Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* - - - - 2 votes

Canucks making critical mistakes in hindsight?


  • Please log in to reply
552 replies to this topic

#361 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 22 December 2012 - 06:06 AM

Our GM has a pretty good track record actually. He may not be the best at drafting, but last time I checked, the Canucks don't have a problem attracting free agents. I think we'll be fine.


Dan Hamhuis would've signed here if it was Robert Pickton recruiting him, so I don't think that's fair.

And the Canucks weren't able to land local boy Schultz, who 90% of this board figured was our guy to lose, so I wouldn't be so sure of this. Also, what happened with Shane Doan?
  • 1

#362 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 22 December 2012 - 06:21 AM

And what do you expect MG to do? Overpay for Ehrhoff and Let Bieksa walk, I would have chose Bieksa over Ehrhoff everytime, Bieksa brings alot more to this team when he is on his game and the role he had here as opposed the one Ehrhoff had here reflects that.


Yep, because then you just over paid for Bieksa 1 year later.

I love the short-term memories of Canuck fans. Bieksa's been as hot-and-cold as anybody on this team, year-by-year. Twice he's been the whipping boy and I would venture a guess that that trend will continue.

I far would've rather the Canucks invested in Ehrhoff, due to the scarcity of his skillset.
  • 1

#363 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,553 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 10:08 AM

As right as you are about Bieksa; we also could not afford to be completely void of the type of player that Bieksa is.

He is the only core defender (with respects to Ballard, he's never cracked our core) who will drop the mitts or create any accountability on opposing forwards. He is one of few on our entire team any good at fighting. But its not just fights, most important he was and is our only blue line right handed shot of any consequence. And lets face it, he is no worse than our third best, both, defensive and offensive blue liner. Where he lacks consistency he also is capable of contributing in many ways. What other defender drawing top match ups every night (yeah Hamhuis carries the D side, but...), a capable pugilist, who scores 40 plus points does not get $4.6 mill on the UFA market?

More of Erhoff's skills (although we certainly miss his skating and handling the puck) were replaceable without rebuilding the D core. We simply could afford to loose Bieksa less.

Yep, because then you just over paid for Bieksa 1 year later.

I love the short-term memories of Canuck fans. Bieksa's been as hot-and-cold as anybody on this team, year-by-year. Twice he's been the whipping boy and I would venture a guess that that trend will continue.

I far would've rather the Canucks invested in Ehrhoff, due to the scarcity of his skillset.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 22 December 2012 - 10:16 AM.

  • 0

#364 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,637 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 22 December 2012 - 10:41 AM

Yep, because then you just over paid for Bieksa 1 year later.

I love the short-term memories of Canuck fans. Bieksa's been as hot-and-cold as anybody on this team, year-by-year. Twice he's been the whipping boy and I would venture a guess that that trend will continue.

I far would've rather the Canucks invested in Ehrhoff, due to the scarcity of his skillset.


You mean the kind of skillset that gets offense and defensive lapses? Neither Bieksa or Ehrhoff will win a Norris trophy. What the Canucks lack is a high end d-man like Shea Weber, and those are very rare indeed. Guys that put up consistent offense, but have the defensive side of the game down pat. The type of guys you know who you can put out against Toews, Ovechkin, Crosby, Stamkos, and be able to handle them.

Last I saw Buffalo with Ehrhoff didn't even make the playoffs, and we didn't get out of the first round.

Defense wins cups. The Canucks need to draft with first and second round picks to get elite d-men, or find diamonds in the rough in later rounds that can become elite d-men. (Corrado we hope?)
  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#365 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,553 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 11:25 AM

This thread is very selective of MG's mistakes. Need I remind you of our other option in Dave Nonis, which in 2007-2008 landed our biggest summer signing in Brad Isbister, and that massive deadline deal for Matt Pettinger.

Gillis has made mistakes sure, but he's done a lot right. This 'culture of winning' as he calls it, bringing in sleep doctors, having an internal cap structure, on top of all that he never fails to disappoint come July 1st - always signing someone, and even the trade deadline you can get excited about as well. I'm a more avid fan because of Gillis.


Look, the Canucks have made a major leap forward with MG. Overall grade has to be a B, would have been an A for his effort through to our SCF visit. It has regressed since. Too many moves which score asset's which are valuable, but do not fill all roles we require.

We were near perfectly balanced in 2010 / 11 but still got exposed in size mis matches. And we are even smaller now. There are a lot more mis matches an opposing coach can target.

