Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

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


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#31 Crying Peter Parker

Crying Peter Parker

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 316 posts
  • Joined: 18-October 08

Posted 16 January 2013 - 03:51 PM

Low Risk High Reward

Get back to flipping burgers kid
  • 1

#32 Canada Hockey Place

Canada Hockey Place

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,560 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 16 January 2013 - 03:57 PM

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.
  • 0
Quando omni flunkus moritati

#33 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,789 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:48 PM

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.
  • 1
Posted Image

#34 Fred65

Fred65

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,034 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 10

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:55 PM

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
  • 0

#35 thehamburglar

thehamburglar

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 10

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:57 PM

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.
  • 0
Posted Image

#36 thehamburglar

thehamburglar

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 10

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:58 PM

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.

O'Brien was actually quite a heart and soul player and not bad for the 6-7th guy. I was a fan of his.
  • 0
Posted Image

#37 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,666 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:59 PM

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


plus vandermeer was recommended to management by the sedins
  • 0

#38 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 16 January 2013 - 05:00 PM

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!
  • 0

#39 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,398 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 16 January 2013 - 07:15 PM

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.
  • 0

#40 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,711 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 16 January 2013 - 07:39 PM

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!




If you keep re-wording your first two "points" you can come up with a huge number of negatives of why star players who were mistreated by the Canucks don't want to sign here..., oh there, see I just created another one!

Just curious here, how do you interpret what other organizations are doing when they sign guys to PTO contracts, or do they only sign star players to massive contracts?


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

#41 DaMacNamedDre

DaMacNamedDre

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,032 posts
  • Joined: 13-October 11

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:44 AM

Barker looked pretty good last night , looked faster than last year.
as a depth signing at that salary ?
worth a shot.
from his interviews it sounds like Cam knows what he has to do and is refocused.
Only 26, still a kid.
Vandemeer fought Lucic and was laughing , knocked Parros on his ass.
Exactly what this team has desperately been lacking for years.
Add one more superheavy and a skilled centre and we're good.
  • 0
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Posted ImageBodee, on 18 April 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

I haven't been a supporter of the Canucks for long. Mainly because firstly I know nothing about NHL and secondly ESPN America only started showing NHL 3 years ago.

http://forum.canucks.com/topic/328055-whats-wrong-with-me
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

#42 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,137 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:01 AM

Barker has the potential to be pretty good; he just needs a fresh start and some time to gel with da team, yo.

And Vandermeer is Vandermeer, what you see is what you'll get.
  • 0
Posted Image

#43 Japandroid

Japandroid

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 08

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:11 PM

PTOs are a great way to build veteran team depth...and as for reclamation projects coming onto the team...great. I like the fact that Gillis is bringing in these kind of guys; obviously these guys want to prove that they still have some gas in the tank/that they are not completely washed up and worthless as their previous teams decided they were. Low risk/potential reward.

Torres is a good example of a reclamation project that worked out: everybody else passed on him but the Nucks gave him a shot and he resurrected his career.

Barker seems motivated to succeed and we've all seen what he's capable of from his Chicago years; I'm definitely excited to see what he can bring to the table.

I think Gomez could actually be a nice addition to the team at the moment due to our need for a centre if he comes cheap. Even though he's been garbage the last couple years he's had some great seasons and you can't deny that he has talent in there - maybe a change of scenery and less pressure is all he needs. The only thing I don't like about it is that he's obviously a leader - being the ex-captain of Montreal - but we already have enough leadership on our squad.

That is all,
Japandroid
  • 0

#44 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,958 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 17 January 2013 - 01:50 PM

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!


How about Naslund, Bertuzzi, Kesler, the Sedins.....
  • 0
Posted Image




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.