Canucks Army Postgame: Canucks Show They Certainly Don't *Lack* Guts

Dimitri Filipovic
October 25 2013 09:27PM

Say what you will about the Vancouver and their performance during the 7-game roadtrip (and about people who begin sentences with "say what you will.."), but a 5-1-1 record all things considered is more than impressive. Especially considering the way they capped it off against the Blues with a 3-2 overtime victory. The operative term here is "gutsy", which I'm sure you'll see bandied about on your Twitter timeline, deservedly so.

Read on past the jump for a recap of what went down.

The Story

"Obviously given everything I've just mentioned, it's easy to see why the Blues are considered to be heavy favourites to take care of business in this game. However, let me just say that I wouldn't exactly be stunned if the Canucks put up a better fight than you may think they'd be capable of.. it's sports, and sometimes when something seems to be way too good to be true, it usually is. I'm just sayin'".

That was from the preview of the game which I posted this afternoon. As someone who has followed a variety of sports very closely for years now, I tend to get spooked when everyone and their grandmother talks about how lopsided a game is going to be. I wouldn't have put money on the Canucks winning or anything, but I just put it out there that I could definitely envision a scenario where they surprised people with their showing. I'm glad they made me look like I kinda sorta know what I'm talking about.

At the bottom of that preview was also a recommendation for a bet that would give you 6-to-1 if Ryan Kesler scored a goal and the Canucks won. Well.. he scored two of them (including the power play tally in OT that won the game), giving him 7 on the year now. That means he's now on pace for 44 goals, which would certainly make me (and many others) look silly were it to happen. I was fairly vocal in my opinion that he was more of a 25-goal guy this preseason, pleading with people to temper their expectations and settle down.

Obviously I didn't anticipate that he would be routinely playing in the mid 20's per game, with 54 shots on goal in 13 games to his name. I also didn't expect him to play with the Sedins at 5v5 like he has over the past handful of games. He has been ridiculous, and it's hard to even imagine what kind of shape the Canucks would be in right now wihtout him. I think it speaks to the mentality that has accompanied being a Canucks fan for life that I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop with him. But for now, there's nothing we can do but enjoy the ride..

Before the game I joked that it would be awesome to see John Tortorella pull a Gregg Popovich and send his stars home, conceding the loss in this one. I thought the Sedins actually had their least effective showing of the season in this game heading into the overtime period. I can't remember them generating fewer promising scoring opportunities than they did here, failing to ever really even sustain pressure with the puck possession we've come to expect from them. Hard to blame them though since they played 24 and 25 minutes respectively tonight after having topped 25 minutes last night as well. They must be exhausted. Plus, they played a part in setting up Kesler's winner with just 15 seconds left to go.

What followed the goal was one of the more bizarre endings to a game I've seen in some time.. as soon as Kesler scored David Backes went after Daniel Sedin (while Barrett Jackman went after Kesler), and a scrum ensued. Backes, ever the classy gentleman, finally received some penalty minutes with his misconduct and roughing penalty after it seemed like he could do as he pleased without the worry of a whistle throughout the game.

He blatantly went after Tom Sestito following a whistle in the 3rd period, and went down like a sack of potatoes to draw a penalty on Bieksa (which led to the 1st goal for the Blues) late in the 2nd. I'd love to hear what was going through his head when he went after Daniel on that play, but I doubt we'll here from him since he probably had to rush home to check on Kelly following the conclusion of the game. After all, Ryan Kesler is in town..

As for the newcomers, Pelletier and Archibald, I thought they were as effective as you could have hoped for in their season debut. That 4th line along with Yannick Weber actually had a couple of decent shifts, which pretty much instantly makes it the best showing from a Canucks 4th line that we've seen all year. Burrows is set to come back so we'll probably see one of them get sent back down, and I hope it's not Archibald, who I think has the potential to be a very serviceable depth forward at the NHL level.

The Numbers


Image via Extra Skater .

As you see by the shot attempt totals the Canucks were actually more than holding their through, oh I'd say, the first 30-35 minutes of the game. After that their heavy legs decided to really show, and by the end of the game you could tell they were just trying to hang on for dear life.

Which brings us to Eddie Lack, who was once again very solid. He stopped 22 of 24 shots he faced, and is surely showing both the Canucks brass and their fans that he can be relied upon to spell Roberto Luongo from time to time and avoid forcing the 34-year old to start more than somewhere between 60 and 65 games. 

