BenSurgeon

Members
  • Content count

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

61 Neutral

About BenSurgeon

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. As far as the Canucks "tanking" was not the argument. If Hammer was not in the Canucks future plans, then management needed to move that assist for something. The Canucks only had one pick in the top 60. It would have been nice if they could have had another pick but the Canucks did not make the Hammer deal and ended up letting him walk for nothing. I recall some on here using the argument that the reason why they did not trade Hammer at the trade deadline was because they wanted to resign him... Where are those people now?
  2. If Hammer was not in the Canucks future plans, why wasn't he traded to Dallas at the trade deadline for something? I know the Canucks claim was Dallas did not offer enough but anything would have been better than what they got, nothing. Also if Russell was the man Dallas wanted, shy did they let him walk and sign Hammer?
  3. I checked on here and couldn't find if this was discussed or not but I was reading Sportsnet and they were saying that CBJ were in talks to move down in the draft but the talks fell through at the last minute. The rumour was it was either Vancouver or Edmonton. If it was Vancouver then Juolevi may not have been the player they really wanted in the first place, although in this case it would make more sense for the Canucks to move down if that is the player they wanted.
  4. I agree that if Ronning was still available at seventh round, why not take him as those players that low very seldom pan out anyway. It reminds me very much of when his father was drafted and the Canucks at the time over looked him and he went in the low rounds.
  5. When I heard of the trade, I thought it was made just to try and make a run for the payoffs next year by selling off the future. Seems to me that most decisions are being by ownership.
  6. It might have been a trade that the Canucks needed to make but I just question whether they gave up too much.
  7. I think you hit the nail right on the head. The expression on Lindens face said it all, "How am I going to now sell this team for next season without that franchise name player?" I agree the Canucks will get a good pick but the player may not be able ready to play in the NHL next season but need a couple more years in the juniors. Linden can't sell season tickets next season on what the team maybe two years for now.
  8. I agree with you. I have watched this team from day one and have become disillusioned with them as, will I ever see this team win it all? I like everyone else on here was disappointed that the Nucks couldn't have a least held on to that number 3 spot but like I said we all knew the rules going in. Although this was no surprise to me. I did the the simulator 10 times and the majority of times the Nucks ended up with 4th or 5th.
  9. We cannot complain after the fact. Like it or not we knew the rules going in and it was a "lottery" where the Nucks could have got one of the top 3 picks. I agree that it is the s*its that as soon as the Nucks were in a position to maybe get that franchise player the league changed the rules. I really think it should be the worst team that gets the highest draft pick but you can thank teams like Pittsburgh of the 1980's for deliberately tanking just to get Lemuix, for the rules changes. The way it is now I think you have a better chance at winning the 649 rather than the Nucks winning a high draft pick. The fact is the Nucks picking at 5th will get a good player but not a franchise player, outside of Bure, that this team has never had. So it is again wait till next year.
  10. Big deal they barely beat another struggling team. Don't start ordering the SC rings yet.
  11. Story I heard was that Dallas first choice was always Russell. Also they were offered something for Verbata but it was a low draft pick. If this is true I would have taken anything for Verbata as he is doing nothing here and the Canucks will not resign him.
  12. I figure there was more to the story when even the radio announcers were puzzled that Dallas went for Russell over Hamhuis.
  13. I agree that is where I would have called BS.
  14. He just pulled a Sundin, where in the end he could have helped this team bring in more assets and resigned with them in the off season but instead the Canucks could end up with nothing to show for it in the end.
  15. For all its worth and I do not know if anyone has posted but the two stories I have heard is the one that they had a deal to Dallas but someone in the Canucks organization vetoed it. This was mentioned by the Moj on 1040. Also on Pratts Rants he said that the Canucks had a deal with Chicago on Friday but Hamhuis nixed it. So you don't know who to believe.