MG has been busy acquiring BPA's (Booth, Kassian, Gaunce, Jensen, notably Garrison who is a score). Booth is obviously better than letting Samuelsson walk for nothing. But with Samuelsson gone currently Kassian and Hansen are our top two natural right wings, which is a MAJOR problem and we have no secondary play maker. We need more size on 3 lines plus on D, another right handed D shot and one (hopefully all in one acquisition) that can carry the puck up ice. We have been re-stocking versus icing a team that has all components it needs.

For all our talent we need some re shuffling. We have excess assets at LW, left D and goalie to work with. It's time for MG to convert Lou plus another significant trade to convert some of those BPA's into working parts.



Exactly, what Gillis lacks in drafting (which I don't think is even that bad), he makes up for in his ability to sign free agents. And he usually signs them below market value.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 22 December 2012 - 11:43 AM.

  • 0

#366 Baercheese

Baercheese

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,734 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 01:25 PM

Yeah I agree, I feel like that too but Tanev is still in the same area as Brodie but age wise and development wise.

Except they play a complete different game. It's fair to compare Brodie and Connauton style wise. Brodie has proven he can keep up in the NHL last season and he's balling as the top Dman for Abby.

If you want to compare Tanev to a prospect, probably Chris Breen. At this point Tanev is further ahead but Breen is pretty solid
  • 0

3499h5x.jpg
Johnny Gaudreau>any Casucks

Edler, Markstrom, Hansen, 2nd round pick 2014 to Islanders for Ryan Strome, 5th overall pick 2014

This is fairly even as well.

 


#367 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 22 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

<p>Just started to think back now on some critical organizational decisions made the past few years and thinking whether decisions made/not made in the new regime are coming back to bite us?

1) Schultz - tearing up the AHL, and while there was a push, decides on the Oilers; now knowing Edler/Garrison have injury issues and K-Conn is having an average year....did not getting him and being with another conference team going to cost us?
2) Luongo and his contract - at first everyone loved his contract and now with the murky new CBA, he may never be offloaded or if he does get traded, is dealt for less than he could of been...was his massive contract going to hamper the team's needs?
3)Hodgson - no need to go into this one; but with Kesler battling 'major injuries' and rumors he's still a ways away/may never regain his former game (wrist/shoulder injuries) plus add the fact we traded him for another 'question mark' - did it not make sense to either get back a centermen or keep Hodgson as C depth that appears needed now?
4)Drafting Pat McNally - was our only high pick that year (no 1st rounder) and now he's developmentally in limbo (Harvard school issues)
5) Sami Pahlsson = waste of a pickup (given away high picks) and then moved to the SEL
6) Corrado = plays well but then gets surprising cut; Gaunce injured and can't even try out for junior tournie = both a step back for development?
7) Lockout = this isn't the teams' fault, but every time there's a decision for the league to do a lockout, the Canucks suffer significantly on the ice(see 94, 04 and TBD for 2012?)

I can only think of one decisions in hindsight which turned out well = acquiring Higgins/Lapierre/Torres who were instrumental in the last cup finals run....There could be more to add to this list that I'm missing, but does it seem lately decisions are not favoring the organization?


How is Gaunce getting injured and Corrado getting cut, Canucks mistakes? I don't get it? Then the lockout? Pretty pathetic that you blame the Canucks management for things that can't be controlled. If they are making all these so called "critical mistakes", then how the hell did they end up winning the presidents trophy two times in a row? Or winning the Western Conference Championship?
  • 0

Posted Image


#368 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,866 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 22 December 2012 - 02:15 PM

Dan Hamhuis would've signed here if it was Robert Pickton recruiting him, so I don't think that's fair.

And the Canucks weren't able to land local boy Schultz, who 90% of this board figured was our guy to lose, so I wouldn't be so sure of this. Also, what happened with Shane Doan?

Was Hamhuis a certainty to sign here prior to July 1st? Just as much a certainty as Sakic, Neidermeyer, Kariya and any other BC boy has been over the years. You don't know for certain until free agency begins.

AGAIN, Schultz was given the maximum allowed offer from Gillis. He wasn't ours to lose, It was 100% his choice where to sign for that maximum allowed offer. As usual, fans here (and 90% are idiots) assumed he would choose Vancouver because of his tie here. They were wrong. He chose the best opportunity for ice time and the quicker road to the big payday.

