past next season. Plus if they ever get the goalie equipment figured out it'll impact both goalies, but it might run Miller right out of the league.

Actually it's quite the reverse. I'm not expecting to be blown away by Tryamkin but I am expecting Markstrom to step up and grab the no 1 spot from Miller this season.

I get your Ramo/Markstrom comparison... but the difference for me is that Ramo could only manage 2.6 GAA and a .909 % behind an excellent (potentially) Flames defense.

Markstrom in 32 games last year had a pretty good showing of his upside and potential IMO. At 2.7 GAA and a .915% behind just a god-awful Canucks defense last season tells me that Markstrom has a quite a bit higher ceiling than Ramo.

Plus I feel that being away from Melanson is going to help Markstrom's game. But I'm probably in the minority there.
- LordHumungous

funny how people's opinions can differ ...you could be right though ...I do agree his ceiling is definitely higher

Asked the same question on the flames board so I'll ask it here too

If you had to chose one Canuck to overachieve expectations and one to underachieve who would you chose

Over I'll say tryamkin ...he had the body and skill to be good

Under I'll say markstrom ...he's just a glorified ramo to me
- Redmile247

I would disagree on Markstrom, his development strayed but was a top tier prospect and is getting back on track to be a starter in the NHL, maybe not an elite starter, but solid. As for Tryamkin, for me if he was to overachieve that would mean he was contributing offensively, but I am ok with him being bottom 4 shutdown/PK guy

My choice for who I would like to overachieve is Etem. I wanted to say Sven, but if he stays similar to last year, you have a decent middle 6 forward. I want to see Etem regain his scoring touch from Jr and use his speed as a scoring threat

For underachiever (avoiding picking those not long for the team like Miller/Burrows), I would bet money that Hansen will underachieve expectations for many. I think Horvat wont meet my expectations this year though. I have high hopes for a big breakout year, particularly with Sutter back, but I think it will be another steady improvement year

I would disagree on Markstrom, his development strayed but was a top tier prospect and is getting back on track to be a starter in the NHL, maybe not an elite starter, but solid. As for Tryamkin, for me if he was to overachieve that would mean he was contributing offensively, but I am ok with him being bottom 4 shutdown/PK guy

My choice for who I would like to overachieve is Etem. I wanted to say Sven, but if he stays similar to last year, you have a decent middle 6 forward. I want to see Etem regain his scoring touch from Jr and use his speed as a scoring threat

For underachiever (avoiding picking those not long for the team like Miller/Burrows), I would bet money that Hansen will underachieve expectations for many. I think Horvat wont meet my expectations this year though. I have high hopes for a big breakout year, particularly with Sutter back, but I think it will be another steady improvement year
- WhiteLie

Hansen is a good one ...I forgot about him ...I could definitely see his numbers drop quite a bit if eriksson or anyone else has success with the twins

Over I'd say Hurtton - he already did last year, big time, but there are a lot of holes in his game. Still, he's one of our few D that you can reasonably expect offence from, based on his skill set, not his points totals from last year.

Under I'd say Miller - he and Marstrom were fairly even last season, but only one will be a Canuck past next season. Plus if they ever get the goalie equipment figured out it'll impact both goalies, but it might run Miller right out of the league.
- CubanBuffet

Agreed the goalie equipment rules...they would probably end millers career

Hansen is a good one ...I forgot about him ...I could definitely see his numbers drop quite a bit if eriksson or anyone else has success with the twins
- Redmile247

His numbers are consistent in the 15-17 goal range each year and usually without the Sedins. I expect him to be in that range again, particularly if he keeps shooting the puck at the frequency he has been the past few years. With Erickson though, he will likely see less ice/opportunity to take those shots.

That all said, as long as he stays to his tenacious game and does well defensively, I will be satisfied. He regresses when he forgets that and tries to dangle

Hansen is a good one ...I forgot about him ...I could definitely see his numbers drop quite a bit if eriksson or anyone else has success with the twins
- Redmile247

Hansen should for sure drop back to reality now that he is (hopefully) off the Sedin line for good.

Asked the same question on the flames board so I'll ask it here too

If you had to chose one Canuck to overachieve expectations and one to underachieve who would you chose

Over I'll say tryamkin ...he had the body and skill to be good

Under I'll say markstrom ...he's just a glorified ramo to me
- Redmile247

You asked your Flames buddies about the Canucks?

I will pick Gundbranson. He is playing for a new team and a contract so he will be highly motivated. I seem him wrecking players in our zone and chipping in with 15-18 points. He will be named Henriks successor next summer. Hansen will drop off.

You asked your Flames buddies about the Canucks?

I will pick Gundbranson. He is playing for a new team and a contract so he will be highly motivated. I seem him wrecking players in our zone and chipping in with 15-18 points. He will be named Henriks successor next summer. Hansen will drop off.
- CanuckDon

Hey guys, who do you think will overachieve for the Flames this year and who do you see underachieving for Calgary?

Tree comes in at number 5 on the Canucks Army prospect ranking...never get tired off watching him crushing Pirri and then swatting away a couple of Ducks

http://canucksarmy.com/20...profile-5-nikita-tryamkin