HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

McKenzie - Would vote Henrik for Hart if he had a vote

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-12-2010, 07:57 PM
  #1
Dolemite
The one...the only..
 
Dolemite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 38,300
vCash: 500
McKenzie - Would vote Henrik for Hart if he had a vote

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=317809

Dolemite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:01 PM
  #2
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,389
vCash: 500
LA over Van in 6?!?!

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:02 PM
  #3
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,262
vCash: 500
He then goes and tweets this:
Quote:
Predictions, for what they are worth: Washington, Philly, Buffalo and Pittsburgh in the East; SJ, Chicago, LA and Detroit in the West.

xtr3m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:02 PM
  #4
parabola
Global Moderator
novus ordo seclorum
 
parabola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ಠ_ಠ
Posts: 42,012
vCash: 500
I agree with McKenzie that you can rationalize it for any of the 3 candidates.

And I think the fact that he'd vote for Sedin is a win

__________________
parabola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:06 PM
  #5
CanucksOo
Registered User
 
CanucksOo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 6,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtr3m View Post
He then goes and tweets this:

Quote:
VanCanucks
@TSNBobMcKenzie - We respectfully disagree...
Quote:
TSNBobMcKenzie
Of course, by picking Kings over Canucks, I've pretty much guaranteed Van gets to final and when I'm there, I'll get heckled endlessly. LOL.
We'll be right there to heckle you Mckenzie

CanucksOo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:07 PM
  #6
Hollywood Burrows
Registered User
 
Hollywood Burrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: VANCOUVER
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,725
vCash: 500
Can't believe he picked the Kings.

Speaking of Toronto media that watch the Canucks twice a year, Damien Cox picked Vancouver to sweep.

Hollywood Burrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:08 PM
  #7
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by parabola View Post
I agree with McKenzie that you can rationalize it for any of the 3 candidates.

And I think the fact that he'd vote for Sedin is a win
I don't.

Bob McKenzie might be a hockey "insider" and is very good at what he does in that aspect; his role as an analyst is mediocre at best.


Last edited by Jay Cee: 04-12-2010 at 08:14 PM.
Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:09 PM
  #8
Wilch
Unregistered User
 
Wilch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Under your bed
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 9,226
vCash: 500
When are the voting results for Pearson, Selke and Hart coming out?

Wilch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:11 PM
  #9
Ronaldo
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Ronaldo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,719
vCash: 55
Last year didn't two people from the TSN panel pick the Blues?

Ronaldo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:18 PM
  #10
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutupgrapes View Post
Can't believe he picked the Kings.

Speaking of Toronto media that watch the Canucks twice a year, Damien Cox picked Vancouver to sweep.
McKenzie watches a lot of teams more than twice a year. He knows his stuff.

Damien Cox is a *****-bag who probably is now hoping LA sweeps to write about how much of a fail organization the Vancouver Canucks are and how fighting should be out of the game.

YogiCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:20 PM
  #11
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,735
vCash: 500
everybody has there own opinions, Lets prove bobby wrong!, except for the hart, lets agree with him on that lol

Lucbourdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:21 PM
  #12
Anodyne
Registered User
 
Anodyne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,860
vCash: 500
Pierre seemed to like the Kings too (oh nos). He didn't say he thinks they'd beat us straight up, since the match-up wasn't even set when he mentioned it (during Boston/Washington on Sunday), but he said something along the lines of "you don't want to play the Kings. Ask Vancouver. They got beat by them 8-3 the other week and they got beat bad," (the added redundancy just for anyone didn't know 8-3 was a bad loss). I wonder if he knew how depleted our lineup was...

Anodyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:25 PM
  #13
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
McKenzie watches a lot of teams more than twice a year. He knows his stuff.

Damien Cox is a *****-bag who probably is now hoping LA sweeps to write about how much of a fail organization the Vancouver Canucks are and how fighting should be out of the game.
Meh.

For me Ferraro is the only TSN analyst I have seen report consistently and authoritatively on the Canucks.

The rest are cliche at best.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:52 PM
  #14
parabola
Global Moderator
novus ordo seclorum
 
parabola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ಠ_ಠ
Posts: 42,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
Meh.

For me Ferraro is the only TSN analyst I have seen report consistently and authoritatively on the Canucks.

The rest are cliche at best.
Ferraro generally is bad. But I agree he's consistent.

parabola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 08:58 PM
  #15
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
I don't.

Bob McKenzie might be a hockey "insider" and is very good at what he does in that aspect; his role as an analyst is mediocre at best.
Nah man, McKenzie knows his stuff. When you consider the Kings only finished 2 points back of the Canucks, and the fact the Canucks have injury troubles and have been a little inconsistent of late (esp. Luongo), I can see why some people might pick LA as the upset.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:07 PM
  #16
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas View Post
Nah man, McKenzie knows his stuff. When you consider the Kings only finished 2 points back of the Canucks, and the fact the Canucks have injury troubles and have been a little inconsistent of late (esp. Luongo), I can see why some people might pick LA as the upset.
I don't dis him for that, as widely unlikely as it seems.

McKenzie is a vocal advocate of soft hockey, and an NHL trade buster. That is what I see his role as on TSN.

