Archived

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

Pasific Coluseum

Why Are The Vancouver Canucks Signing/PTO All These "Reclamation Projects"?

44 posts in this topic

Since Mike Gillis has taken over GM he has had this propensity to invite washed up free agents to tryout with the Canucks at training camp in the hopes they make the team. Year after year it's the same old story with none ever making the team. Excuse me, Peter Schaeffer made the team but only lasted like a month before he was cut!

I do not agree with this philosophy because it takes away one of the Canucks prospects from actually showcasing their skills. There's a reason why old, waived, free agent players who do not have a contract are "trying out" THEY ARE NOT USEFUL ANYMORE

Now I heard our genius GM signed Cam Barker and Jim Vandermeer, 2 players that couldn't even stick on the roster of one of the worst teams last year. Not to mention they were let go even with Edmonton's weak Defense lineup. I'm also hearing rumors that the Canucks are inquiring about signing Scott Gomez in light of Booth's injury. ARE YOU FRICKEN KIDDING ME HERE...

Stop PTO and signing players who have no shot in hell making the team thus wasting both the player's and the team's time. Give the young bucks a shot. That is the future not 35-40yr old veterans with nothing left in the tank.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Criticizing the Canucks? Take it easy man!

Can't wait to see the homers jump in on this one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schaefer used to be an excellent penalty killer. At the time Burrows was injured so the idea was to have Schaefer take his place and then get sent down unless he peformed well. Schaefer unfortunately sucked worse than anyone could have anticipated. He was solid in the preseason and more or less earned his spot.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Are The Vancouver Canucks Signing/PTO All These "Reclamation Projects"?

Just for poops and chuckles

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Are The Vancouver Canucks Signing/PTO All These "Reclamation Projects"?

Just for poops and chuckles

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Barker is worth a shot at 700K. He could be a second pairing dman if he gets his act together. Last season Edmonton took a chance with him at over 2 million.

Vandermeer isn't a reclamation project. He is a 7-8 dman and always has been. He brings toughness and can fill in a relatively solid 12-14 minutes per night. He isn't a complete flop offensively either.

Fedoruk was one of the most feared fighters and had a bit of skill, Owen Nolan wasn't too far off a very productive season in Minnesota where he scored 25 goals in less than 60 games, Brendan Morrison went on to have a productive season with Calgary. PTOs are a great way to gauage a player as they take on no risk. If a player has personal issues but the skill to be a top performer an off season of hard work and lifestyle change can do wonders. Look at a guy like Wellwood. He is the perfect 2nd line guy for low income teams. He chipped in 47 points, is solid on faceoffs, and refined his defensive game (+3).

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

last year they brought in a bunch of tryouts/PTO's because they didnt want the canuck players playing in preseason so they needed extra bodies.

this year with the condensed schedule they needed some veteran help on the blueline. barker battled substance abuse issues for a few years but if he could ever come close to his years in chicago gillis will look like a genius.

these guys are stopgaps to fill in if 2-3 defenseman get hurt they arent going to play much if at all. and are only needed because of the poor play of connauton so far this year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a big difference between the guys that are invited for a PTO and Barker / Vandemeer this year.

Have you ever noticed that the PTO deals started around the same time that the Canucks started kicking off the exhibition schedule with a split-squad game? My theory is that these guys are signed to a PTO to help fulfill the requirement to have a minimum number of players with NHL experience in every exhibition game. If one happens to get a contract out of the deal, great. Or, in the case of Brendan Morrison, it was a professional courtesy, as a long time Canuck alum, to give him the opportunity to showcase his talents while looking for a new deal.

In the case of Barker and Vandemeer, those guys were signed to contracts and, I feel, are purely depth moves to support the team in this short season.

And... just because a guy is available on waivers, doesn't mean he's washed up. Martin Gelinas was huge in the '94 run and he was a waiver wire pick up. In fact, he played another 12 seasons or so after that. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, but he's the first one to come to mind.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTO's are fine. Aside from haveing the these players to push prospects and lower liners, sometimes you just need to have the extra bodies just to have a good scrimage. And you never know, you may find that guy that trained like a demon over the summer and made big strides.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple...... low risk high reward.

