King of the ES Posted November 4, 2012 Share Posted November 4, 2012 First - Luongo for Bjugstad, Petrovic and Upshall is very different than Luongo and Ballard for Paajarvi - you don't see me proposing Luongo and another roster player for Bjugstad, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 4, 2012 Share Posted November 4, 2012 Getting rid of Ballard is a benefit to the Canucks - this way, they're not on the hook for $4.2M payable to their 5th - 7th defenceman over the next 3 seasons. The weakness of Edmonton's D might make them receptive to taking on Ballard. Kassian does not "bring a lot more to the table" than MPS. They were drafted in the same year, MPS 3 spots ahead. Kassian's more physical, MPS is more offensively gifted. And now that Kassian's lost all this weight, they're basically even the same size (MPS listed at 204 pounds). So how does he "bring a lot more to the table", exactly? Because he's a Canuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 4, 2012 Share Posted November 4, 2012 OK, so in addition to the meager return of Bjugstad and Petrovic, we also have to absorb a terrible contract in Upshall. What a great deal! And once again, Keith Ballard really shouldn't be referred to as a "roster player". If MG could get a 7th round pick for him, today, you can bet that he'd pull the trigger. $4.2M allocated to your 6th defenceman is not a winning strategy. Thanks for the math lesson, but I hoped that you would've noticed that I was talking about his AHL numbers, since I was comparing him to the great Zack Kassian, for context related to your assertion that Paajarvi's basically a bust. With Paajarvi's "awful" season last year, he had 8 points in 41 games in the NHL, which you've referenced. Kassian, meanwhile, had 10 points in 44 games - again, just like in the AHL, practically identical. Strangely, though, one's "fallen off the charts", and another one's "the next Todd Bertuzzi". Figure that one out. Again, thanks for the news briefing, but I am aware that no deals can be made during a lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gally Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 What about someone like Randy Jones. Maybe add B.C. prospect Curtis Hamilton too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 So we trade him for nothing, and we have 4.2 avalable. What are we gunna do with that money? Nothing really, it will just sit there, and why as a team trying to win a cup, would we not use up all our cap space to give us the best possible roster? so why would we just wanna clear cap space for the sake of clearing cap space, and making our team worse in the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 I'd trade Luongo, Ballard and Jensen for Eberle...not sure if Edm would? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 First of all, related to the rest of your post, Keith Ballard has been a total disaster in Vancouver, I'm not sure how that's even debateable. The depth of the disaster has gone largely unnoticed, given that we've won the President's Trophy in both of his two years with us, but, not even pointing out his awful production, this is the guy that the Canucks were prepared to fly Nolan Baumgartner in from a vacation on Muscle Beach before playing him in the SCF. Related to the above, it gives us flexibility. You're always allowed to make trades, are you not? We can pick up expensive players on losing teams that might want to shed cap/expense. If there's a way that we could get Ballard off of this team, suddenly we have a lot of opportunity to use that cap space in far more productive ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 Bjugstad + Petrovic > > > > Paajarvi I'd take Bjugstad alone. I don't understand the Paajarvi hype, he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 So we get rid of a "cap dump" in Ballard to pick up the exact same thing from someone else? Explain that cause really that doesn't change anything, it's still the same level of play at another overpaid contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 I'd take Bjugstad alone. I don't understand the Paajarvi hype, he hasn't done anything to deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 Please, do tell me what Bjugstad has done to earn the hype surrounding him on these boards. In the meantime, I'll just try and forget that Paajarvi's 15-goal, 34-point rookie campaign as a 19 year-old in the NHL happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 Right and then he went on to miss the roster the next year. He has huuuge bouts of inconsistency. Bjugstad, the 6'5'' centre tearing up the NCAA, and Petrovic, the big d man with a mean streak are the far better package. Paajarvi might be 6'2" but he plays soft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 So, Paajarvi "hasn't done anything to deserve the hype", yet your justification on wanting Bjugstad is that he's "6'5" and he's "tearing up the NCAA". Do you see the flimsy logic here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLahey Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 So, Paajarvi "hasn't done anything to deserve the hype", yet your justification on wanting Bjugstad is that he's "6'5" and he's "tearing up the NCAA". Do you see the flimsy logic here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 A cap dump somewhere else might be a better fit here. Higgins & Lapierre are two examples. We don't have to use up that $4.2M in one player. It can be used to tweak the lineup here and there, or it can be used to bring in somebody more significant. Either way, it's a more productive use of the space than having it parked on the 3rd pairing of D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 I do, but once again you're attacking the poster without supplementing your own argument. You state that we would be lucky to get Paajarvi from Edmonton, when he couldn't crack a roster which had guys like Hordichuk, Eager, Lander and Belanger as regulars. I was also correct in pointing out that his stock had sharply fallen. I'm not over the moon about 34 points from a soft winger, we have that in Raymond. Bjugstad's choice to stay in college was in my opinion a bad one, as he should have signed an NHL deal and be tearing it up in the AHL right now. There isn't much to base the Bjugstad hype on but even if you watch his highlight package and see the shear dominance, you would understand why Florida is so high on him. Add in Petrovic and this is still a better package than soft Paajarvi. Do you really believe Paajarvi is the solution for this teams problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 I do, but once again you're attacking the poster without supplementing your own argument. You state that we would be lucky to get Paajarvi from Edmonton, when he couldn't crack a roster which had guys like Hordichuk, Eager, Lander and Belanger as regulars. I was also correct in pointing out that his stock had sharply fallen. I'm not over the moon about 34 points from a soft winger, we have that in Raymond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 How isn't he good enough? He's just not given opportunities, he dropped the ball in 10-11. no doubt but last season he had a fine season, he wasn't a weakness at all and show flashes of what he can be, and in the playoffs, he was one of the few players who showed up when it mattered most. And since we are aiming for a cup, those are the kind of players we want don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 You are clueless. He's had plenty of opportunities. Every practice is an opportunity. He hasn't delivered. That's why he hasn't played. 3 goals, 14 points in 112 games played for the Canucks. Pretty simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 You're not doing any better of a job with your life by complaining in this thread. And like your garbage opinions mean more than anyone else's in this thread 'Lu not a massive upgrade over Dubnyk' ahahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.