I don't see his analysis at all useful as far as hockey in concerned. The Kings could very well win this series, anyone could win any given series, and I would rather my Canucks lose than play bad hockey. His opinion (which was not known to me I guess until now) on the series doesn't really mean much either way.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:08 PM
  #17
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 19,349
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas View Post
Nah man, McKenzie knows his stuff. When you consider the Kings only finished 2 points back of the Canucks, and the fact the Canucks have injury troubles and have been a little inconsistent of late (esp. Luongo), I can see why some people might pick LA as the upset.
LA are more than capable of beating us. I would feel much better with a healthly Mitchell playing (and Loungo in form ). I still think we can get them but any of the top 6 in the west (may even the preds with a bit of luck) can win 2 rounds.

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:12 PM
  #18
Bourdon
Registered User
 
Bourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas View Post
Nah man, McKenzie knows his stuff. When you consider the Kings only finished 2 points back of the Canucks, and the fact the Canucks have injury troubles and have been a little inconsistent of late (esp. Luongo), I can see why some people might pick LA as the upset.
LA has been just as inconsistent, and they can't score on the Canucks, with the exception of the blowout. They also have 10 shootout wins.

1-3, 1-4, 1-2, 0-1, 2-4, 3-2, 0-4 in the last two seasons against Canucks aside from the blowout.

Bourdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:18 PM
  #19
Awesomesauce
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,510
vCash: 500
After a great deal of consideration I think I would give it to Henrik to. I think Crosby is the best player in the league, and I think he had a tremendous season all things considered. Ovechkin is TERRIBLY overated, like most exciting players (ie pavel bure, and guy lafluer).

Having said all of that, when you count every factor I can think of, I honestly can't give it to Crosby over Henrik this season.

Crosby outscored Henrik, led the league in goals, was great on face offs, and had little help from linemates.

Henrik had more points, was easily the leagues best setup man, played better defense, was in a much more difficult conference, played much of the season with a bad back, and ate up significantly less ice time at both ES and on the PP.

I don't like Harts going to goalies since I think they essentially play a completely different sport then the skaters, they already have an award, and if you were to go by the letter of it a goalie would win every year.

I think on some levels its a tough call, but the more I think about it and factor everything in that I would as a voter, Henrik would be my man.


Last edited by Awesomesauce: 04-12-2010 at 09:28 PM.
Awesomesauce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:29 PM
  #20
Dolemite
The one...the only..
 
Dolemite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 38,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awesomesauce View Post
After a great deal of consideration I think I would give it to Henrik to. I think Crosby is the best player in the league, and I think he had a tremendous season all things considered. Ovechkin is TERRIBLY overated, like most exciting players (ie pavel bure, and guy lafluer).
The Caps have proved that they can win without Ovy in the lineup. Not exactly the definition of an MVP.

Dolemite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:30 PM
  #21
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
I don't dis him for that, as widely unlikely as it seems.

McKenzie is a vocal advocate of soft hockey, and an NHL trade buster. That is what I see his role as on TSN.

I don't see his analysis at all useful as far as hockey in concerned. The Kings could very well win this series, anyone could win any given series, and I would rather my Canucks lose than play bad hockey. His opinion (which was not known to me I guess until now) on the series doesn't really mean much either way.
I may be wrong, but I could swear McKenzie was one of the guys who generally stayed out of the fighting in hockey debates, and has admitted it's a part of hockey. I don't remember him advocating any kind of soft hockey, and I know for a fact I've seen him critical of the league for suspension on clean hits (I can't remember which hit it was).

He's certainly not anti-fighting on the level of a joker like Dave Hodge, who is clueless and totally out-of-touch with the game. If Hodge had it his way, there wouldn't even be hitting, let alone fighting. I hate that guy.

But I dunno, bottom line I guess we disagree on his hockey knowledge; I think Bob is extremely well-informed hockey analyst.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourdon View Post
LA has been just as inconsistent, and they can't score on the Canucks, with the exception of the blowout. They also have 10 shootout wins.

1-3, 1-4, 1-2, 0-1, 2-4, 3-2, 0-4 in the last two seasons against Canucks aside from the blowout.
Yeah true. I'm not saying LA will win it, but I don't think it's preposterous to suggest LA could upset.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:32 PM
  #22
Dolemite
The one...the only..
 
Dolemite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 38,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas View Post
Yeah true. I'm not saying LA will win it, but I don't think it's preposterous to suggest LA could upset.
You haven't watched the Kings in their last 5 to 10 games have you? Quick has been anything but solid.

Dolemite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:47 PM
  #23
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,262
vCash: 500
Bob is still my favourite TV analyst.

xtr3m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:50 PM
  #24
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolemite View Post
You haven't watched the Kings in their last 5 to 10 games have you? Quick has been anything but solid.
I've seen a few of their games, but I don't follow them closely. I know Quick has been shaky though.

How has Luongo looked the last 5 to 10 games?

Anyways, you seemed to have missed the point - I'm not saying LA will win (I have money on the Canucks, in fact), just saying if somebody picks LA as an upset they aren't stupid/crazy/drunk/etc.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2010, 09:56 PM
  #25
One Trick Pony*
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,022
vCash: 500
I'm not sure the Canucks defense will be able to withstand LA's offensive depth, I think that's the main reason why the Canucks aren't heavy favorites.

Just my $0.02.

One Trick Pony* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.