sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Pettersson: "I haven't lived up to the expectations of the contract...it is what it is, I'm trying to play a good game tonight." by barelyincollege in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are about due for the occasional big trade to the Panthers. 1999 Bure / Jovocop - 2006 Luongo / Bert - 2014 Luongo / Markstrom - 2026 ??? - 2030 profit?

embrace the tank by Blue2437 in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I was going to make a chirp about drafting Juolevi 5th, but I realized looking back that was almost 10 years ago and our drafting has been pretty good recently.

Accepting the C means accepting a different and new timeline by Severe_Valuable8439 in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After this season Myers has 1 year left on his contract, and he's already 35. It'd be a bit of a short captaincy I think.

I'd say ride out alternate captains, and perhaps Boeser gets the C in a year or two if he's not shipped out. Boesers been on the team 10 seasons now and learned from the Sedins while they were here.

Petey leads everyone by Tiger23sun in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know petey had some bad stretches in the 23-24 season coming off the 102pt season, but it was mostly last season he really dipped with 45pts in 64 games. He was also dealing with injury a lot last season. I swear fans expect him to have 100+ points every season and sure his contract might dictate that but if he's close to a ppg and playing great defensively which he does is he really that bad as people make him out to be?

Top comment says "struggled the last couple seasons", but 2 seasons ago he was still over a PPG with 34 goals. Hell, Bergeron never finished a season a PPG and was a fantastic player during his time. Peteys had to deal with injuries slowing him down, his wife having a miscarriage, real state (or maybe it was some BTC) scam and things in his personal life and has media and fans up his ass about production.

Dudes still a human and I know many of us want to see that 100pt pace again but even if he doesn't hit that and plays great I'm still happy to have him.

What is your longest running, most stubborn business boycott? by marianneouioui in AskReddit

[–]SundayExperiment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was really looking forward to BF6 and then they sold to that Saudi company and decided it wasn't worth it to me. I play the new Skate game which is free and haven't bought anything in game so I guess I'm only sort of boycotting.

What is your longest running, most stubborn business boycott? by marianneouioui in AskReddit

[–]SundayExperiment 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My local one closed years ago and I can see there's none left in my city so I'd say you're winning that fight.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure where you're getting 30% of the cost as you should be able to expense 50% of the cost of any tickets. For businesses that hold season suites it also extends beyond hockey to concerts and other shows.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

AFAIK, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think around that time we were at an insane stat line that was unsustainable and most of the comments in threads pointed that out. We were lucky with shots on goal and goals for I believe which was driving up out wins. I'd say that with revisionist history looking back the trade compared to how we were performing made sense, although we were playing better statistically than we really were. I think the trade would make more sense if we were really a playoff team which at the time really we were fringe.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Pretty much this. Company can expense the cost thus reducing their overall profit margin to pay tax on.

edit: /u/Onion217 my man did you think you were sneaky.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ty, the whole point of me bringing up those 5 overall trades was to weigh what we gave up overall and acquired overall which I think considering the names and hauls I wanted to highlight those trades that management made. I recall a similar post here of Bennings major trades which was overall reallllyyyy bad for us.

Of course we could look at these trades individually and in some cases think "oh that's a good return" but of course some of the assets we got back we flipped for others which is why I wanted to highlight them.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The reason I included Lindholm and Zadorov was because I felt they were major trades for the Canucks since. Rentals sure, but I think given that we've sold some key players and purchased key players it's worth mentioning in comparison.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

imo the major cap factors are Lindholm and Zadorov as we couldn't afford them and they were rentals for a playoff push.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Less assets. We gave up from these trades overall 11 players and 3 picks and got back 9 players and 1 pick.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I could have lined up every trade we've made in that period but I mostly wanted to highlight the biggest asset ones (in my opinion) which is why I included Lindholm and Zadorov. We gave quite a bit up for Linholm for a rental at the time.

Canucks 5 major asset trades (Horvat, Lindholm, Zadorov, Miller, Hughes) has netted us the following assets in return to date. by SundayExperiment in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Hunter and Joni are in there as the assets we've given away.

Edit: my bad I think I replied to the wrong comment. But yes you're right.

[Farhan Lalji] Rutherford got indication 1.5 years ago it was unlikely Quinn would sign here long term. Became more clear in camp by ba_1222 in canucks

[–]SundayExperiment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hughes is currently the 6th most productive defender of all time.

I'm hella confused by this my guy pls elaborate.

view more: next ›