Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Vancouver Canucks: Anti-WHL?


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#61 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 23 November 2012 - 04:50 AM

That's still 25 more points than Ballard, while consuming far less cap dollars.

You're saying that you don't think Howden's going to make the NHL?



How is it looking better? Keith Ballard is not improving. If the Canucks had any confidence in him, they wouldn't have felt the urgency to rush out and roll the dice on a guy like Jason Garrison. If Ballard's on the team whenever the NHL comes back, he'll still be on the bottom pair, earning $4.25M.

Grabner's scored 54 goals in 2 years on Long Island, and is 25 years old. He also is amongst the fastest skaters in the league. It's unbelievable to me that people think we somehow "won" that deal. Grabner would be our #3 winger, IMO, ahead of both Booth & Raymond.

Except you're forgetting one thing: Grabner couldn't even crack FLORIDA'S line-up and was subsequently placed on waivers. What the hell makes you think he would've cracked a Presidents' Trophy winning line-up?
  • 0

#62 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 23 November 2012 - 04:51 AM

Let me guess, Captain Hindsight has an answer for this!
  • 0

#63 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,558 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 05:42 AM

If your scouts had turned up recommendations like:

Prab Rai
Morgan Clark
Taylor Ellington
Dan Gendur
Michael Grabner
Evan Fuller
Matt Butcher
Andrew Sarauer
David Schulz

Over the previous 5 drafts out of the WHL/BCHL, would you keep going back to that well? I certainly wouldn't ...

I would like to see Delorme and the western guys fired but failing that, I think the OHL has been a sensible (and fruitful) place to concentrate our scouting efforts. And that goes for eastern high schools and tier 2 junior A leagues as well. Our eastern North American scouts under Mike Gillis have certainly been the only ones finding real players, I don't think there is any question about that.

But I do want to see more quality and quantity in the system, from where isn't important to me although it would be cool to have a Canucks alumni where everyone isn't over sixty, no one on the current roster lives here in the summer and that is a function of where they come from. I look at what we have in the pipeline and I see the basement of the league in our not to distant future.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#64 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:41 AM

Except you're forgetting one thing: Grabner couldn't even crack FLORIDA'S line-up and was subsequently placed on waivers. What the hell makes you think he would've cracked a Presidents' Trophy winning line-up?


Florida made a rash decision based on a poor training camp showing, and they paid for it.

It's not a question of "cracking", it's a question of organizations making mistakes - in this case, both Florida and Vancouver. Don't tell me that a guy who scored 35 goals on one NHL team isn't good enough to "crack" any other roster in the NHL.
  • 1

#65 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 23 November 2012 - 02:56 PM

Florida made a rash decision based on a poor training camp showing, and they paid for it.

It's not a question of "cracking", it's a question of organizations making mistakes - in this case, both Florida and Vancouver. Don't tell me that a guy who scored 35 goals on one NHL team isn't good enough to "crack" any other roster in the NHL.

Well, we traded him because we didn't think he'd crack our line-up. Florida waived him because he didn't crack their line-up. At least 3 other teams passed on him while he was on waivers (NYI was 4th in line), so clearly they didn't think he was good enough for their line-ups.

So, Captain Hindsight, basically what you're saying is you're a better judge of talent than at least 17% of the GMs in the NHL? Who are the next gems that are waiver eligible and have done nothing at the NHL level so far?

Edited by n00bxQb, 23 November 2012 - 02:57 PM.

  • 0

#66 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 23 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

I would like to see Delorme and the western guys fired but failing that, I think the OHL has been a sensible (and fruitful) place to concentrate our scouting efforts. And that goes for eastern high schools and tier 2 junior A leagues as well. Our eastern North American scouts under Mike Gillis have certainly been the only ones finding real players, I don't think there is any question about that.

But I do want to see more quality and quantity in the system, from where isn't important to me although it would be cool to have a Canucks alumni where everyone isn't over sixty, no one on the current roster lives here in the summer and that is a function of where they come from. I look at what we have in the pipeline and I see the basement of the league in our not to distant future.

Well, considering that even during a season in which they struggled, at least 1 Sedin had a point in 98 of the Canucks' 241 goals last season, I'd say it's a possibility when the Sedins retire. Anytime you lose 2 players who are at least partially responsible for 41% of your scoring, it's bad news.
  • 0

#67 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,021 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

The Canucks are too successful.
They are 'forced' to 'settle' for the 'mere' likes of Jensen or Gaunce late in the first round.
There is a way to break this cycle.
If the Canucks could suck like the Leafs, they could draft WHL supastar defensemen like Morgan Rielly.
Conclusion: the Canucks management must be WHL hating idiots, because they are too successful to draft early.

