• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

vancanfan

(Signing) Canucks sign Cam Barker, 1 yr - $700 K

285 posts in this topic

I've read multiple scouting reports that say he is slow as molasses, lacks defensive awareness, plays with zero intensity, doesn't hit or block shots.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharks fans also tried to tell us how awful Ehrhoff was when we traded for him.

That tends to happen after a player leaves a team.

Wait until you see him on the ice before you go and say he's awful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add to that the fact he coughs up the puck like a poop-flavoured appetizer.

But Gillis always has a soft spot for "problem" players, thinking Vancouver's environment can help turn them around. He struck out with Wellwood, but hit a double with Lapierre. Trouble is, even if Barker gets his life in control, he's just not good enough. Barker's slower than a snail in tar.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oilers/Wild fans were disappointed in Barker because they paid him 2.25 and 3mil

We've got him for 700k, much less pressure and reason to be upset if he doesn't pan out

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Report in this article about how Cam Barker played for the Texas Stars during the lockout.

http://thehockeywrit...-stars-edition/

His PTO with Texas lasted just 23 games and was not renewed, for reasons that have eluded many Stars fans. Cam Barker’s critics– and there are many, and they aren’t shy– can stick it. While he was here, Barker was a solid, veteran defenseman who played big minutes in all situations. He beat up last year’s WHL defenseman of the year Alex Petrovic in a pre-season bout, showing a willingness to throw down, and more often than not he led the team in shots on net. While a Star, Barker was a big, mobile, puck-moving defenseman with great hockey sense– exactly the kind of player any organization can use.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharks fans also tried to tell us how awful Ehrhoff was when we traded for him.

That tends to happen after a player leaves a team.

Wait until you see him on the ice before you go and say he's awful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharks fans also tried to tell us how awful Ehrhoff was when we traded for him.

That tends to happen after a player leaves a team.

Wait until you see him on the ice before you go and say he's awful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were the Canucks GM and a week ago you had been offered Barker and Vandermeer for Luongo, would you have done it?

Because the way everyone's talking today, I think that would have been an unfair deal and the Canucks would also have to throw in Raymond or Ballard to even things up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised Barker performed well for the Texas Stars. There's a reason Chris Bourque, for instance, lead the AHL in scoring last year, but has never cut it in the NHL. The gulf in talent between the two leagues is wide and deep. So perhaps the lead-writing cheerleader in that link should gain some perspective when he tells Barker's detractors to "stick it".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were the Canucks GM and a week ago you had been offered Barker and Vandermeer for Luongo, would you have done it?

Because the way everyone's talking today, I think that would have been an unfair deal and the Canucks would also have to throw in Raymond or Ballard to even things up.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't see any AHL games, but already noted early on he was just ok in the Spengler Cup. Hardly noticed him, which isn't necessarily a bad thing for a defenceman but could be for an offensive defenceman. He didn't make any glaring errors, but didn't do much either on a team with some very good players while playing against less than NHL quality opposition.

For the price, it's worth a tryout, but I'm not expecting a lot out of this deal while I keep an open mind until I can see him in some games.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go read what the Wild fans/media have to say about Barker and tell me it's a "Good Signing". The guy is useless. We won't see him in a nux uni unless there are 4 injured Dmen before him.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Stars, he led the entire team in shots up until his contract expired.

In the Spengler cup, the rest of the defensemen were all already playing the season on European ice, something Barker has rarely done. The fact that in your opinion he looked 'okay' and in my opinion, he looked good defensively for a self-proclaimed 'PMD', he has done fine this year for a >$900,000 7th-8th defenseman.

Tie that in with the fact he's a big body and has the potential to regain old form, it's a fairly good signing based on these facts. I'm not sure what you mean by not expecting much, because his role isn't much, and if he can't fill it, that will surprise me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched him in Edmonton last year, I can tell you that he is NOT what he was expected to be, and barring a monumental turn around he will likely be our 8th D man splitting time between the pressbox and the AHL. He is NOT an upgrade on Rome, he is a replacement for Gragnani.

I am not unhappy with the signing, but I don't expect much.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bloggers over at Nuck Misconduct teamed up with the Wild's bloggers (from Hockey Wilderness) to talk about Cam Barker.

So Who Is Cam Barker?

...

Nucks Misconduct (NM): The party line is that Vancouver is stock piling depth and Baker is a $700,000 gamble in that puzzle, a gamble that was laughed off the Wild, couldn't crack the top six on the second worst team in the league last season and was told by an AHL team just last month "thanks but no thanks." Sigh. What's your biggest take away from Barker's time on Minnesota, besides losing Nick Leddy?

