Gollumpus

Members
  • Content Count

    5,171
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Gollumpus last won the day on December 28 2014

Gollumpus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,528 Gaming the system

About Gollumpus

  • Rank
    Canucks First-Line

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Haven't you heard? The time of the enforcer is over in the NHL... Aside from that, I am wondering which other teams were interested in taking Eriksson, what other pieces were being exchanged, and why did Eriksson "vito" the deal? regards, G.
  2. Well, right there you got a point... (I'll enter stuff later. Bed is for the weak, and I'm in that condition all week.) regards, G.
  3. Re-build not finished, but great strides have been achieved in just a short time. The top six could still do with maybe one or two more guys (Podkolzin is likely one). There's a better bottom six (overall) than there was in 2011. I liked that Higgins, Malhotra and Hansen line, but the 4th line for next year should be better than 2011. The defense is maybe half way there. Maybe. A lot depends on the potential of guys on the farm, or out of the country, or maybe still to be drafted. In goal, Demko and DiPietro have a lot of potential, and likely/hopefully will do well. regards, G.
  4. Doing a re-read of "A Canticle for Lebowitz": https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/164154.A_Canticle_for_Leibowitz". regards, G.
  5. Ah, this is what I was wondering about. Thanks muchly. regards, G.
  6. Yup. And the point is that the 2nd year NMC ends after the draft, no? Draft in June, NMC clause expires in July. Probably not too important a point as Ferland will (likely) be on the Canucks' protected list for the expansion draft. regards, G.
  7. Could be. What I'm going by is that at the time of the draft (June 2021), a player with a NMC has to be protected. Ferland's NMC expires in July 2021 when a M-NTC becomes active. I suppose it's not too important a point, as Ferland will likely be one of the guys on the Canucks' protected list (based on the current roster). regards, G.
  8. Perhaps this gets covered later in the thread, but, isn't the expansion draft in June 2021, and doesn't Ferland have a NMC which lasts through 2021 and only changes to a M-NTC after July 2021? regards, G.
  9. Baertschi has always been on pace to score 20+ goals per season in his time here. It's only been the injury thing which would make me seriously consider trading him. 2015-16 Vancouver Canucks NHL 69 15 13 28 -14 14 | 2016-17 Vancouver Canucks NHL 68 18 17 35 -6 8 | 2017-18 Vancouver Canucks NHL 53 14 15 29 3 20 | 2018-19 Vancouver Canucks NHL 26 9 5 14 -9 6 |
  10. I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I think I get your meaning. This being said, there have been a lot of Canucks teams with a whole lot more jam this team, and they could even throw in some marmalade as well. regards, G.
  11. Fully agree with your opinion. I was making light of the other guy's opinion, hence the ..... This being said, I suspect Sutter is still vulnerable to being traded. Cap, age and recent injury history are weighing against him. regards, G.
  12. The team's record certainly supports this opinion..... regards, G.
  13. The team (currently) has three forwards too many, assuming 13 is the desired amount. I'm assuming Horvat, Petterson, Boeser, Miller, Pearson, Ferland, Roussel, Virtanen, Motte and Leivo are safe bets to be here at the start of the season (10). I suspect that Eriksson is the mostly likely guy who is gone, mostly due to his off season comments etc. He may be difficult to move, and the return in a trade may not be huge, but with the right sweetener he could be gone. I'd prefer to keep Sutter. I think he is a good player, but his age (30), his recent injury history and a desire on the part of the team for cap space make him a target. He would likely bring a greater return at a TDL, this year or next. I could see Goldobin being gone. With the Canucks filling the top-6 with better options, and Goldobin having a history of not being a great defensive player, he doesn't look to be that attractive an option for the bottom six. I could see him being traded, or opting to go back to Russia. I'd prefer a trade as the team then gets an asset. Remaining forwards: Baertschi, Beagle, Schaller could be vulnerable to a trade or being waived, although I suspect that all three would be claimed. I suspect that team management would prefer to keep the latter three forwards (Baertschi, Beagle, Schaller) and move Eriksson, Sutter and Goldobin. And none of this takes into consideration that a guy like Gaudette could play lights out in the pre-season such that the team just can't afford to send him down (waiver exempt). regards, G.
  14. I have a different a set of assumptions and conclusion. I don't see Benning wanting to have any additional negative press regarding this issue than might already be out there, therefore, he would have wanted to handle this situation in a most professional manner. It seems to me that if Benning wanted to speak (directly) to Eriksson, then Benning would have (probably) gone through Ericksson's agent. This assumes that Benning and the agent had discussions between themselves, and that it was agreed that bringing Ericksson into the discussion would be advantageous. The agent, assuming s/he is a good agent, would not want their client to speak to management without representation being available. This suggests to me that at the very least, a conference call situation would have been arranged. If Ericksson failed to be part of an arranged call between himself, his agent and Benning, then this would be a serious "screw you" moment in Eriksson's relationship with both of the other parties (unless there was a very good and excusable reason). If this were the case, then not only should Eriksson be looking for a new team, but he also might be looking for a new agent... or it's all bull$&!#e and nobody ever called anyone on this issue. regards, G.