However, they make up for it by going out and signing, for hometown discounts, proven NHL top four blueliners from BC - guys named Hamhius and Garrison (players you keep running down, ironically, King)

Edited by oldnews, 23 November 2012 - 07:25 PM.

  • 1

#68 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 10:42 AM

So, Captain Hindsight, basically what you're saying is you're a better judge of talent than at least 17% of the GMs in the NHL? Who are the next gems that are waiver eligible and have done nothing at the NHL level so far?


"Have done nothing"? I guess you forgot that he had 11 points in 20 games with us the year before? Forgot that his line, with Raymond & Kesler, were making some serious noise around the league?

As for your "Captain Hindsight" comment, I guess GMs should never be held accountable for their decisions, than? Heck, Dave Nonis drafting Pat White over Dave Perron wasn't a mistake, because that's "hindsight"; is that what you're saying?
  • 0

#69 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 10:53 AM

The Canucks are too successful.
They are 'forced' to 'settle' for the 'mere' likes of Jensen or Gaunce late in the first round.
There is a way to break this cycle.
If the Canucks could suck like the Leafs, they could draft WHL supastar defensemen like Morgan Rielly.
Conclusion: the Canucks management must be WHL hating idiots, because they are too successful to draft early.


Where did I say that it had to be the 1st round? They haven't drafted any WHL players period, in the last 4 drafts. Hard to imagine that that's a coincidence, when they've drafted 4 OHLers and 6 QMJHLers in the equivalent time period.

However, they make up for it by going out and signing, for hometown discounts, proven NHL top four blueliners from BC - guys named Hamhius and Garrison (players you keep running down, ironically, King)


I'm not running down Hamhuis. Only ever said that he's not as good as Phaneuf.

Garrison, yes, I predict that he'll be a flop.
  • 0

#70 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 24 November 2012 - 04:42 PM

"Have done nothing"? I guess you forgot that he had 11 points in 20 games with us the year before? Forgot that his line, with Raymond & Kesler, were making some serious noise around the league?

As for your "Captain Hindsight" comment, I guess GMs should never be held accountable for their decisions, than? Heck, Dave Nonis drafting Pat White over Dave Perron wasn't a mistake, because that's "hindsight"; is that what you're saying?

They were "making serious noise" around the league? You're confusing CDC's "speed kills" fad with the rest of the league. Grabner only played well in 2 games, which was against Toronto (2nd worst team in the league that year) and Anaheim and he only got called up because Daniel, and later, Samuelsson, were out with injuries.

The Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson line was making serious noise. They put up 80 goals that year and that line dominated against Los Angeles. I suppose 11 points in 20 games (and, of course, conveniently leaving out the 1 point in 9 playoff games, which would make it 12 points in 29 games) would put Grabner ahead of 25-goal-scorer Raymond and 30-goal-scorer Samuelsson on the depth chart, though, right?

So you have the Sedins & Burrows, Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson coming off a brilliant year, and Gillis wanted to get grittier for the playoffs, so he brought in Torres and Malhotra (after Grabner was traded). So, if I understand your logic, he should've axed a 25- or 30-goal-scorer to roll an unproven Grabner in the Top 6 or not signed gritty forwards so he could use softy Grabner on the 3rd line?

White was an off the board pick, Perron was not. Perron was expected to be a mid-to-late 1st rounder. White was expected to be a 2nd rounder. It was a stupid move at the time and it looks even more ridiculous now (thank god MG got Ehrhoff for White). The only scouting report that has the two even close was ISS (and, even then, Perron was ranked ahead) and, obviously, Nonis'.

Patrick White:
CSS - Ranked 23rd amongst NA skaters
ISS - Ranked 34th
TSN - Not in Top 30
THN - Ranked 60th

David Perron:
CSS - Ranked 10th among NA skaters
ISS - Ranked 32nd
TSN - Ranked 16th
THN - Ranked 31st

Edited by n00bxQb, 24 November 2012 - 05:05 PM.

  • 1

#71 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 05:20 PM

They were "making serious noise" around the league? You're confusing CDC's "speed kills" fad with the rest of the league. Grabner only played well in 2 games, which was against Toronto (2nd worst team in the league that year) and Anaheim and he only got called up because Daniel, and later, Samuelsson, were out with injuries.


Nope, that line was more than a fad. They were making noise. Grabner was routinely one of the more noticeable players on the team. The performance against Anaheim was unbelievable.

For context, Zack Kassian had 1 goal and 3 points in 17 games played after being acquired, and look at the hype surrounding him. Grabner's 5 and 11 in 20 games was impressive, and an obvious signal that he play at the top-six NHL level.

The Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson line was making serious noise. They put up 80 goals that year and that line dominated against Los Angeles. I suppose 11 points in 20 games (and, of course, conveniently leaving out the 1 point in 9 playoff games, which would make it 12 points in 29 games) would put Grabner ahead of 25-goal-scorer Raymond and 30-goal-scorer Samuelsson on the depth chart, though, right?


Samuelsson dominated against Los Angeles, yes. Not sure about the other two. And yes, Grabner only had 1 point in the playoffs. But was he even playing on the top-six? I don't believe so, as (like you said) Samuelsson had returned from injury.

So you have the Sedins & Burrows, Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson coming off a brilliant year, and Gillis wanted to get grittier for the playoffs, so he brought in Torres and Malhotra. So, if I understand your logic, he should've axed a 25- or 30-goal-scorer to roll an unproven Grabner in the Top 6 or not signed Torres so he could use softy Grabner on the 3rd line?


If you want to trade Grabner, fine. Just don't trade him along with your 1st round pick, and another young versatile forward, for a 3rd-pairing defenceman with a big contract (who was deemed so utterly useless in the playoffs that the team was prepared to fly in Nolan Baumgartner while vacationing in Malibu to prevent Ballard from playing).

And yes, obviously, in hindsight, the smart move would've been to keep Grabner and move Raymond.

White was an off the board pick, Perron was not. Perron was expected to be a mid-to-late 1st rounder. White was expected to be a 2nd rounder. It was a stupid move at the time and it looks even more ridiculous now (thank god MG got Ehrhoff for White). The only scouting report that has the two even close was ISS (and, even then, Perron was ranked ahead) and, obviously, Nonis'.

Patrick White:
CSS - Ranked 23rd amongst NA skaters
ISS - Ranked 34th
TSN - Not in Top 30
THN - Ranked 60th

David Perron:
CSS - Ranked 10th among NA skaters
ISS - Ranked 32nd
TSN - Ranked 16th
THN - Ranked 31st


So I guess that you also think that the Alex Mallett pick from 2012 was stupid, as well?
  • 0

#72 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 24 November 2012 - 05:54 PM

Nope, that line was more than a fad. They were making noise. Grabner was routinely one of the more noticeable players on the team. The performance against Anaheim was unbelievable.

For context, Zack Kassian had 1 goal and 3 points in 17 games played after being acquired, and look at the hype surrounding him. Grabner's 5 and 11 in 20 games was impressive, and an obvious signal that he play at the top-six NHL level.



Samuelsson dominated against Los Angeles, yes. Not sure about the other two. And yes, Grabner only had 1 point in the playoffs. But was he even playing on the top-six? I don't believe so, as (like you said) Samuelsson had returned from injury.



If you want to trade Grabner, fine. Just don't trade him along with your 1st round pick, and another young versatile forward, for a 3rd-pairing defenceman with a big contract (who was deemed so utterly useless in the playoffs that the team was prepared to fly in Nolan Baumgartner while vacationing in Malibu to prevent Ballard from playing).

And yes, obviously, in hindsight, the smart move would've been to keep Grabner and move Raymond.



So I guess that you also think that the Alex Mallett pick from 2012 was stupid, as well?

2 good games out of 30 means he's done something. Okay ... Aren't you the same guy who rags on the Sedins for not carrying the team in the playoffs? They certainly have good games far more often than 1 of 15 in the playoffs.

Kassian hasn't done anything either, but he's not waiver eligible, so we don't need to make that choice.

Grabner was playing 3rd line for most of the playoffs. I suppose 10 minutes/game isn't enough to produce? He, along with Wellwood, got the boot because MG wanted the 3rd line to get bigger and grittier for the playoffs, as I already mentioned.

Bernier was a young, versatile forward? I seem to remember Bernier being a pariah pretty much everywhere he went. I personally didn't think he was as bad as he was perceived to be around here, but he was being paid $2M/year to play on the 4th line when we traded him.

Ballard was a 1st pairing defenseman on Florida. Was it a bad decision in retrospect? Yes. At the time, it wasn't that bad of a deal. Bernier was a salary dump, Grabner wasn't a top 6er and too soft to be a bottom 6er. It was the previous equivalent of Raymond, Ballard, and a 1st that's been tossed around here as the de facto trade proposal for the last 1.5 years. If you could trade Raymond, Ballard, and a 1st for a top-pair dman on another team right now, would you do it?

I maintain that Grabner is no better than Raymond. Raymond had a good year then followed it up with a mediocre year. Grabner had a good year then followed it up with a mediocre year. Raymond is simply further ahead of Grabner on the same set of tracks.

