jatylo Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Only real answer i can give to this is "you never know". One teams philosophy might make or break certain players. Who knew Martin St.Louis and Datsyuk would have been a first line stars 10 years ago. Yes the majority don't become anything but a few do make an impact. You can lead a horse to water but doesnt mean it will drink it. Barker has shown he has talent but that doesn't mean he will use it effectively. Vandemeer is a solid 3rd pairing dman. Again to answer your question You never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Cheap low risk contracts? Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 For trying out for the team and for having extra bodies at practice. No harm just benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowtownCanuck Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Watch the movie Moneyball, that's the theory that Gillis is working from. There was a lot of talk about the concept when we hired him, the movie helps put it into perspective, complete with the almost making it in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonz Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Maybe bc canucks don't have alot young prospects compared to other teams that contribute to the team, so they need ptos hoping be cheap salary that can contribute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharnhayre Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Nothing wrong with bringing in NHL calibre players to push the existing players to be better. Internal competition is the best kind of competition. No job should ever feel safe on the team... Players need to know that if they dont perform, someone is waiting in the wing to take their spot... A little pressure is what they need to stay motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCR Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 It's simple enough: most of these players are just coming off contracts where they were overvalued, and their perceived value has dropped through the floor. The Canucks look at the underlying numbers and see if these formerly overvalued players might currently be undervalued. It's a moneypuck game. The risk is low, and while a great reward isn't likely, if it does pay off it's worth it because the risk was so low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Haha Coops and Puckles! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCF4E Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 1 - PTO's cost the team nothing. On occassion they even work out. 2 - How can MG sign Gomez when he's still under contract to Montreal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crying Peter Parker Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Low Risk High Reward Get back to flipping burgers kid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 What other options for depth are there? As far as I know: 1. Draft. Develop. 2. Sign players with NHL experience 3. Sign undrafted prospects 4. Trade Let's see how it's worked out (depth D who have dressed since 2008): 1. Sauve 2. Davison, Vaananen (waivers), Rome, Baumgartner, Sulzer 3. Oberg, Sweatt, Tanev 4. O'Brien, Lukowich, Alberts, Parent, Gragnani Point being, it's kind of a crap shoot. Option #2 doesn't seem too bad. Barker and Vandermeer don't seem too bad either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Related to: 'Why do are prospects stink so bad?' It's because the Canucks aren't allowed to succeed. They're only allowed to waste piles of money on garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred65 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Fill in gaps for the pre season camp. I don't like it under normal seasons when they charge for NHL entertainment and then play a bunch of old decrepit player who they know will be let go at the end of camp. But on this occasion they're (owners) spending their own money and not charging a outlandish cost for tickets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehamburglar Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 If we play them when we need them, without having to rush our prospects it's alright. If we don't play them, I think Vandemeer can go down, which is a low risk for us getting two veteran players for about 1.5 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehamburglar Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 What other options for depth are there? As far as I know: 1. Draft. Develop. 2. Sign players with NHL experience 3. Sign undrafted prospects 4. Trade Let's see how it's worked out (depth D who have dressed since 2008): 1. Sauve 2. Davison, Vaananen (waivers), Rome, Baumgartner, Sulzer 3. Oberg, Sweatt, Tanev 4. O'Brien, Lukowich, Alberts, Parent, Gragnani Point being, it's kind of a crap shoot. Option #2 doesn't seem too bad. Barker and Vandermeer don't seem too bad either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbal23 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowest common denominator Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 It's because no bonafied star players want to sign with a mickey mouse organization like the Canucks. It goes back to the way Bure was treated before he even arrived in Vancouver. Then take a look at how we treat players that do become stars here (Bure, Luongo) Now Gillis is reduced to looking under rocks and in dark corners for warm bodies. Go Canucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 These guys will make camp a lot more competitive and push the prospects to a higher level. The prospects have to earn their way onto the roster just like anyone else and if they can't beat out the vets, they don't deserve to join the big club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 It's because no bonafied star players want to sign with a mickey mouse organization like the Canucks. It goes back to the way Bure was treated before he even arrived in Vancouver. Then take a look at how we treat players that do become stars here (Bure, Luongo) Now Gillis is reduced to looking under rocks and in dark corners for warm bodies. Go Canucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.