Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Joslin and Mullen: What was the purpose of signing them?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
47 replies to this topic

#31 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:29 PM

the answer is simple, DEPTH. I can't believe someone would actually make this thread


I can't believe that you needed to make that comment.
Posted Image

#32 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,976 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:48 PM

Gillis essentially has two teams to manage.
Posted Image

#33 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 11:11 PM

Pretty sure we signed Mullen so his dad could call UFAs on our behalf.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#34 radski

radski

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 08

Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:37 AM

I hear ya. Every team including the Canucks make these kinds of signings every single year. But somehow people go, "why did we sign these guys?" "Gillis sucks!" lol

There was a thread on this the day these two were signed. Somepeople acted like the sky was falling and the Canucks were doom to failure. Mike Gillis failed as gm and so on and so on.


That's not as bad as the Oilers and Leafs fanboys on the TSN boards. I counted at least a half dozen who seemed pretty serious about these signings being MG's response to the Suter and Parise signings lol.

#35 Evil Roach

Evil Roach

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 11

Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:46 AM

This thread: what was the purpose?

#36 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,554 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 11 July 2012 - 01:02 AM

Apparently the purpose of this thread was for me to find out that we no longer have Gragnani or Parent.

Cause seriously, WTF? I know neither of them lit it up in their brief stints as Canucks, but I'd still take them any day of the week over Mullen and Joslin as backup defenders.

#37 Dildo Faggins

Dildo Faggins

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 11

Posted 11 July 2012 - 01:14 AM

The Canucks management signed them because they like pissing off the fanbase. They take great pleasure in aggravating us beyond belief.

#38 nd84

nd84

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,521 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 06

Posted 11 July 2012 - 01:18 AM

Parent and Baumgartner are no longer playing for the Wolves so there are some holes to fill

I believe Mullen will strictly be for the AHL.

Considering what we have as of right now, Joslin has potential to be a 7th or 8th defenseman, If he doesn't get to that role he will be in the AHL as well.
Posted Image

#39 JamesB

JamesB

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,923 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 10

Posted 11 July 2012 - 08:41 AM

Every year the Canucks have to sign guys primarily for the AHL but who can also serve as emergency callups. Every team does this.

And every year people ask "What are the Canucks doing!!! How can these guys help the team?".

The Cancuks have a commitment to the Wolves to supply at least 12 players who can play effectively at the AHL level and would be expected to supply more than that. Some of those guys are legitimate prospects, but most are career AHLers who have only an outside chance of becoming NHL regulars -- like Joslin and Mullen.

#40 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:00 AM

I've actually liked Joslin from what I've seen watching Carolina games. I think he'll be a great depth guy who can jump up at a #6 with injuries. There's still potential for him to learn, and he's a big boy makes a great first pass and typically quick decisions.
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#41 tjkaemingh

tjkaemingh

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 730 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 03

Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:53 AM

I think one of them was a Baumer replacement, the other better not be a Rome replacement. These guys are both pretty brutal so hopefully we never see them play a playoff game. I hope MG picks up a decent #5 defenceman at the deadline in case of injuries, otherwise if we lose say Hamhuis to a concussion and Bieksa to a leg injury, look at our defence:

Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Tanev
Alberts - Joslin

Jesus.


Jesus in net! Wow this would be awesome and Miraculous. Schneids is great but Jesus could really make a lot of "saves"!

#42 Spoosh

Spoosh

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,474 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 05

Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:58 AM

Joslin could probably stay with the big club (not the lineup, press box with Alberts) for most of the time, Mullen is for the ahl


There you go!
© 2000, 2014 K'Spoosh Entertainment Ltd.

Misuse of this almost copyrighted information will with near certainty lead to misuse of it.


Posted Image

#43 StenMan.EXE

StenMan.EXE

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 848 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 11

Posted 11 July 2012 - 10:24 AM

Pretty much just for the Wolves. With some of the lesser end D-men we have like Tanev, Sauve and Alberts, i don't see the Canucks giving either Mullen or Joslin much ice time... unless there is injuries.

#44 dorrcoq

dorrcoq

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: 12-September 05

Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:45 PM

I think one of them was a Baumer replacement, the other better not be a Rome replacement. These guys are both pretty brutal so hopefully we never see them play a playoff game. I hope MG picks up a decent #5 defenceman at the deadline in case of injuries, otherwise if we lose say Hamhuis to a concussion and Bieksa to a leg injury, look at our defence:

Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Tanev
Alberts - Joslin

Jesus.


Yeah, because any other team losing their top defensive pair would just slot in a couple of All Stars, right?

#45 Newsflash

Newsflash

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,325 posts
  • Joined: 30-December 08

Posted 11 July 2012 - 03:50 PM

To clairfy, why did Gillis (who I think is doing a fine job) sign these two vs. two other larger, grittier, d-men?


We have a farm team to worry about as well.

I think all Canucks fans, and hockey fans in general can see that to make it far in the playoffs you need size and endurance. Gillis did an excellent job drafting large yet capable players. I understand that Mullen will be an Wolf, but he will be a small Wolf. And really what is the point of depth if it is not good depth?


The needs of the Wolves are not the same as ours. Joslin and Mullen are not going to be playing for us in the playoffs.

There are still decent d-men available that can strengthen our core even more. Who knows what Gillis intends on doing this summer, but I have a feeling he is far from done.


He doesn't have to sign NHL UFA's either. He could sign NCAA players or go the trade route.

I swear to god some CDCers should be dragged out into the street and............


Gtfo.

Buddy I called this EXACT situtation on here two years ago and was flamed, so I guess I have a bit of hockey knowledge, not to mention the 4 years I played in the OHL idiot.


The conspiracy theories that used to be against Lateralus:
Puberty, life, movie theaters, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out during a children's movie, Toy Story 3, Pixar, who ever decided to make Woody so damn attractive, a job, his mothers basement, being 40, being 40 five years ago, dogs who can out run him, all dogs, the Olympic committee, Truth, Fact, Honesty, Logic, Newsflash, a father figure who was there to see him learn to ride his first bike, bikes,

#46 Avicii

Avicii

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,363 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 07

Posted 11 July 2012 - 03:54 PM

I think one of them was a Baumer replacement, the other better not be a Rome replacement. These guys are both pretty brutal so hopefully we never see them play a playoff game. I hope MG picks up a decent #5 defenceman at the deadline in case of injuries, otherwise if we lose say Hamhuis to a concussion and Bieksa to a leg injury, look at our defence:

Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Tanev
Alberts - Joslin

Jesus.


That's dumb, you could say that about anyone's defence...

Niskanen and Letang are injured, their defence is crap.
Doughty and Mitchell are injured, their defence is crap.
Weber and Suter are injured, their defence is crap.

What was the point you were trying to make? You want us to get 6 top pairing defenseman or something in case everyone gets injured?

Posted Image


#47 nucksovereverything

nucksovereverything

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 11

Posted 11 July 2012 - 08:17 PM

I can't believe that you needed to make that comment.

it was how i felt at the time, so i guess that's why. Seriously yo, DEPTH!

#48 awalk

awalk

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,326 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:01 PM

d-d-d-depth




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.