Going off the board in the 1st round is stupid, especially when you have a guy who has dropped 10 spots available, but you take a guy who's ranked 10 spots higher than your current pick instead. Again, every major scouting report had Perron ahead of White. This is why the Jankowski deal was incredibly stupid by Calgary, too. Time will tell if it works out for CGY or not, but it was still a stupid, stupid move at the time. Once you get beyond the first 35-40 picks, the players are very unlikely to become full-time NHLers and it is much harder for scouts to agree on those players due to the flaws in their games, personalities, work ethics, etc. Going off the board at that point isn't nearly as stupid because quite literally all the players are serious question marks.

For the record, I liked the Mallet pick. Big, tough, skates well, can score. Reminds me of Burrows but bigger.

Edited by n00bxQb, 24 November 2012 - 06:00 PM.

  • 2

#73 Russ

Russ

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,374 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 06

Posted 25 November 2012 - 02:15 AM

I have complained about the lack of WHL players in the past, this season I didn't because I like the Mallet pick alot (saw him play for Wolves tonight and I liked what he brought in limited minutes).

I would like seeing some WHL kids drafted in the future though, I think theres alot of talent out here.
  • 0
Xbox Live - Lenerdosy
PSN - Lenerdosy

Interested in a game of NHL or BF3? Send me a friend request and lets play.

#74 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,156 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 25 November 2012 - 04:43 PM

I didn't see it mentioned in the thread but the Canucks western amateur scout is Harold Snepts.
  • 0

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#75 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,727 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 25 November 2012 - 06:09 PM

I didn't see it mentioned in the thread but the Canucks western amateur scout is Harold Snepts.


Rewarding unqualified alumni?

That's not a recipe for success. If we're gonna dump a bunch of money into scouting and development, we better make sure we have top scouts.

He could be qualified, I'm not really too familiar with his work. I hope it's not just a case of handing out jobs to ex-players as a favor.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#76 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:52 PM

I still think we need to improve our scouting in general.


Agreed, but I think MG has put in a lot of resources on player development. The draft is a crap shoot. Wings have been a great team for a long time so they've been able to let the kids play in the minors and develop. We are seeing something similar with the Canucks now.

I think we will start to see the results of this new development program over the next few years.
  • 0

#77 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:55 PM

Rewarding unqualified alumni?

That's not a recipe for success. If we're gonna dump a bunch of money into scouting and development, we better make sure we have top scouts.

He could be qualified, I'm not really too familiar with his work. I hope it's not just a case of handing out jobs to ex-players as a favor.


Excellent post.

I'm not really familiar with his work either.....but maybe the Canucks not drafting WHL kids tells us something about his work.
  • 0

#78 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,752 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:35 PM

To be honest we just need to draft better, regardless where the players come from. Are we agreed?
  • 1
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#79 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,575 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:41 PM

Where did I say that it had to be the 1st round? They haven't drafted any WHL players period, in the last 4 drafts. Hard to imagine that that's a coincidence, when they've drafted 4 OHLers and 6 QMJHLers in the equivalent time period.



I'm not running down Hamhuis. Only ever said that he's not as good as Phaneuf.

Garrison, yes, I predict that he'll be a flop.


...
Listen, I love Phaneuf... But he is not as good as Hammer :lol:
Hamhuis is one of the top 20 D in the league (10th in Norris voting last year, 16 the year before, both higher spots than Dion)

You predict Garrison will be a flop. Based on what exactly? While he might now score 15 goals every year, if at all, he is still a darn good shut down D. If he could put up 25 points a year and play his type of D, he'll be doing pretty good.

Edited by Jägermeister, 29 November 2012 - 01:41 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#80 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,165 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 23 December 2012 - 10:26 PM

1. How is it looking better? Keith Ballard is not improving. If the Canucks had any confidence in him, they wouldn't have felt the urgency to rush out and roll the dice on a guy like Jason Garrison. If Ballard's on the team whenever the NHL comes back, he'll still be on the bottom pair, earning $4.25M.

2. That's still 25 more points than Ballard, while consuming far less cap dollars.

(I added 1. and 2. just to show what I am addressing)

1. Your wrong actually, Keith Ballard is improving.

And the Jason Garrison addition had nothing to do with Ballard, it was about adding to our defense that Salo and even Ehrhoff from the year prior. Garrison's addition and slot in the line-up doesn't affect Ballard, your right he will be on the 3rd pair either way, cause he can't play the right sides and Edler and Hamhuis are both top pair defensemen. Garrison is capable of playing the right side, and is an excellent addition to fill the role and take the minutes Salo had.