As for the power play opportunity situation, the Canucks only drew 2 of them again in this one (one of which was a 4-minute minor that drew blood on a high stick). I highly doubt that the league is "against them", but it's hard not to take issue with the 2 infractions they were whistled for themselves late in the 2nd period when they're not getting any of those calls themselves. 

My one issue with Tortorella coming out of this game is why he didn't utilize the Higgins-Santorelli-Kassian combination more throughout the game. He started the game with Richardson on that line, but by the 2nd period Kassian was back up there and they were back to getting up to stuff. I really like that combination and think they have a chance to be effective. Kassian needs to stay out of the penalty box, and getting into a fight doesn't exactly help with that. Burrows' return to could put a wrench in those plans, though. Oh well.

7482b25b962fb1661ea9028fb4e0db36
Dimitri Filipovic writes about hockey on the internet, and is the Managing Editor of Canucks Army. You can follow him on Twitter @DimFilipovic, and email him at dimitri.filipovic@gmail.com.
Avatar
#1 NM00
October 25 2013, 09:33PM
Trash it!
32
trashes
Props
4
props

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Avatar
#2 Surrey Bob
October 25 2013, 11:06PM
Trash it!
15
trashes
Props
1
props

The Canucks could have won this game 2-1 but the spirit of AV still haunts them. They have choked under Av for so many years, it's almost second nature for most of these guys to quit and play like crap when they have the lead. This is what happens when you have a lousy coach like AV for all those years. This is what Torts has to clean up. Meanwhile AV's genius is once again showing through in New York. Av won't make it past two years. On the upside, once AV gets done with making the Ranger into a joke choke team like he did here, the Canucks will get their revenge on Messier Keenan's Rnagers after all.

Avatar
#3 S and M
October 25 2013, 11:26PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
1
props

The Canucks need to realize that the Blues are good but not quite there yet. The real standard lies with teams like Chicago, Boston, LA, San jose, Avs, Pens. The bar is much higher than what I see coming from the Canucks. If you can't beat those teams convincingly , you got no chance to win the cup. There's no such thing as a lucky champ.

Avatar
#4 S and M
October 26 2013, 01:17AM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
2
props

@pheenster

Why? Because the Av's won two Stanley Cups before and they have a better record than the Canucks so far? I lost credibility with you? Hahaha. You lost all logic with me with that reply.

It's funny how so many of you say that it's not the whole time the franchise but the current standing that counts. Well, had I said the Canucks have been bad since they came into the league, I'm sure you would say " it's a new management, you can't count all those other years Canucks have sucked." Ok, now when the AV's are playing better than the Canucks since the start of this season somehow that don't mean the AV's are any good? Shall Say that the AV's have two cups and the Canucks have none? Or will that make me lose credibility with you? The Canucks have sucked since 46 years ago, and they still suck now. Can you understand that or do I have to make a chart for ya?

Avatar
#5 Hard Puck City
October 26 2013, 06:07AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
3
props

@5minutesinhebox

Yeah, man, just admit that you're impressed when you're not impressed. Hahahahahaha! He wants you to admit that this regular season win is the rule, not the exception. Cause we all know the Canucks are as reliable in the post season as a broken condom.

Avatar
#6 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 03:48PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
1
props

@Nolan

COMMENT REMOVED

Avatar
#7 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 02:50AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
2
props

@The Voice In The Dark

It's called " hypocrisy "...something the fanboys here have in abundance. But if you counter their argument, they will call you a "troll" or an " Oilers fan ". The fanboys will look for anything to blame for their teams ailments. It's the refs faults, Bettman, the rules, the big bad Bruins, the schedule, the Oilers. It's never the team, their fat useless GM, the Sedins, Luongo, the scouts.

Just look at 'No standards Teddy', he's the epitome of low self esteem and low aim. These folks aim for nothing, and are proud of everything.And Rogers Arena is full of these failure appreciating and failure deserving tools. Mark your calender. The Canucks will reach 50 years without having won anything. People who plant crap will always harvest crap.

Avatar
#8 Hard Puck City
October 26 2013, 03:54PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
2
props

@pheenster

Because the Av's have won TWO Cups in their short history in Colorado and your Canucks have won.....NONE? Give it up man, those Canuck pom poms and that skirt makes you look like an ugly Bon Jovi groupie.LOL

Avatar
#9 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 01:10AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
2
props

@Ted

Ah, 'No Standards Teddy'. Still trying to get other people to HAVE NO STANDARDS...WHAT A SHOCK. LMFAO

Avatar
#10 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 01:23AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
1
props

@Mitch

And the Blues don't have to move their legs too? You make it sound like the Canucks are doing daily marathons or triathlons. If they can't or won't hang on to a lead, or know how to, then they should learn how to or don't bother get a lead to begin with

Avatar
#11 Hard Puck City
October 26 2013, 01:43AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
1
props

@Ted

Hey! Look everyone! Everyone's favorite Canuck shill is back! Say hello to DON TAYLOR!