Doan chose to remain loyal to HIS team. Just because a player is from BC doesn't mean playing for the Canucks is his greatest desire. Sakic and Doan chose loyalty. Neidermeyer chose family. Kariya chose to stay outside of Canada. Schultz chose opportunity. UFA players actually get to make their own choice. Hence the term "unrestricted".
  • 0
Posted Image

#369 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,280 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 22 December 2012 - 02:23 PM

Was Hamhuis a certainty to sign here prior to July 1st? Just as much a certainty as Sakic, Neidermeyer, Kariya and any other BC boy has been over the years. You don't know for certain until free agency begins.

AGAIN, Schultz was given the maximum allowed offer from Gillis. He wasn't ours to lose, It was 100% his choice where to sign for that maximum allowed offer. As usual, fans here (and 90% are idiots) assumed he would choose Vancouver because of his tie here. They were wrong. He chose the best opportunity for ice time and the quicker road to the big payday.

Doan chose to remain loyal to HIS team. Just because a player is from BC doesn't mean playing for the Canucks is his greatest desire. Sakic and Doan chose loyalty. Neidermeyer chose family. Kariya chose to stay outside of Canada. Schultz chose opportunity. UFA players actually get to make their own choice. Hence the term "unrestricted".

Guess what buds, Garrison did. Don't go around saying 9 out of 10 people here are idiots, that just makes you the idiot.
  • 1

Subbancopy.jpg


#370 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,866 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 22 December 2012 - 02:56 PM

Guess what buds, Garrison did. Don't go around saying 9 out of 10 people here are idiots, that just makes you the idiot.

My point, which appeared to go over your head, was everytime (and I do mean everytime) a quality BC boy is on the open market the idiots here automatically assume they "want" to sign here. It's simply not the case. You don't know until free agency actually begins. Has there been some: yes. But every one them: no. They each have their own agenda from loyalty to money to opportunity. Schutz in particular wasn't MG's to lose. MG could only make the maximum allowed offer. After that it was 100% up to Schutlz. The only way you could blame MG in that situation is if he didn't make the maximum allowed offer or didn't make an offer at all. Kariya wants to play here. Sakic wants to come home. Doan wants to come home. Neidermeyer wants to play here. And there have been many more. Foolish assumptions. You know what they say about assumptions....
  • 0
Posted Image

#371 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:05 PM

Yep, because then you just over paid for Bieksa 1 year later.

I love the short-term memories of Canuck fans. Bieksa's been as hot-and-cold as anybody on this team, year-by-year. Twice he's been the whipping boy and I would venture a guess that that trend will continue.

I far would've rather the Canucks invested in Ehrhoff, due to the scarcity of his skillset.


:picard: How is his skillset rare? Many if not all of our puck movers have most of the same qualities.

I agree Bieksa is inconsistent, as you recall me bringing that up serveral times when you were be-littleing Ballard.


But Bieksa is a far more important player on our team, and since we wouldn't have to have overpaid like we would have with Ehrhoff, I'm much happier with Bieksa.


You think we overpaid for him, but we didn't, he actually took less. He could have gotten alot more on the open market.

To us: Bieksa > Ehrhoff, we made the right move.
  • 1

zackass.png


#372 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:07 PM

My point, which appeared to go over your head, was everytime (and I do mean everytime) a quality BC boy is on the open market the idiots here automatically assume they "want" to sign here. It's simply not the case. You don't know until free agency actually begins. Has there been some: yes. But every one them: no. They each have their own agenda from loyalty to money to opportunity. Schutz in particular wasn't MG's to lose. MG could only make the maximum allowed offer. After that it was 100% up to Schutlz. The only way you could blame MG in that situation is if he didn't make the maximum allowed offer or didn't make an offer at all. Kariya wants to play here. Sakic wants to come home. Doan wants to come home. Neidermeyer wants to play here. And there have been many more. Foolish assumptions. You know what they say about assumptions....


I know, just cause he is born here all of a sudden it is a match made in heaven, and it's just simply not the case most of the time.
  • 0

zackass.png


#373 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:10 PM

Except they play a complete different game. It's fair to compare Brodie and Connauton style wise. Brodie has proven he can keep up in the NHL last season and he's balling as the top Dman for Abby.

If you want to compare Tanev to a prospect, probably Chris Breen. At this point Tanev is further ahead but Breen is pretty solid


Still, I mean in terms of a fair comparison. Brodie to Connaution really isn't a fair comparison besides there skillset.

It's like comparing Wotherspoon to Corrado, there skillset isn't the same but it is a much more fair comparison then Corrado vs a lower level prospect.

So really

Brodie = or < Tanev (IMO)
Brodie > Connaution
  • 0

zackass.png


#374 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:12 PM

If Kassian is so great then why hasn't he had the same success on the Wolves that he did on the Americans?


