Chairman Maouth

I don't see anyone in the West being favourites at this point. Depending on what happens the next few weeks any of the teams who won their quarter final series could contend, and maybe even a couple more like LA and PHX. Strange things happen when the season begins. Last year was proof of that.

I'm actually more of a wind-up puppy. As a matter of fact, if you don't say something a little more clever or interesting soon I'm going to go push a ball around the kitchen floor with my nose.

You're right. Results are the only way to calm the critics. But of course the Canadian media favours Canadian teams. Doesn't every country do that? I remember the 1992 and 1993 World Series with Toronto. The American media nearly had a collective stroke. Well I do enjoying reading good material. Yours isn't bad either, but only as a catalyst.

I'm not sure I can do that chief. Your post may haunt me the rest of my life. As a matter of fact, I'm on the verge of tears at this very moment. Hell, I may need an ambulance to take me to the hospital for a dose of IV Valium. Is Valium strong enough? I don't know. I may need a horse tranquilizer instead. Yeah, that's it. I won't call an ambulance -- I'll call a vet. He'll fix me up with a couple ounces of that stuff and I may be able to cope with those harsh words o9f yours that you're forcing me to deal with. Is the Guiness Book of World Records still around? Cause I think I just set a new high water mark for sarcasm. And I did it through all those tears.

One bad game two years ago; otherwise a solid playoffs. A fairly solid effort this playoffs considering the state of the Canucks defence. You know how ridiculous the injuries on defence were -- right? It was brutal -- and now the defense has been addressed by Gillis. I guess I just imagined all the panic and the Flames watching going on around here towards the end of the season. Look, I know it's human nature to devalue opposing players and overvalue your own, but I try to be as objective as possible. Luongo is still fairly young. Devaluing him now based on his performance over essentially one calendar year may be foolish. Kipper is older than Luongo and had 3 or 4 years in a row where his play deteriorated, last year he was back with a vengeance. I'm not laughing at him anymore -- except for maybe when he abandoned ship in the Olympics.

Excellent response their chief. Well done and totally original. In the nearly 5 years I've been a member here no has ever before told me to leave. Not a mod, not a member, no one. You're the first. I like this forum and the people here. For the most part, they are fairly knowledgeable and polite hockey fans. Congratulations on being the exception that proves the rule.

There are a number of Canucks I'd rather have than Datsyuk, and yeah, Luongo is one of them. Save this thread in your favourites and throw it back at me around Christmas. I do. You took my (sarcastic) point and turned it into your own and in effect, agreed with me in that a player shouldn't be written off after one sub-par season. Isn't that a "point" for me?

You're seriously writing Luongo off after one sub-par season? Guess the Wings will be lucky to squeak into the playoffs again next season after a lot of sub-par performances this season. You must be devastated.

It's because Mike Gillis both stole and rescued Erhoff from San Jose. He never got a chance to shine in San Jose and therefore didn't command as much money. Now he's performing to his full potential with a team that's giving him a chance to shine. Think Mikael Samuelsson in teal.

Seriously? Do you know of a better measuring stick for that than goals per game?

I'm not playing any games when it comes to the cap at this time. Too many unknowns still in play. Of those players you mentioned, the most valuable (Mitchell) didn't even play in the playoffs so that screws your theory a little right there. The rest did 3rd or 4th line duty and none of them tore it up. The Canucks have no problem at all scoring, and none of those players you mentioned were major contributors in that area. On the contrary, most of them scored very little. And we have some excellent prospects in the system, some of who could make the team this year. The Canucks offence is the least of their worries. The Canucks addressed a weakness; not having a mobile enough defence, and in my opinion they did an excellent job at addressing that. As soon as you can get your head around the fact that the Canucks needed to address defence and have given up very little of their potent offence in doing so, the sooner the experts will show you the secret handshake.

Wait -- I thought this thread was about the Canucks going forward into the 2010-2011 season? Well alright.... Such as calling the Canucks the "Sharks 2.0" or something like that. Canucks were underdogs until the 2009 playoffs at which time they were never favoured, but they were recognized as being a contender. Also, they've never come close to winning the President's Trophy and then choked a bunch of years in a row. That was an absurd statement. Also, your contention that Luongo is the reason the Canucks lost in the playoffs two years in a row is also absurd. He had one bad game in 2009 against the Hawks. If you even followed the Hawks/Canucks series a couple of months ago you'd know that the Canucks defence was absolutely decimated by injuries in the playoffs. An already thin defence (without Mitchell) were dropping like flies. Hell, I knew when Salo got hit in the nuts that the series was over. We were so decimated that Salo (now known as Semi Salo) played the very next game and you could tell he was hurting with every stride he took,. The f*****'s face was green the entire game, but there was no one else left to put in.