Avatar
#12 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:36PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
2
props

@Ruprecht

True.

But if we're going to praise the performance against Pittsburgh (without Letang, Neal and Bennett by the way), the performance by St Louis also deserves praise...

Avatar
#13 S and M
October 26 2013, 03:38PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
1
props

@5minutesinhebox

And no, luck doesn't play a part in winning the cup. You make your own luck. You are obsessed with luck. What is luck? You see luck as the goal that went in for a team, but do you stop to think that " luck " happens all over the ice all the time? Do you stop to think that luck can come in any form? How do you know that the other team that lost didn't have more puck luck? luck is not just the puck crossing the goal line. Your idea of luck in pro sports as a big reason why the cup is won is false and it cheapens their accomplishments. There is no such thing as a lucky punch that wins the boxing match. If you get KO'ed by a lucky punch, it's because you were not skilled enough or trained enough to avoid the punch.

Do you think the oilers and islanders dynasties for example were luck? The best team for whatever season always wins the cup. If Vancouver was worried about Boston blowing them out in the 7th game, then they should have won the games in Boston to begin with.

Pros hold skill as value. You also cannot make it to the pros on luck either. Don't get fixated on luck. Or you will have an impression that luck is what it takes to win. And if that is so , how can you train for luck? Have the Canucks been unlucky for over forty six years? Unworthy is a better answer.

Avatar
#14 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 09:12PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
1
props

@Nanodummy

How would you like to bet everything you have that the Canucks won't win the cup this year?

Avatar
#15 Riot Squad
October 25 2013, 11:11PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
1
props

@andyg

They both played the same, it's just that the Canucks for the life of them can't hold onto a freaking lead.

Avatar
#16 S and M
October 26 2013, 02:38AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
1
props

@pheenster

If you didn't want to sound like a double standards - two faced - hypocrite, you could have not typed anything at all.

Avatar
#17 NM00
October 26 2013, 09:11AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
2
props

@5minutesinhebox

"the Canucks did what they had to do to win."

You mean show up to the rink for a scheduled work day?

"Say anything you want but this was just a gutsy win"

I didn't know 'gusty' was a synonym for 'luck'.

"Admit it, youre impressed"

The only impressive performance the Canucks have had this season was last Saturday afternoon.

We are all Canucks...

Avatar
#18 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 08:56PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
1
props

@5mintuesinthebox

What 5minutesinhisbutt is trying to say or imply is that every single Stanley Cup winner won on luck...and the Canucks have been just "unlucky" for the past 45 years.

what does he mean? He means you're talking out of your ass again, kid. You and your luck this, luck that. Face the facts, wake up and smell the turd, the Canucks have accomplished NOTHING. The Canucks don't even have enough skill or luck to win the cup. Heck, they're even too cheap to buy their way to the cup. Too dumb to see, too stupid to learn.

Don't waste your time with lucky the kid, S and M, he lives in his own rosy little Canuck world. LMFAO

Avatar
#19 Surrey Bob
October 26 2013, 09:10PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
2
props

@NM00

Good old " No Standards Teddy". With people like him in the world, there are no winners and no losers. A world were everyone holds each others hands and talks about their feelings and how good the Canucks are, like a bunch of women.

It's not bad enough 'no standards teddy' is a cool-aid addict, but what's worse, he wants everyone to have no self pride and no standards just like him. No Standards Teddy loves losing and wants everyone to enjoy it as much as he does. He probably gets turned on when he watches the Sedin punching Marchand's glove with is face.

Avatar
#20 Hard Puck City
October 27 2013, 05:07AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
1
props

@Nanodummy

Mr. Roy came to the Av's this time as a coach and changed the culture of the team. As a player, Roy could not stand losing, he wants his players that way as well.

The Canucks, on the other hand and their fanboys don't mind losing, make excuses for losing, compare themselves to crappier teams whenever they lose, blame someone else when they lose or simply ignore the fact that they lost because they won;t do what it takes to win. The Canucks simply don't care if they lose, they CAN stand it, their fans tolerate it, they brush it aside, accept it and are proud of it. The Canucks are a 'brand', a mascot..anything but a real competitive team that hates losing.