If only say 1 out of 10 worked out, you're still ahead of the game.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things:

1. PTOs and "reclamation projects" are cheap bets for high rewards. If they turn out great (i.e. Lappy and Higgins) great, if not, whatever.

2. Argument that these PTOs and "reclamation projects" are hindering our prospect's development is also false. Some would even argue that getting quality ice-time and a change to play important minutes with AHL affiliate is better for development.

Also, dating back to about 3 years ago, Canucks have begun resting their regulars in preseason games (minus this year of course due to lockout), and have needed more bodies to fill out roster. There is a max number of "veterans" you need to dress for preseason games, so you can't play just your prospects. The PTOs (i.e. Nolan, Fedorouk etc.) have played for the Canucks during the preseason, largely because of this rule. Again, if they work out, then great. If not, no harm.

Similarly, this season, some 2-way contracts and PTOs have been handed out because we need bodies for scrimmages and full practices to simulate game situations. Calling up prospects solely for this purpose would not really be for their "development" unless you're Corrado and have what organization would identify as inside-track to making the team in not too distant future. In another words, Canucks simply don't have a lot of prospects outside of Tanev, Kassian, Schroeder and Corrado - all of whom are with the team now.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...it takes away one of the Canucks prospects from actually showcasing their skills"

And who exactly isn't being given a chance to showcase whatever limited amount of skills they have.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was he serious when he said the Canucks were interested in Gomez.....?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Reclamation Projects" or "Depth Additions"?

I prefer the latter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple really. Terrible drafting = terrible prospects. That is all.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Mike Gillis has taken over GM he has had this propensity to invite washed up free agents to tryout with the Canucks at training camp in the hopes they make the team. Year after year it's the same old story with none ever making the team. Excuse me, Peter Schaeffer made the team but only lasted like a month before he was cut!

I do not agree with this philosophy because it takes away one of the Canucks prospects from actually showcasing their skills. There's a reason why old, waived, free agent players who do not have a contract are "trying out" THEY ARE NOT USEFUL ANYMORE

Now I heard our genius GM signed Cam Barker and Jim Vandermeer, 2 players that couldn't even stick on the roster of one of the worst teams last year. Not to mention they were let go even with Edmonton's weak Defense lineup. I'm also hearing rumors that the Canucks are inquiring about signing Scott Gomez in light of Booth's injury. ARE YOU FRICKEN KIDDING ME HERE...

Stop PTO and signing players who have no shot in hell making the team thus wasting both the player's and the team's time. Give the young bucks a shot. That is the future not 35-40yr old veterans with nothing left in the tank.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

barker isnt 35-40 and neither is vandermeer (32). the red wings have been doing the whole reclamation thing for years, to great success. and the fact you can add without subtracting for low cap, and even in vandermeers case a 2 way contract, is awesome!!! i think normally it would be just a camp tryout, not necessarily a contract, but watch how fast remaining ufa d-men are going to go to new homes. smart move to get the depth quickly, because those two players would be gone by now in my opinion

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTO doesn't mean they take a roster spot. There is plenty of room in the pre-season to see what players have left in the tank, they could turn out to be total steals. And it's not like the Canucks are the only team doing it, I'd be shocked if there was a team in the league that didn't hand out a couple of PTOs every year. As for Vandermeer and Barker, short seasons are notorious for injuries, you're gonna love that depth if Edler and Hamhuis go down with sprains, pulls, or breaks.

I'd totally take Gomez to take as a second line center. Yeah, he doesn't put up points like he used to, but he's a great center and a great leader with a ton of post-season experience. People think Gomez is terrible only because of his contract, if he was getting paid 2mil or less he'd be well respected.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... looks like every response in here should shed some light onto your narrow point of view OP.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.