• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,026 Gaming the system

About GreyHatnDart

  • Rank
    Canucks Regular
  • Birthday 03/05/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,381 profile views
  1. Completely agree. I’ve always liked Baertschi since he’s been here, and seems to be popular but quiet in the locker room. Seems to care about the team and likes the city. Perfect support secondary scoring player, and ideally I’d love a player like him to be a 3rd line, PP specialist with sheltered minutes. But on our team, he’s a top 6 and they missed him most of the year, especially during the dry stretches when we couldn’t score goals. Huge game against Calgary, and imo is the most important game of the season. If they leave it on the ice, I’ll be happy. Much as it pains me to say it, Calgary is a pretty well built team and I wouldn’t be surprised to see them in the WC finals.
  2. Honestly this is it. Nothing against any white collars here, but our lower bowl seems to still be made up of suits using hockey ticket to close deals. Go golfing ffs. Police the really obnoxious drunks, but hockey games are supposed to be loud. My ex girlfriend got stared down by other people in the crowd and the some staff in the lower bowl for heckling a Dallas Star twice in the last game I went to ffs, it was pathetic.
  3. It’s bizarre to me that this team ordinarily makes backup goalies look great, and always allow first career goals, or bust guys slumps.
  4. Reasonable assessment about Gardiner and our lack of scoring. If put with a more defensive minded dman, it could be a good fit. Except of course we’re after RHD’s, not lefties.
  5. No significant free agent is going to take a discount on a basement level team without some form of trade protection. Exhibit A: Beagle and Roussel. There’s been plenty of instances of players going to teams with a legitimate shot at winning cups, and that’s likely a major motivator for older players especially. It wasn’t a short term failure for Gillis, as those moves took us to Game 7, but it certainly was a long term failure as, as I mentioned, made these players and their contracts significantly harder to move and therefore of lesser value. Benning has made plenty of mistakes as well, but I don’t judge either Beagle or Roussel as mistakes. Their dollar figures aren’t unreasonable, although I would definitely like to see more production from Beagle, and a one year shorter contract. However the whole point of a guy like Beagle is to shelter our more offensively talented players into that role while he takes the “harder minutes” ie the shutdown role and PK. The difference now moving forward, as our team slowly begins its upwards trajectory gives the ability to signing FA’s for that reason, and not having to overpay bottom 6 players via $, term, or trade clauses. My point is, Gillis severely handcuffed this team with the trade clauses he handed out, because the return did not warrant the loss of picks he traded and overall poor drafting and development, which is a major part of why we’re at where we’re at. If you’re able to find a balance where improving short term doesn’t hurt you long term (ie finding great picks in later rounds to keep the prospect pipeline flowing) then by all means trade picks. He wasn’t able to do that.
  6. While I agree with some of the Gillis sentiments, a big part of any managers job is maintaining and increasing productivity short term while keeping an eye on the future. Gillis did not do that at all. Trading picks is fine but not at the cost of success down the road, which in this case was an abysmal prospect pool. You also said he was better at getting players cheaper, but fail to mention that he was able to do that by attaching NTC’s and NMC’s to said players, thereby lowering their trade value for Benning in the future. So to say Gillis was better at trading is minimizing the impact of the contracts he put in place and the actual harder job he put on Benning to get good value for them. Benning isn’t immune, the Eriksson signing and the exchange we got for Gudbranson compared to what we paid for him immediately come to mind. End of the day is they had different mandates, and different talents but each had made plenty of mistakes.
  7. Sure, but if your entire scouting team is telling him to pick one player, I doubt he says go to hell and picks someone else without at least considering it.
  8. I suppose the issue I take with some people’s opinions is they say Brackett is the reason we draft well but then blame Benning for Juolevi over Tkachuk
  9. Secondary scoring; swing and a miss; PK and grit and would back any teammate any time; plays hard minutes, good in the dot, and good PKer; a poor fit, as evidenced so far in his time with Pittsburgh. Are all of these players integral to a cup team? No. For a team transitioning as we are though, these guys are/were for depth, and filling roles. I’m not really sure what you see when you look around the league at what players play bottom 6 roles and minutes, and what kind of players you want there. You going to put Matthews out on the PK? Jeff Skinner in a shutdown role? Of course not. You need niche/role players just as much as top scorers. We have more of the former, of course, because our young core is still developing. Jay Beagle has a cup ring, and plays on our 4th line... do you think he didn’t play his role in Washington and was beneficiary for them there just because he wasn’t scoring?
  10. Average in what context? Baer has had a significantly better career than the average 2nd round draft pick. Hell even Vey with 138 career games is significantly better than the average. Perhaps there was another Gaudette but Gauds is a far cry from having a more successful NHL career than Baer has had, and Woo hasn’t played pro on any level yet. They’re both trending well to be sure, I really like both players and hope they excel. But to try and say that trading that 2nd for Baer on a 25% of getting an NHL capable player, on top of likely 2-4 years of development to even get there, was a bad trade I don’t know what to say.
  11. Fair enough, but if you check the link I reference there was plenty of inbound picks in Benning’s trades as well.
  12. I didn’t say I did either, old or young I could care less about that with a player as far as if they’re effective on the ice or not. Contractually, until recently, younger guys generally were on cheaper deals after their ELC’s so there’s that to consider. I agree though, at that point I believe the mandate was simply trying to jumpstart the roster than overhaul it.
  13. I never said it was a success or anything even close to making that statement. I was simply pointing out that people accuse Benning constantly of trading away all his picks but don’t mention retaining picks back in other trades. Detroit is in a very different situation than we were the first couple of years when Benning was moving more picks. The mandate at that point was trying to make the playoffs, not rebuild.