2. Comparing a top 6 forward's top totals' (Who gets quailty PP time) to a defensemen playing on the 3rd pair, who missed half the year and gets no PP time.

A brilliant comparison.

Grabner's scored 54 goals in 2 years on Long Island, and is 25 years old. He also is amongst the fastest skaters in the league. It's unbelievable to me that people think we somehow "won" that deal. Grabner would be our #3 winger, IMO, ahead of both Booth & Raymond.


Raymond scored 25 Goals once and is among the fastest skaters in the NHL too, look how much that means now.

No one thinks we won the deal, quite frankly it is too early to tell, Grabner could regain 20-30+ Goal, 50+ Point form and they will maybe win, if not and Ballard continues to make the strides he made last year, then it won't look bad at all from our end.

As for Grabner being our #3 winger is laughable, Booth is better than him, even he had a better year last year, and Booth is strong, bigger, and isn't nearly as soft.

Then Raymond vs Grabner is a toss up, they bring the exact same skating and offensive skillset, both had great years then struggled so who knows what will happen, but Raymond also has a better defensive game.

Where did I say that it had to be the 1st round? They haven't drafted any WHL players period, in the last 4 drafts. Hard to imagine that that's a coincidence, when they've drafted 4 OHLers and 6 QMJHLers in the equivalent time period.


I'm not running down Hamhuis. Only ever said that he's not as good as Phaneuf.


King! But earlier you said late round picks don't matter! So what is your actual stance on this, cause right now you are certaintly the King of Contradiction.


And Hamhuis > Phaneuf

For context, Zack Kassian had 1 goal and 3 points in 17 games played after being acquired, and look at the hype surrounding him. Grabner's 5 and 11 in 20 games was impressive, and an obvious signal that he play at the top-six NHL level.


Circumstances King.

Zack Kassian played on the 4th Line, Grabner had a top 6 role, plus you discount the fact that Grabner is generally a more offensive player, but you don't consider all the intangables Kassian has that Grabner didn't.

But if you want to compare just offensively, it would be nice to see Kassina given the same shot Grabner had rather than just being buried on the 4th line so he can play in the NHL.


And BTW you can't brush this off as an excuse, that would only mean more contradiction since you used the exact same excuse for Grabner's poor playoff in 10:

"And yes, Grabner only had 1 point in the playoffs. But was he even playing on the top-six? I don't believe so,"

So that being noted I would now like to hear your response.

If you want to trade Grabner, fine. Just don't trade him along with your 1st round pick, and another young versatile forward, for a 3rd-pairing defenceman with a big contract (who was deemed so utterly useless in the playoffs that the team was prepared to fly in Nolan Baumgartner while vacationing in Malibu to prevent Ballard from playing).

And yes, obviously, in hindsight, the smart move would've been to keep Grabner and move Raymond.


Hindsight is a luxury that you only use in your favour.

Bernier ment nothing in the trade, merely a cap dump. He was 'another young versitile forward'. He was a failed experiment with a contract we didn't want to pay.

Ballard was a top pairing defensmen in Florida, lead the league in shot blocking the year prior. His durability, great skating abilit, overall good two-way game and his ability to play big minutes in important situations made him a hot commodity around the league, as you recall there were 7 other team's that went after him that day, and as MG said he had to step up and throw in the 1st to get the deal done.

At the time Ballard was a huge need and it was the right move when you consider everything.

So I guess that you also think that the Alex Mallett pick from 2012 was stupid, as well?


Don't you think it was a bad pick? So why take the other side just to make a point.

You contradict yourself too much King, which is the reason your arguments can lack legitimacy. Just pick a side and stick with it. (And that's with everything, not just this)
  • 0

zackass.png


#81 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,571 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 24 December 2012 - 04:55 AM

However, they make up for it by going out and signing, for hometown discounts, proven NHL top four blueliners from BC - guys named Hamhius and Garrison (players you keep running down, ironically, King).


However,free agents such as Hamhuis and Garrison want to play nowhere else but Vancouver,and although Gillis and Co. low ball them ,they still wish to come home and play for their childhood dream team.
This has made Gillis look a lot better than his record actually shows and in no way should he be given or take credit for players that literally drop into his line up.

Edited by nuck nit, 24 December 2012 - 04:57 AM.

  • 0

#82 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,571 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 24 December 2012 - 05:02 AM

He could be qualified, I'm not really too familiar with his work. I hope it's not just a case of handing out jobs to ex-players as a favor.


Hear say,your honor.

Edited by nuck nit, 24 December 2012 - 05:45 AM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.