Where did Kassian come into the conversation? I asked you a question about Ehrhoff, and you balantly ignored it knowing you didn't have answer.

The Sedin's can make anyone a 40+ Point defensmen, case and point. Bieksa. Ehrhoff obviously has the skill to be a 40 Point defensmen on his own but the Sedin's really contributed to his cause, and made him look atleast a bit better than he actually is.


And here's a funny fact, Buffalo added Ehrhoff and others in free agency, and there powerplay got worse from the season before.
  • 0

zackass.png


#375 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:15 PM

But it is a concern that he's just not doing anything in the AHL, and he's got to turn it around pretty quickly as he's a couple years away from "bust" territory. I was always intrigued by the fact that he was the 1st overall pick in the QMJHL.


How is Sauve not doing anything? He's a defensive defenseman, playing in a defensive role and he is +2. Seems to be handling that role just fine and doing a good job.

And whenever I watch he looks reliable and solid, makes few mistakes. Out of all our defensemen on the Wolves I think he is 2nd on our depth chart behind Tanev (In terms of who we would call-up)
  • 0

zackass.png


#376 Bagofcats

Bagofcats

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Joined: 08-February 08

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:17 PM

4 division titles and 2 president's trophies. I don't think it's hurting us.

In a few years we're going to have an influx of well rounded prospects who are ready to play at the NHL, instead of learning as they go, because the proper amount of time was taken to develop them.


I still don't see where this magic influx of well rounded prospects are going to come form. Maybe Gaunce and Jensen but it's too early to tell. It's also proven that the current canucks staff don't know how to develop players. Tavev is inconsistent, Raymond is still terrible and Schroeder gonna be 23 before the next season starts.

They can sure make some decent 4th liners though.

Edited by Bagofcats, 22 December 2012 - 03:20 PM.

  • 0

#377 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:50 PM

Dan Hamhuis would've signed here if it was Robert Pickton recruiting him, so I don't think that's fair.

And the Canucks weren't able to land local boy Schultz, who 90% of this board figured was our guy to lose, so I wouldn't be so sure of this. Also, what happened with Shane Doan?


That's not funny, and not true.

He bought into what Gillis was selling, and wanted to be apart of it, he had plenty of opportunities to go to other great teams (Philly and Pit both had his rights) for more money but Gillis was able to get him to buy into our system.

And just that wouldn't have happened with just anyone as our GM, just cause someone is born he doesn't mean they automaticlly want to be on the team over every other team regardless of the money and opportunity they can get elsewhere.
  • 1

zackass.png


#378 Baercheese

Baercheese

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,734 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:51 PM

Still, I mean in terms of a fair comparison. Brodie to Connaution really isn't a fair comparison besides there skillset.

It's like comparing Wotherspoon to Corrado, there skillset isn't the same but it is a much more fair comparison then Corrado vs a lower level prospect.

So really

Brodie = or < Tanev (IMO)
Brodie > Connaution

Brodie was a 4th round pick as well
  • 0

3499h5x.jpg
Johnny Gaudreau>any Casucks

Edler, Markstrom, Hansen, 2nd round pick 2014 to Islanders for Ryan Strome, 5th overall pick 2014

This is fairly even as well.

 


#379 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 03:56 PM

Brodie was a 4th round pick as well


That wasn't really my point but alright, he was also picked a year earlier than Connaution.
  • 0

zackass.png


#380 Baercheese

Baercheese

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,734 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:02 PM

That wasn't really my point but alright, he was also picked a year earlier than Connaution.

Wasn't really directed at you but more of the development stand point of the Flames.
  • 0

3499h5x.jpg
Johnny Gaudreau>any Casucks

Edler, Markstrom, Hansen, 2nd round pick 2014 to Islanders for Ryan Strome, 5th overall pick 2014

This is fairly even as well.

 


#381 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:05 PM

Wasn't really directed at you but more of the development stand point of the Flames.


Ah I see, yeah the Flames got a good pick there forsure.
  • 0

zackass.png


#382 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,670 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:35 PM

Another mistake, IMO, was giving up on Wellwood. Was great to see his offensive skills brought to light again in Winnipeg last year.


I didn't mind Wellwood when he was here. He was pretty good in the faceoff circle, could score some goals as well. Was lacking in the assists, but that may have been due to stone handed line mates.