Bryan Reynolds (BR): In his time here, Barker earned the nickname Kobe Bryant. This was not due so much to his solid fade away jumper, but the fact that we've never seen both guys in the same place at the same time, and neither one of them can skate. The biggest take away is that he is a great human being, and one of the nicest guys you will ever meet, but that he is a terrible hockey player who has ridden his draft selection to a lifetime of comfort.

The trade for Barker robbed the Wild of a top prospect at a time when the Wild could not afford to do so, AND gave the Blackhawks the cap relief they needed. Barker will forever be remembered as the worst trade the Wild have ever made. Keep in mind that the Wild once traded for Chris Simon.

Think about it this way. The bulk of us, no matter how good we are at what we do, would be lucky to make, in a lifetime, what Barker made in a single year to absolutely suck at what he does. If that doesn't make you want to stab yourself in the eye with a spoon, nothing will.

NM: We've become accustomed to Keith Ballard being the lightning rod for criticism as an offensive-minded guy who gives back too many chances the other way. All reports indicate Barker's much worse: offering nothing offensively while remaining a horrific liability in his own zone. How much do you think that has as much to do with being (no offense) on some poor teams and how much is solely on his decision-making?

BR: Barker is a master of the "shoot the puck into a defending forward's shin pads, then trip over his own feet while there is a three on none break the other way." Not only does he not offer anything offensively, he scored fewer points in his time with the Wild than noted point producer Nick Schultz scored in one season.

How much is due to being on bad teams? It can't be discounted, but once you watch him play for a good three or four minutes, you will realize quickly that the fact the team was bad likely had more to do with Barker's presence, than the bad team accounts for Barker's performance.

and you'll know what I mean.

NM: Was he used on your special teams and did that fail spectacularly as well?

BR: He was used sparingly on the power play, getting roughly 71 minutes or so on the man advantage in his full season here. In that time, he had two assists. To compare, Jared Spurgeon had 78 minutes of PP time, and had 10 points (4G, 6A) in his rookie season. Spurgeon is 5' 9" standing on a stack of phone books, and looks like a 12 year old, by the way.

Barker was trusted with just under 44 minutes of PK time, which I can only imagine was due to the other five defensemen being the ones serving the penalties. To compare, Marek Zidlicky was given 100 minutes of PK time, and he was considered a defensive liability.

NM: Was there a specific mistake you saw Barker commit most frequently? Failing that is there one big goof that comes to mind (bonus points if you lost the game as a result)?

BR: Other than putting on ice skates? The biggest one is the aforementioned inability to shoot the puck around a defending forward from the point. He also seemed to fall down more than others. I mean, I know that ice is slippery, and sometimes skates aren't sharpened quite right, but it was a disproportionate amount for a professional hockey player. I remember thinking at one point that my two year old skates better than he does. Everything the guy does costs his team games. Listing out the instances would fill far too much cyber space.

NM: He's (generously) listed as 6'3'' and 223 lbs, which makes him at the moment the biggest guy on our roster. I'm afraid to ask but here goes: how is his physical game?

BR: Short answer? Terrible. Long answer? ???? terrible.

There was a stretch in the 2010-11 season where Niklas Backstrom and Josh Harding were just coming off of injuries. To the point that Anton Khudobinwas the Wild's starter. First game back, Harding gets run, and gets run hard. Barker skated away as though Kate Upton was at the bench waiting for him. If there were a checking contest between Barker and a ten year old girl, my money is on the girl knocking Barker head over heels.

NM: Do you think Barker could be a beneficial addition to any team that aggressively shelters his role and asks little more of him than the very basics of a third pairing defenseman?

BR: There are a couple of youth hockey teams in my hometown that might benefit, sure. Though, they probably fall down less than he does. The problem here is that the basics are what Barker struggles with. He can't skate, he can't shoot, he can't handle the puck, he doesn't check, he doesn't clear the net, and he shows about as much emotion as a sea snail.

I honestly cannot fathom why the Oilers signed Barker, let alone why the Canucks, one of the best teams in the league, would consider this a good move. I often defer to NHL GMs having more and / or better information than I do, but with Barker, every GM who has trusted this kid to do anything but steal top defensive prospects from Chuck Fletcher has been proven an idiot.

But hey... he's a third overall pick, so he must have some upside, right?

...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.