Leafs have never made it to stanley cup finals since 1966, vancouver has been there 3 times just saying.
- pker2theend

Considering that the Leafs win the cup in 1967, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that your statement is false.

Speak for yourself...I'm taking Hammer all day.
- andru2797

Bieksa plays with Snarl that Hawks lack on the back end. Hammer is a turnover machine and if we got rid of him we could of still had buff or Niemi. So yea I would pack Hammers bag for Bieksa

We will take Bieksa for Hjalmarsson
- nickmo2699

No. Bad idea.

As Fat Tony Amonte would say "Go take a lap for writing that."

I'm sorry, but has this Canucks team given us any reason to think otherwise?

LA has dominated Vancouver in just about every way this series. I just don't see anything changing, do you? If so, what and how?
- As_I_See_It

Ummm...VAN has outshot LA 2:1 the last 2 games. A more accurate statement would be: Quick and Brown have dominated the Canucks in every way in this series.

Last I checked Schneider doesn't have a ring and he isn't considered the #1

He'll get fair market value for a back up. I just can't think of any reason he could argue for more then 2.5 mil per.

Look around, unless you have put your time in as a #1 you aren't getting paid
- IanEsplen

When the pricetag for another team to acquire him starts at a First Rounder+Top Prospect to even get in on the conversation, how could you undervalue his worth come contract time? Schneider is going to be one of the top goalies in this league and and should be looking at $3.5 to start. Just my two cents, not a bad problem to have that's for sure.

You didn't watch last night, didnt you?

Nice subject change, troll.
- Mattjd123

Leafs have never made it to stanley cup finals since 1966, vancouver has been there 3 times just saying.
- pker2theend

Leafs have never made it to the 4th round.

Ummm...VAN has outshot LA 2:1 the last 2 games. A more accurate statement would be: Quick and Brown have dominated the Canucks in every way in this series.
- andru2797

Richards has been pretty good as well.

You didn't watch last night, didnt you?

Nice subject change, troll.
- Mattjd123

Oh I watched it, Brown and Quick singlehandly dominated Vancouver.
Can you say otherwise?

please add facts....just make them relevant.
I'll start:
canuck cups=0
- Barx

Fact: Meager intelligence results in unoriginal comments.

Bieksa plays with Snarl that Hawks lack on the back end. Hammer is a turnover machine and if we got rid of him we could of still had buff or Niemi. So yea I would pack Hammers bag for Bieksa
- nickmo2699

Hammer does a lot of the gruntwork that goes unnoticed and is under-appreciated by most fans like blocking shots, throwing big hits at the right time (See PHO series), killing penalties...he doesn't care about individual accolades or personal awards. He's there to help the team win. I wouldn't trade a guy like that for perceived "snarl".

Considering that the Leafs win the cup in 1967, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that your statement is false.
- As_I_See_It

Woops my bad 1967, but I wasn't born then so excuse me.

Oh I watched it, Brown and Quick singlehandly dominated Vancouver.
Can you say otherwise?
- As_I_See_It

There is the only reason.

I'm sorry, but has this Canucks team given us any reason to think otherwise?

LA has dominated Vancouver in just about every way this series. I just don't see anything changing, do you? If so, what and how?
- As_I_See_It

I know this isn't NHL12 on PS3... but what about shots?

Fact: Meager intelligence results in unoriginal comments.
- Mattjd123

please refer to your own posts to prove this fact.

'You didn't watch last night, didnt you?'
~Mattjd123

There is the only reason.
- Mattjd123

Now now, give credit where credit is due...Richards and Brown have outplayed Kesler and Hank in all 3 zones.

please refer to your own posts to prove this fact.
- Barx

Anything insightful to add?

There is the only reason.
- Mattjd123

You didn't watch last night, didnt you?

You didn't watch last night, didnt you?
- Barx

Last night was all quick and LA's PK. That's it. Vancouver carried the play for most of the game otherwise.

Last night was all quick and LA's PK. That's it. Vancouver carried the play for most of the game otherwise.
- andru2797

carrying the play means nothing....winning does.

You didn't watch last night, didnt you?
- Barx

It is clear quick was the reason they won, just because brown got a lucky rebound does not mean he is the one who won the game for them

It is clear quick was the reason they won, just because brown got a lucky rebound does not mean he is the one who won the game for them
- pker2theend

team game-kings are the better team.

carrying the play means nothing....winning does.
- Barx

The winning team doesn't always dominate...that's exactly my point. LA has NOT dominated Vancouver other than in the win column...agree that's where it matters though.

It is clear quick was the reason they won, just because brown got a lucky rebound does not mean he is the one who won the game for them
- pker2theend

Brown has been unbelievable this series.