This being said, I do think Malhotra was an upgrade. Better in the third line center role that Wellwood, who had aspirations of moving higher up the depth chart, or so I recall hearing. I suppose the other thing that may have come in to play was Wellwood's reported lack of training and keeping himself in shape. And didn't he like to stay out late with O'Brien?

I suppose it comes down to the team choosing to let a guy who was a character go, and replacing him with a character guy.


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#383 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,670 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:11 PM

I still don't see where this magic influx of well rounded prospects are going to come form.


Then I advise you to watch more Wolves games.

This being said, do the Canucks have the next Wayne Crosby or Sidney Gretzky down on the farm? No. But what is there is better than decent 4th liners, although they'll have some of those as well. :)


Maybe Gaunce and Jensen but it's too early to tell. It's also proven that the current canucks staff don't know how to develop players. Tavev is inconsistent, Raymond is still terrible...


Is Tanev's inconsistency due to him not being developed properly, or is it merely because he's still a prospect and he'll go through slow points while he continues to develop? And in what part of his game do you feel he is inconsistant? His defensive game is very highly regarded, no? Tanev's offensive game has never been a strong point for him, but if he makes it to the NHL it will not be because he's an offensive d-man.

Raymond was doing pretty good until his thumb was broken in 2010 - 11 season. This may well be one of the main factors in why he has had diminished numbers over the last two seasons.


... and Schroeder gonna be 23 before the next season starts.


My, my, don't they grow up so fast? I don't see how this is a development issue.

So what are the Canucks supposed to do, move Sedin or Kesler so Schroeder can get some minutes with the big club?


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#384 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,038 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:47 PM

Erhoff in the playoffs or bieksa in the playoffs?....

FFS.....not even worth debating who belongs here between those two.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#385 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,553 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 06:56 PM

Well; the real bonus of adding Malhotra was that he was capable of handling physical match ups at a very fit 220 lbs. I had zero confidence playing Wellwood against line ups like in San Jose or Anaheim, but Manny was a winning match up for us. It took a tremendous stress off Kesler.

I also thought Hodgson was plain better if we were to go with a smaller player, but blah blah blah...

I didn't mind Wellwood when he was here. He was pretty good in the faceoff circle, could score some goals as well. Was lacking in the assists, but that may have been due to stone handed line mates.

This being said, I do think Malhotra was an upgrade. Better in the third line center role that Wellwood, who had aspirations of moving higher up the depth chart, or so I recall hearing. I suppose the other thing that may have come in to play was Wellwood's reported lack of training and keeping himself in shape. And didn't he like to stay out late with O'Brien?

I suppose it comes down to the team choosing to let a guy who was a character go, and replacing him with a character guy.


regards,
G.


  • 0

#386 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,670 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 09:41 PM

Well; the real bonus of adding Malhotra was that he was capable of handling physical match ups at a very fit 220 lbs. I had zero confidence playing Wellwood against line ups like in San Jose or Anaheim, but Manny was a winning match up for us. It took a tremendous stress off Kesler.

I also thought Hodgson was plain better if we were to go with a smaller player, but blah blah blah...


Yup. This was one of things I was thinking about when I said he was better suited for the 3c role. :)

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#387 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 09:43 PM

And this is why your credibility ranks with the used Christmas wrappings on the back porch.


Making comments like this without providing any good points on your view is why your credibility ranks with the broken Christmas lights that get left in the box.
  • 0

zackass.png


#388 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,483 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 09:52 PM

Erhoff in the playoffs or bieksa in the playoffs?....
FFS.....not even worth debating who belongs here between those two.

Bieksa-9 G,15 A,2 PPG in 61 playoff appearances.
Ehrhoff-7 G ,27 A, 3 PPG in 73 playoff appearances.

Of course,if you can actually score and set up goals your team has a better chance of making the playoffs.
Ehrhoff: 58 G ,200 A ,27 PPG over 556 NHL games played.
Bieksa: 42G,149 A ,16 PPG over 425 games played.

Ehrhoff is a full year younger than Bieksa.
I will go for the skill,speed and youth of Ehrhoff,thanks.
  • 0

#389 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,483 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 09:56 PM

Making comments like this without providing any good points on your view is why your credibility ranks with the broken Christmas lights that get left in the box.


More like your Gillis speak from a media newspaper leaves little worth responding to.
Watch the back porch screen door on your rear end while you empty your CDC trash.
  • 0

#390 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,670 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 10:09 PM

Actually,I was looking at your Mom's shaved body while I sat on the floor,pretending to play with the box.


Providing proof yet again that you are not fit for human company.

Have a great life, nuck.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.




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.