Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

hockey21383

What Was The Point Of Getting Pahlsson?

70 posts in this topic

So I was just thinking to myself, Why did we get Sami Pahlsson??? We supposedly got him to be a third line checker to check the other teams top line, but that first round against LA we ended up matching our top 2 lines against there's and we clearly lost that battle. I thought the whole point of getting Pahlsson was to do what he did when the Ducks won the cup, which was to check the other teams top line and get them off their game, and the 3rd line didnt play at all against LA's 1st and 2nd lines. Wouldnt it have been better if we just kept 3 scoring lines???? just a little clueless.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To replace Malhotra.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was for depth in the playoffs, just like when MG acquired Higgins and Lapierre. It just turned out that these playoffs didn't last long enough to require depth.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He gave us depth at a low cost.

Can't say he played poorly, but he didn't seem to fit in right away.

We've seen many players come in and struggle with our system initially and have success later on (Ballard, Booth, Alberts)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depth. And MG doesn't like rental players, so you can expect him back next year.

As for not playing against LA's top lines, you can blame AV for that.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depth. And MG doesn't like rental players, so you can expect him back next year.

As for not playing against LA's top lines, you can blame AV for that.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depth. And MG doesn't like rental players, so you can expect him back next year.

As for not playing against LA's top lines, you can blame AV for that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And thats why I don't understand why AV is probably coming back.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He gave us depth at a low cost.

Can't say he played poorly, but he didn't seem to fit in right away.

We've seen many players come in and struggle with our system initially and have success later on (Ballard, Booth, Alberts)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't give us depth. We traded away Hodgson. The trades are almost directly related to each other. Pahlsson replaced Hodgson, and Kassian was supposed to provide that physical depth.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They also weren't convinced Hodgson could handle the defensive demands of being a third-line centre and decided to trade for Sammy Pahlsson.

Pahlsson, who will become an unrestricted free agent this summer, was acquired from the Columbus Blue Jackets at the trade deadline for a pair of fourth-round draft picks. The Canucks have said they don't view Pahlsson as a rental player and hope to re-sign the 34-year-old Swede, who had six points in 19 regular-sea-son games with Vancouver and scored one goal in five playoff games.

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/trades+cost+team+chance/6508173/story.html

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was just thinking to myself, Why did we get Sami Pahlsson??? We supposedly got him to be a third line checker to check the other teams top line, but that first round against LA we ended up matching our top 2 lines against there's and we clearly lost that battle. I thought the whole point of getting Pahlsson was to do what he did when the Ducks won the cup, which was to check the other teams top line and get them off their game, and the 3rd line didnt play at all against LA's 1st and 2nd lines. Wouldnt it have been better if we just kept 3 scoring lines???? just a little clueless.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.