It’s all true though. Reilly is basically Hughes but worse and older

Did you see Rielly in the regular season? He’s declining and a defensive liability. He’s a negative asset at this point with that contract. 4 good games doesn’t change that

Well how's Hughes playing these days? Is he being an absolute beast when it matters most in the playoffs?

Typical anti leaf nonsense

Except it’s true. Rielly has been a defensive liability for years, and his offensive production dropped significantly from last season. He’s in the first year of his contract that he’s already overpaid on, in 2 years it’ll look like the OEL or Vlasic contracts look now

So Adam Lowry is a better goal scorer than Austin Matthews these days? Since he’s scoring more when it matters most in the playoffs

He literally broke records for points as a defenseman in his rookie playoff season so yes, he shows ip when it’s important…

Hilarious take, Rielly is showing just how great he is. In the playoffs where it matters.

Your anti leaf nonsense is boring

Oh yeah? Broke records? Which records? He isn't top 50 for most points in a playoff.

I’m using your own logic

Hughes has the most points ever by a rookie dman in the playoffs. Rielly has never had more than 6 points in a playoff run. Hughes is above average defensively while Rielly is a defensive liability. Hughes has proven he is better in both the regular season and playoffs. Your pro leaf bias is boring

This is what you guys say about every Canuck. Like when you guys were all saying Garland was as good as Nylander. It's all ridiculous. Rielly right now, is dominating in the playoffs. And you guys can only sit here and crap on Rielly to make yourself feel better. I don't care.

Nobody ever said Garland was as good as Nylander. But it’s a fact that Hughes is better than Rielly. You just have a pro Leaf/anti Canucks bias

Most points in a playoffs as a rookie defenseman….He would have a lot more playoff points if the team around him was half as good as him

You guys absolutely did say Garland was as good as Nylander. Just like you guys said Boeser was better and I am sure how Petterson is better than Matthews as well eh? No one has better players than the canucks.

Always excuses eh? Every Canuck is better than everyone else and yet you guys haven't been anything but mediocre for years.

I didn’t see any Canucks fans say Garland was better than Nylander. If they did they must have been trolls. Didn’t see any say Boeser was better, maybe that was early in their careers though, although I think (dumb) Leafs fans trash Nylander more than other teams fans do. Pettersson had a better season than Matthews but Matthews is still a better player overall. It’s not hard to give other teams players credit when they deserve it, you should try sometime

I do but unless you say Canuck players are the best ever you get labeled on here.

I am not really accomplishing anything here. Hughes is definitely a great player. As is Petterson, I like both. I would love to see the canucks being a good team but man their management has been so bad, I think they should have done a proper rebuild 2 years ago. I think that's why I come across as a troll too much. I do like the canucks, but I see them differently than most hardcore fans, I wish they were better. But the team just has too many major holes and cap issues. It's going to be tough to ever really get better.

If that is what you are taking from that comment, I don't know what else to say. Canucks have a terrible defense group outside of Hughes. They can't make the playoffs with 1 good defender and 5 AHL defenders. That isn't how it works. Canucks have good players, but not a good team. There is a pretty big difference. In terms of individual performances, Canucks have great players, but they don't put it together, especially defensively.

Now I'm convinced that you need to see a psychiatrist because you are just making things up at this point...

This just contradicts your other comments. It isn't hard to see why the Canucks aren't a good team. 2 players don't make a good team.

It's the whole thing though, seeing fleeting succes and thinking you are way better than you are. I am speaking about the management here. Benning thought the bubble year was way more than it was and it cost you dearly and now new management thinks Boudreau is the answer based off 2 winning streaks that sandwiched long stretches of 500 or below hockey. It's just been a viscous circle and I don't know how they get out of it. The fans buy in and it just spins

Boudreau was fired a long time ago. He was always supposed to be a temporary coach...