Avatar
#21 Ted
October 26 2013, 12:58AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
5
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Hey! Look everyone! Everyone's favorite troll came out to play! Everyone, say hello to Moron00!

Avatar
#22 NM00
October 26 2013, 09:09AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
1
props

@The Voice In The Dark

"Personally, I think coaching played a big role in this win and the record on the road trip."

Personally, I think luck played a big role in this win and the record on the road trip.

And by 'luck' I mean the fairy dust that Tortorella found just in the nick of time for these last three OT/shootout victories...

Avatar
#23 S and M
October 26 2013, 03:26PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
1
props

@5minutesinhebox

You read way too much into the regular season, man. I gave the Av's some credit because they got much better with Roy and a few additions. I also would rate their chances higher thant he Canucks for those reasons. If the Canucks history wasn't so..well...very bad, I'd give them more credit. But I didn't make their history, they did.

If the Avs are suddely elite they're elite, what's so hard to fathom? Boston suddenly won the cup a few years ago , didn't they? Before that they were a team of chokers...well until they met the Canucks in the finals. do I think the Av's will win the cup this year, probably not, but I'm more inclined to say the Av's are more dangerous than the Canucks in the post. The Canucks are sometimes good for one upset, but usually as their history shows, they don't win when when it counts.

Avatar
#24 Ted
October 26 2013, 05:31PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
1
props
5mintuesinthebox wrote:

How is it luck? The Canucks controlled play for 2 periods, and then the Blues were given a 2 man advantage on 2 calls that shouldnt even have been called. So if anyone was lucky it was the Blues. Without that 2 man advantage the Canucks win this game regulation by 2.

They did what they had to do to win. Weathering the storm through a 3rd period where they looked totally gassed, and then taking over play in overtime.

All of this on the tail end of a brutal road trip, missing what would constitute a 2nd line, with a 4th line of AHLers, and their back up goalie.

You can be as pessimistic as you wanna be. Disappoint will do that to a guy. Im just going to sit back and enjoy this one.

It be flattering if he was just a pessimist. NoMind00 is a negative bitch and I don't think life has been too kind to him. I just hope he goes off and becomes a 'fan' of some other team. He claims to be a Canucks fan - the Canuck haters are more positive than turd00.

Avatar
#25 PB
October 25 2013, 09:49PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
17
props

@NM00

THERE'S the Eeyore we all know and love!

Avatar
#26 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:34PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
6
props

@DCR

The Canucks had 62% of the shot attempts at 5 on 5.

http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-10-25-canucks-blues

That's a dominating performance.

Avatar
#27 NM00
October 25 2013, 10:40PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
4
props

@antro

"Btw, when do we get to dig up what you wrote over the summer about Gillis' moves with guys like Santorelli and Stanton?"

You may dig it up now.

And while you're at it, dig up where you thought those guys were going to play big roles...

I'll gladly give Gillis credit for those moves, though.

At the least, hopefully the Canucks won't have to trade assets for a rental on the way to a 1st round loss vs LA or SJ...

Avatar
#28 NM001
October 26 2013, 12:22PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
2
props
NM00 wrote:

"Btw, when do we get to dig up what you wrote over the summer about Gillis' moves with guys like Santorelli and Stanton?"

You may dig it up now.

And while you're at it, dig up where you thought those guys were going to play big roles...

I'll gladly give Gillis credit for those moves, though.

At the least, hopefully the Canucks won't have to trade assets for a rental on the way to a 1st round loss vs LA or SJ...

Guys I agree with NM00. Clearly as he has put it several times we will probably make the playoffs but be out of the first round. We would lose to any elite team like:

SJ

Stl

LA

Chi

Ana

Pit

Bos

Det

I mean we have no hope of beating these guys in the regular season so no way we could beat them in the first round of the playoffs. Might as we'll give up hope now, fire Gillis, get rid of the twins and Kesler, and blow the whole team up.

Avatar
#29 NM00
October 26 2013, 06:18PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
3
props
Ted wrote:

It be flattering if he was just a pessimist. NoMind00 is a negative bitch and I don't think life has been too kind to him. I just hope he goes off and becomes a 'fan' of some other team. He claims to be a Canucks fan - the Canuck haters are more positive than turd00.

While I find your rage amusing...

"Comments are moderated. Pretend your mom is reading over your shoulder."

