nuck nit Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The fact that he's only 5'9" on a team that is already relatively small is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I realise you were just kidding, but there are those CDCers out there that actually do think the Canucks have a legit shot at landing Ryan to which I have to say, pppffffttt...get f'n real. It's nothing more than wishfull thinking. Canucks do not have what Anaheim is looking for in return for Bobby Ryan. They want roster players - defenseman and a second line center. No chance the Ducks would take Ballard either, considering the cap hit and term left on his contract (3 years - 4.2M/per). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Kid, you have a serious small-man complex. Get out of your delusional world. This has clearly just become an analog for your own perceived deficiencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If journeymen weren't serviceable then they wouldn't be journeymen because that's what makes them journeyman. The fact that he's only played 163 games in the NHL and is already 29 years old proves that he's nothing more than a mediocre to slightly less than mediocre/jouneyman player. The fact that he's only 5'9" on a team that is already relatively small is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Garrison 6'2" 218 lbs 27 years old Kassian 6'3' 214 lbs 21 years old Gaunce 6'2" 215 lbs 18 years old Last three key additions to the Canucks - bigger, younger, skilled. I wouldn't be surprised to see this trend continue with the players acquired in a Luongo deal. Doan 6'2" 228 lbs young at heart (an exception to the young part for good reason) Ebbett (also an exception for good reasons) was signed primarily imo because he played well as a depth option for the Canucks last year, has a big heart but also is a veteran presence for the Wolves, who lost Baumgartner to retirement - will be great with young players like Jensen etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 He has eight years of pro hockey under his garter belt. A journeyman is someone who has completed an apprenticeship and is fully educated in a trade or craft, but not yet a master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If journeymen weren't serviceable then they wouldn't be journeymen because that's what makes them journeyman. The fact that he's only played 163 games in the NHL and is already 29 years old proves that he's nothing more than a mediocre to slightly less than mediocre/jouneyman player. The fact that he's only 5'9" on a team that is already relatively small is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Nateb,you did not reply to the facts I presented so you then resort to name calling and bullying so you can feel all better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 BPA is such an overused term. Every GM uses it and they usually say it after they drafted a player because what else are they going to say? Are they going to say that the player drafted 10 spots behind the player that they drafted was actually better? YOU think that he's done a good job at the draft so far but in reality, he doesn't have a single player that he's drafted that was on the playoff roster last year. So, exactly how good could he be drafting? As for a list of players, you can look up the list yourself, as I'm not going to do all of your homework for you but since Gillis has been with the Canucks from 2008 until now, he's had 5 drafts. With the average NHL player being over 6'1" tall and 205lbs, in the 5 drafts he's had, this is his breakdown. 2008 draft - 5 players drafted with 4 of those players being under the league average 2009 draft - 7 players drafted with 5 of those players being under the league average 2010 draft - 5 players drafted with 3 of those players being under the league average 2011 draft - 8 players drafted with 4 of those players being under the league average 2012 draft - 5 players drafted with 4 of those players being under the league average I will admit that some of these players might be taller than the league average and might fill out and get heavier but right now are under the average weight. But, since you didn't think that I could come up with 1/3 or 33% of the players who were undersized, this above list actually shows that the actual number is 2/3 or 66%. So, in answer to your question, yes I obviously can come up with more than 33% and I can actually double it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Gillis signed him so it was not a problem for the .org. His height does not effect his scoring, playmaking and defensive abilities plus he plays all three forward positions. The team forwards are not small as all active roster forwards are 6' and higher,averaging 6' 1 1/2 " . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Andrew Ebbett plays with heart and clearly Gillis noticed it. It don't matter if he's 5'0 or 6'11, Gillis thought he is going to be a good depth player based on his past accomplishments. So... are you a mediocre human? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 You talk in some posts about the wording used (journeyman) and apparently we have different opinions of undersized. I wouldn't say someone who's 6' and 190 lbs as undersized, but apparently you want to compare that to league average. You say it yourself about comparing draft age players to NHL age players, yet you want to claim a victory on your 'stats'. Just so you know, I did the math including players 6' or under (considering weight is a very poor comparison for teenagers compared to men), which is why I brought it up. 2008: 2/5 2009: 2/7 2010: 1/5 2011: 1/5 2012: 0/5 That's 6/27, or 22%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Ebbett as a signing isn't so bad. As all have agreed, he puts out effort, and he's inexpensive. He also managed to score at almost a 25 goal pace last season (assuming he actually could keep up a goal every 3 or so games pace). Perhaps one of the other reasons he was re-signed is that his lack of achievements over his career makes him a safe choice should the Canucks need to send a contract through waivers. It is unlikely he would be claimed by another team. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Can you read? I said that Ebbett has heart but I'm not too sure what accomplishments that you're referring too. 163 games at 29 years old and having signed only 1 one - way contract would prove to me that he's not all that accomplished of an NHL player. As for your last comment, I have to assume that your 2 left over brain cells must have split apart and made you even more confused. I do apologize if calling Ebbett mediocre has hurt your precious little feelings but if you can prove to me that Ebbett isn't a mediocre/less than mediocre NHL player then I'm interested to hear your reasons why you think that he isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kack Zassian Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Ebbett is a perfectly good utility player. Why are people even talking about him and his pros/cons? He fits the role of utility player, nothing more nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 I sure can read, especially at a level beyond what your brain can even begin to comprehend. See what I did? I'm talking down on you like you have. But the main point is that you did not notice me bolding "depth player" in the original post. Gillis MOST LIKELY did not sign him as the answer to our so-called 'top six problems'. He is a depth player signing. A depth player does not need to have accolades rivalling that of Teemu Selanne. I liked how you brought "feelings" and emotions into this - are you enraged that someone called you out for being pathetic? (That you are - and you're terrible at analyzing posts) It's just hilarious how you're raging over a depth player signing largely as a result of Ebbett's "size problems". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 So, are you talking down on me or are you talking down too me? Apparently you can't read as well as you thought because if you could, you'd know that I said that Ebbett has a lot of heart and works hard. What I was also saying, which is apparently too much for you to comprehend, is that this team is already too soft and small to have a guy like Ebbett as a depth forward. So, I did notice your bolding of "depth forward" and maybe you should take some of your own advice and read the posts a little better. Since you are obviously inflicted with a trisomy of the 21st chromosome, I will try to explain it to you a little more clearly. Ebbett is a mediocre/less than mediocre NHL player. I'm not badmouthing the guy, it is what it is. I'm sure that even he would tell you that. He has some qualities that certain teams will look for but not enough strengths to overcome his weaknesses to make him anything other than a journeyman player in the NHL/AHL. Now, is it that hard for you to understand? If you don't like the truth or it hurts you too much, well.........too F'in bad!!! Quit being a bitch! And the only thing that I'm angry about, other than trying to explain things to idiots like you, is that SO FAR, Gillis has gone against everything he said that he was going to do and what he thought this team needed. I wouldn't have a problem with Ebbett being signed if the Canucks were already a big team but since they aren't, I do, especially since they were manhandled in this years playoffs, and to a certain extent last years finals. Again, I apologize to your sensitive feelings and also the fact that you have some very obvious cognitive disabilities. But you might want to stay away from drugs and alcohol from this point on, as those two little brain cells that you have left will expire that much quicker..............and oh yeah, whatever you do, don't sneeze...........actually, for the betterment of this site, I hope you have an allergy attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 I guess we must have a different idea of what undersized is. But, with the average NHL player being OVER 6'1" and 205lbs, then please enlighten us as to how 6'1" and 190lbs isn't undersized? Of course it is. And of course we are talking about the league average, what else should we be comparing it too, soccer? You do know this is an NHL hockey teams site right? Ohhhhhh, I see, so when you draft a player, they give you his height only and not his weight? C'mon, what a joke. I admitted that some of these players will put on weight but not all of them are going to gain some. Burrows, Raymond, the Sedins, Hansen and Bieksa haven't exactly gained much weight, if any, since they were drafted(or signed in Burrows's case). And what in the hell is the point of doing the math on players 6 feet or under when the league average is over 6'1"? Wait a minute, I think I know why, it's because you think that it will help you make your point, when all it does is prove that you're math formula is useless considering that you're basing it on the wrong referance point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drop Em Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Now this is exciting stuff. Explain why there is no room for a depth forward? Last time I checked, there is room to sign more than a few players as the Canucks are not close to their contract limit. Ebbett's contract is also a TWO-WAY, not a one-way, so again, it gives the GM plenty of flexibility PLUS the bonus of having a player that you have personally seen. And I was talking down to you. You are badmouthing the guy, period, for the above reasons which I'm sure you'll gloss over conveniently to support and reconfirm your own points. You act like the team has no room for contracts. That's where you're wrong, pea-brain. (See how tough I am talking trash online? The difference is that my points actually cover your arguments and less to do with showing off my e-penis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Wholly **** are you stupid. I never said there wasn't room for a depth forward. Please show me where I said that. What I've been saying is that Gillis has said that he wants to get younger, bigger and stronger and then he re-signs Raymond, re-signs Ebbett and signs two smaller defensemen who are also DEPTH PLAYERS. I've also said that we have too many smaller and soft forwards and then we re-sign a guy who's one of the smallest players in the league. If the bus (in your case the short bus) is travelling too fast for you to follow along, then don't reply. Oh, and you are now saying that you were talking down to me when you previously posted that you were talking down on me. And you accuse me of not reading the posts properly. What a hypocrite. For the last time, I wasn't bad mouthing the guy, I was in fact giving him some credit. I said that he was a hard worker and has lots of heart. I also said that he was a mediocre/less than mediocre NHL player. How is this bad mouthing him when it's FACT??? He's a 29 yearl old journeyman player who just signed a 2 way contract, who's been with multiple organizations, has only signed 1 one-way contract in his career, and has played the equivalent of 2 full NHL seasons since he turned pro 6 years ago. What part of all of that doesn't say mediocre/less than mediocre NHL player? Again, I never said anything about the amount of contracts that we still have available. This is where your cognitive problems affect your ability to form a proper argument and comeback. You're arguing points that I never even made. I never said one thing about contracts, you brought that up Corky. As for accusing me of showing my e-penis, laughable coming from some fool who has some cartoon character taking his robe off and flashing people............plus, I don't think you have a big enough screen if I were to show off my junk...........but both you and Bodee can keep dreaming about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.