It would be so cool if I had the energy to go back and search the posts on this forum from the summer of two years ago when Mike Gillis was hired -- and read about how the general consensus was that Vancouver would be a bottom-dwelling team for years to come. The Canucks had chosen a fool for a G.M. etc., etc. Detroit fans were giddy in their enjoyment of that mistaken assessment. It proves one thing for certain; that objective opinions on a rival teams forum are worth about as much as what it costs to post them. Now, in the summer of 2010, Detroit fans appear to be getting their s*** in a very tight knot about the fact that other teams in the West, including Vancouver, are overtaking them as favourites to vie for the Stanley Cup. Some of the absurd and uninformed comments on this thread prove that. Personally, at this point, I don't see any team as being the team to beat in the West, but I do know that Vancouver has definitely improved while other traditionally strong teams have either weakened or done little to improve. Time will tell I guess.

The Canucks defense looked very solid, including Andrew AHLberts who had his best game as a Canuck. Might be able to change his name back if he keeps that up. Erhoff was again a beast, but the entire D-core played well. Kesler was also a beast making excellent defensive plays and getting two assists. Bernier and Wellwood continued their excellent post-season play and all four Canucks lines scored. The Sedins were the Sedins, with them giving the Hakws D fits all night. One point each; Daniel with 11 points in 7 games; Henrik with 9. Luongo was briliant and kept the Hawks off the scoreboard in the first period when he faced 17 shots. The only goal Chicago scored was on a 5 on 3 powerplay in the third. Although the Canucks had few shots in the third, they continued to press with a very tough forecheck and the Hawks had no answer for it. Patrick Kane played great, Byfuglien was a total non-factor, and despite some flashes of brilliance early, Niemi's weaknesses as a goaltender were exposed by the Canucks offense, which is clearly not the same offense as the Preds offense. Definitely the best I've seen the Canucks play in this year's playoffs. The mindset of the Canucks this year appears to be very different than in the past. Rick Ball from the Team 1040 witnessed the Canucks reaction in the dressing room after beating St Louis last year and LA this year. He said the celebrations were totally different. With St. Louis, they acted like they clinched the western conference. They were way over-the-top. With the win over LA, there was no over-the-top celebration at all. Ball said that they knew, unlike last year, that the journey had just begun. In my opinion, that shows a team with playoff experience is clearly maturing. You can also see this reflected in Luongo's post-game comment from last night when he was asked what the win means. ''Nothing. [it means] nothing to me,'' he said. ''It's only one game. We're here to win four games, not one. There's no satisfaction for me personally or for this team.'' An article out of Chicago.

Hahaha Is his real name Norton Mapes?

Doesn't your prison friend Bubba get jealous?

I read a few posts on this thread... Does anyone else find it hilarious that an argument is being made here that Wings fans throw classier trash ice on the ice than Coyotes fans?

I didn't know the Hawks had got by Nashville yet.

Lol, and you felt the need to drag this thread out of the back lot just to say that? No worries as far as I'm concerned. He's had his chances, just hasn't capitalized. He will. Besides.... Mikael Samuelsson - 7 goals in last 5 games. That's gotta sting a little.

They did it twice tonight. Quick got lit up and they pulled him, they put Bernier in, he got lit up, and they put Quick back in who got lit up a second time. I was wondering if they might have a third goalie hanging around somewhere.

That kid probably asked his dad to put him directly into the freezer so he can preserve Ovechkin's ice forever. Seriously, Ovechkin was just playing around.

Conspiracy theories aside (they're nutty), the Canucks have had three highly questionable and controversial calls go against them this series. The game-changer call on Bieksa when the rule clearly states that if a puck hits a player accidentally that he will not be penalized. The ridiculous no goal call off the skate. And during game three, a King had an obvious hold on a Canucks stick that wasn't called. That happens and that's fine. But what was revealed on HNIC last night was that referee (Steve Kozari) did see it and call it, he then looked at his partner (Paul Devorsky) and pulled his hand back down when he realized Devorski's hand wasn't also up. Ron McLean was all over this last night and showed the video of this happening. Referees are never supposed to do that under any circumstances. It defeats the entire purpose of the two referee system. As a result, the Canucks lost out on a PP opportunity in a tight game. As I said, that happens, but the way in which it happened is disgraceful. However, the only conspiracy that exists, is a conspiracy of idiocy that has quite possibly cost the Canucks at the very least, one playoff game.

Green Men interviewed.

Why. You see fans dress up all the time in various costumes. What's so different between these guys and some guy in a Viking suit.

Their names are Force and Sully. http://canucks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=513183