Avatar
#30 Surrey Bob
October 27 2013, 11:48PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
1
props

@Nanodummy

I bet you everything you have the Canucks won't win the cup this year.

Say goodbye to everything you have. You will never be a Canucks fan again after this season.

I'll remind you next year.

Avatar
#31 Surrey Bob
October 28 2013, 02:09AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
1
props

@5minutesinhebox

Hahahahahahaha...very fuunny "lucky Lucy ". Y=I love how you keep making EXCUSES for the club. EXUSES EXCUSES EXCUSES.

Talk is cheap pal. Save it for when they win a cup. Can't? It's cause you're s shill. I seriously don't know how Gary Valk keeps himself from punching your face on that crappy show of yours.

Avatar
#32 andyg
October 25 2013, 10:14PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
9
props

@NM00

Wrong

Go get glasses.

Avatar
#33 Ruprecht
October 25 2013, 10:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
11
props
NM00 wrote:

Irrespective of the score, a dominating performance by St Louis...

Irrespective of performance, another Win by the Canucks.

Avatar
#34 andyg
October 25 2013, 10:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
3
props

@NM00

Wrong

Go get glasses.

Avatar
#35 pheenster
October 25 2013, 11:42PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
14
props
S and M wrote:

The Canucks need to realize that the Blues are good but not quite there yet. The real standard lies with teams like Chicago, Boston, LA, San jose, Avs, Pens. The bar is much higher than what I see coming from the Canucks. If you can't beat those teams convincingly , you got no chance to win the cup. There's no such thing as a lucky champ.

You lost all credibility when you included the Avs in that statement.

Avatar
#36 pheenster
October 26 2013, 02:13AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
5
props
S and M wrote:

Why? Because the Av's won two Stanley Cups before and they have a better record than the Canucks so far? I lost credibility with you? Hahaha. You lost all logic with me with that reply.

It's funny how so many of you say that it's not the whole time the franchise but the current standing that counts. Well, had I said the Canucks have been bad since they came into the league, I'm sure you would say " it's a new management, you can't count all those other years Canucks have sucked." Ok, now when the AV's are playing better than the Canucks since the start of this season somehow that don't mean the AV's are any good? Shall Say that the AV's have two cups and the Canucks have none? Or will that make me lose credibility with you? The Canucks have sucked since 46 years ago, and they still suck now. Can you understand that or do I have to make a chart for ya?

If you wanted to prove that you're a moron, you could have typed a lot less.

Avatar
#37 5minutesinhebox
October 26 2013, 05:41AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
7
props

@NM00

In the 3rd period yes. But the Canucks did what they had to do to win. These 5-3 killed their moment but they had owed play to that point. Yeah they were holding on for dear life in the 3rd (and Lack very impressive). Say anything you want but this was just a gutsy win. During this trip they showed they can roll with the big boys, outplaying Pitt and gutting this one out on the end of a ridiculous road trip.

Admit it, youre impressed

Avatar
#38 NM00
October 26 2013, 09:04AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
3
props

@The Voice In The Dark

There's a pretty big difference between Edmonton without their top 2 centres (and Ottawa for large stretches of last year, for example) and the Canucks without three top 9 wingers.

And where exactly did I "jump" on the Canucks for the performance against Edmonton?

I suggested people calm down after the Canucks were dominating play against the Oilers and Calgary and, you know, wait until their is some better comp...

St Louis controlled play at 5 on 5 against a tired/thin Canucks group.

Vancouver (without Burrows) controlled play at 5 on 5 against a Penguins team without Letang, Neal & Bennett last Saturday.

A performance for which I gave the Canucks full marks, by the way.

Shockingly, the groupthink homers on here can't stop foaming at the mouth long enough to see the parallels between the St Louis game and the Pittsburgh game...

The Canucks won a game last night in which they were outplayed.

Last Sunday the Blue Jackets won a game in which they were outplayed.

So it goes...

Avatar
#39 Unknown Comic
October 26 2013, 09:35AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
2
props
NM00 wrote:

The Canucks had 62% of the shot attempts at 5 on 5.

http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-10-25-canucks-blues

That's a dominating performance.

Funny, my extraskater has the Blues taking 62% of the shot attempts at 5 on 5.

Why not use fenwick close? This looks like you're just cherry picking the highest number.

Avatar
#40 pheenster
October 26 2013, 10:14AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
3
props
S and M wrote:

If you didn't want to sound like a double standards - two faced - hypocrite, you could have not typed anything at all.

Stay in school, kids.

Avatar
#41 Ted
October 26 2013, 01:16PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props
NM00 wrote:

"the Canucks did what they had to do to win."

You mean show up to the rink for a scheduled work day?

"Say anything you want but this was just a gutsy win"

I didn't know 'gusty' was a synonym for 'luck'.

"Admit it, youre impressed"

The only impressive performance the Canucks have had this season was last Saturday afternoon.

We are all Canucks...

@ Cancer00

Loving your posts! It'd be nice if you became a 'fan' of some other team so you can spread your 'cheer' to them. It'd be nice to see an idiot like you spew his B.S. elsewhere. We cheer for our local team. We know the Canucks aren't great but that's cool. Idiots like you who know nothing and talk like you know it all are fun to watch for a little while...you say such stupid things and it is entertaining. However, it is getting to the point where you should just go crawl back under Surrey Bob's trailer at the park.

WE, not you, are all Canucks :)

Avatar
#42 Ted
October 26 2013, 01:20PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props
Unknown Comic wrote:

Funny, my extraskater has the Blues taking 62% of the shot attempts at 5 on 5.

Why not use fenwick close? This looks like you're just cherry picking the highest number.

He also makes up pointless stats and notes them down to support his stupidity. It's quite funny, really. Wait until he goes back to tell us how many club controlled players we have and how they suck. I love that one. DogSh!t00 is solid!

Avatar
#43 NM00
October 26 2013, 01:40PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
4
props

@Ted

Something tells me you think January 7, 2012 was game 8 vs Boston...

Avatar
#44 JFR
October 26 2013, 02:26PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props

I don't mind Kassian fighting. I believe at this point in his career it gets him into games and sometimes guys need to hate their opponents to get fired up. I thought the Canucks would go about 4-3 on this trip so I am pleasantly surprised! I have said all along that this has been a better road team than home team. It's time for Torts to put a BIG emphasis on being a tougher team at home.

Avatar
#45 S and M
October 26 2013, 03:41PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
2
props

@pheenster

Keep drinking the cool aid, ladies. The cup will come because your love cool aid, guaranteed.

Avatar
#46 JCDavies
October 26 2013, 07:58PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props

@NM00

Pretty obvious that there is no moderation going on at this site.

Avatar
#47 pheenster
October 27 2013, 06:39PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props
Hard Puck City wrote:

Because the Av's have won TWO Cups in their short history in Colorado and your Canucks have won.....NONE? Give it up man, those Canuck pom poms and that skirt makes you look like an ugly Bon Jovi groupie.LOL

I'll say hi the next time I see you at the Tim Horton's drive thru. Do me a favour though, make it a bit snappier, OK? I'm a busy guy. Congrats on the Employee of the Month, by the way; your parents must have been proud.

Avatar
#48 Hard Puck City
October 27 2013, 07:55PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props

@Ruprecht

The team I cheer for has won at least one cup. And you cheer for a team that will never win one. Competitive team? You're not talking about the Canucks, are you? Cause what they do can't be considered competitive, it is called " wasting people's time".

Avatar
#49 Surrey Bob
October 28 2013, 02:12AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props

@5mintuesinthebox

Every team has a 1% chance at the cup this year. Your Canucks have 0% chance at the cup this year.

And yes, I see you're making excuses again. Read what I wrote. Canucks-ZERO chance. ZERO %. that's all you need to know Don, and I will be right again at the end of the season. I'll be sure to remind you, as you have a selective Canuck memory.

Avatar
#50 Surrey Bob
October 28 2013, 02:56AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props

@5minutesinhebox

You claim to know sooo much, 45yearsinthbox, and YEt you still don't know why your team sucks. You STILL don't know why people don't see your team as anything more than MEDIOCRE. Yet you still keep yapping your mouth, all the while your team keeps on SUCKING. Nes flash buddy boy, your TEAM has sucked for 45 years. $% YEARS. Go on, start the excuses again. Tell me how the cup isn't everything in the NHL. Tell me how your SUCKY team is better than the suckier teams in the league. Tell me how LUCK plays a major part in winning. Tell me all those LOVELY EXCUSES you love to use again and again.

Run me off the boards here? LOL. Every year your team doesn't win the cup is a clear validation of my opinion. and any excuse you make about not winning the cup is another validation of what a LOSER mentality you have. Even if I wasn't here, know that by the end of this year, you team will still have no Stanley Cup. Don't cry because other people can see fats, even if you can;t or won;t , shill-boy.

Comments are closed for this article.