Toggle sidebar

Tank Fails

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
4Twenty said:
Uh where is the “significant bad luck” then?

They moved down twice. One was extremely beneficial (Elias Pettersson). The other (Matthew Tkachuk).

The Canucks arent unlucky. They’re just bad.


Their own choices is why folks have a belief of the bad luck.


I’m not saying the Canucks are going to win Bedard sweepstakes either. But it won’t be because they’re unlucky.
Click to expand...


Sometimes losing the draft it's beneficial, sometimes harmful. That's a different argument to lottery luck. The Canucks are amongst the unluckiest draft lottery draw teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brookbank
Canucker said:
lol...I'm not going to try to dissuade you from your optimistic viewpoint, I don't agree with it but if it helps you feel better about things then more power to you. I would just say that over the last several years we have lost significantly more positional value in the lottery than we have gained...I'm not saying we are some sad sack, "Boo hoo" franchise that never gets anything good...but we do have a string of some bad luck as it comes to the lottery...doesn't mean it can't/won't change, but in recent history we've had a run of bad luck.
Click to expand...
Just curses? Or do you believe in other kinds of magic while making fun of people who don't?
 
If canucks don’t win the lottery and draft somewhere between 5-10, are they more likely to draft a D or F.

I guess where is the bigger organizational need?
 
NewEraGM said:
If canucks don’t win the lottery and draft somewhere between 5-10, are they more likely to draft a D or F.

I guess where is the bigger organizational need?
Click to expand...
Theres only 1 “Elite” D in the draft
 
NewEraGM said:
If canucks don’t win the lottery and draft somewhere between 5-10, are they more likely to draft a D or F.

I guess where is the bigger organizational need?
Click to expand...
Organizational need is BPA that’s plays C or D unless it’s an elite winger prospect like Michkov
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canucker
Nucker101 said:
Organizational need is BPA that’s plays C or D unless it’s an elite winger prospect like Michkov
Click to expand...

Organizationally the system needs damn near everything. There’s nothing there 2-3 years out. Still probably lean D and C if given a choice since they’ve proven fairly hard to acquire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nucker101
Organizational need for prospects is basically never wingers. Like if you have too many really good centres you just either have them play wing since a donkey can figure out how to play wing, or you move them for wingers since centres are inherently more valuable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LickTheEnvelope
TruGr1t said:
Organizationally the system needs damn near everything. There’s nothing there 2-3 years out. Still probably lean D and C if given a choice since they’ve proven fairly hard to acquire.
Click to expand...

We definitely need a blue chip goalie too. There is nothing in the system that projects as a quality starter. Given the current NHL defensive mess it's understandable and Horvat leaving is understandable goalie isn't being talked about but it is arguably the biggest prospect hole, on par with defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TruGr1t
arttk said:
Issue wasn’t prioritizing D, issue was they ID the wrong D.
Click to expand...

Issue was taking a defenceman when the BPA was Matthew Tkachuk - some people had him/Puljujarvi very closely rated, he was the clear 4th best prospect going into the draft. After CBJ took Dubois and EDM took Puljujarvi, he was clearly the BPA but Dim Jim went into his bag and decided this was the time to pick for organizational needs.
 
For the lottery did the Montreal Canadiens drafting 1st count as winning the lottery? If so does that mean they aren't able to get 1st this year?
 
BoHorvat 53 said:
Issue was taking a defenceman when the BPA was Matthew Tkachuk - some people had him/Puljujarvi very closely rated, he was the clear 4th best prospect going into the draft. After CBJ took Dubois and EDM took Puljujarvi, he was clearly the BPA but Dim Jim went into his bag and decided this was the time to pick for organizational needs.
Click to expand...
I mean yeah but if we took Sergachev, Mcvoy or Chychrun we would be fine.
Like Juolevi busted HARD. He isn’t even AHL material.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitz and Bites and Canucks LB
4Twenty said:
are peoples memories that short they forget the thinking that led to Olli Juolevi????
Click to expand...
There were four really good d
We literally just picked the worst one out of five.

Trust me, I’m a fan of the best player available 99% of the time, but the organizational need is just way too significant right now

Assuming we’re not drafting a 30 ranked guy in the top 10
 
Canucks LB said:
There were four really good d
We literally just picked the worst one out of five.

Trust me, I’m a fan of the best player available 99% of the time, but the organizational need is just way too significant right now

Assuming we’re not drafting a 30 ranked guy in the top 10
Click to expand...
I think organizational need should be completely ignored.

You should just heavily favour right shot D & C with top 6 potential followed by left shot D, over wingers. Always.
 
Agree that the luck thing is defeatist. Must focus on doing the best you can in the circumstances you get. Luck or chance should be irrelevant. We made a bad choice with Juolevi. We made a good choice with Pettersson. Calling Petey lucky is just as silly as calling Juolevi unlucky.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom