Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Report] - Schroeder sent down


  • Please log in to reply
308 replies to this topic

#121 Lockhart

Lockhart

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:32 PM

He was going to get sent back soon anyway. If Ebbett was put on waivers somebody would have probably claimed him.
  • 0

#122 wshdrvvn

wshdrvvn

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,296 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:32 PM

I've run the gambit of emotions on this but instead of crying on the forums i did some reading. as a hockey fan this decision seems like it should only be about hockey.  and if that were the case (meaning contracts weren't a thing) barker gets sent down 10 times out of 10.  We all know contracts are indeed real soo what we're left with is something of a head scrathcer at the moment.  So if you've already hit the panic button (which reading through, most have) try to realize booth and kesler's salaries are still against our cap.  jordan can't get plucked off waivers, its not worth risking a healthy versatile ebbett or anyone else just to have JS in the season opener.  kes and maybe booth will be put on LTIR there will be cap space.  he will be back and he will play some games.  come back from that ledge my friends.

Edited by wshdrvvn, 18 January 2013 - 03:36 PM.

  • 1

#123 Dilly Canuck

Dilly Canuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:33 PM

Ebbett or Schroeder...

Hmmm... Can i pick option 3?


Like who Gomez? John Shannon already tweeted today the Canucks have no interest in him.

Bozak? Doubt a Luongo deal is coming anytime soon and the Leafs have him penciled in as a number 1/2 center. to start the season.

Connolly might be a possibility and a clear upgrade over Ebbet. If we could get him for under a million bucks I'm all for it.

After this there isn't much on the market so we're probably going to have to work with what we got.
  • 1

#124 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:36 PM

As one poster astutely said, this may just be cap management, where Booth and Kes are put on LTIR tomorrow and he's 'brought back up' ...when he really didn't even go to Chi....


We have to have a 23 man roster max at any given point. Without Kesler and Booth we have a 23 man roster AFTER having sent Schroeder down (12 forwards; 9 D; 2 goalies). He won't be brought back up unless someone else is sent down.

It has nothing to do with Kesler and Booth who are already on LTIR to get us to the 23 person roster.

23-man Roster
There may be a maximum of 23 players on each Club's playing roster at any one time from the commencement of the NHL regular season through the trade deadline. Prior to the start of the season, each Club must submit to the NHL its "Opening Day Playing Roster" which shall be comprised of not more than 23 players. Each Club must have a roster of at least 20 players, composed of 18 skaters and two goaltenders. Players on Injured Reserve do not count in the 23-man limit.

Edited by Provost, 18 January 2013 - 03:39 PM.

  • 2
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#125 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,150 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:38 PM

Yes, and so much so that they had a surplus of great young players whom they did not have room on the roster for.

So rather than rot them; they turned two superb players into an even more useful veteran Richards.

(and they did not trade them for prospects who would not help them for a year or two...)

You realize that the vast majority of their roster was developed from within right? Brown,bernier, Clifford, Doughty, Kopitar, Lewis, Loktionov, Martinez, Nolan, Parse, Quick, and Voynov were all drafted and developed by L.A.


  • 0

#126 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,511 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:44 PM

AFAIK, Canucks will have Kesler and Booth on their roster to start the season, and THEN put them on LTIR. This maximizes the amount of cap relief they will get.

So as soon as the paperwork for that is done, it would not surprise me to see Schroeder back on the team immediately. He may have not even leave Vancouver.

If you count up the roster with non-injured players, that's already at the 23-man roster limit. Booth and Kesler will have to start on IR to free up their roster spots (likely what you meant anyway) and then they'll decide about LTI. Otherwise we'd have to send 2 others down to fit them in.

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Raymond Ebbett Kassian
Higgins Lapierre Hansen
Volpatti Malhotra Weise
(12 forwards)
Hamhuis Bieksa
Garrison Edler
Ballard Tanev
Alberts Barker Vandermeer
(9 defence)
Schneider
Luongo
(2 goalies)
- 23 total w/o Booth or Kesler

If we wanted to bring Schroeder right back up after, we'd either have to put someone else on IR or send them down to get them off the roster. If anyone wants to explain how it would work differently, I'm happy to listen.

Edited by elvis15, 18 January 2013 - 04:29 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#127 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,645 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:52 PM

Whomever didn't see that coming is blind. As much as I want Schroeder with the big club I knew AV would go with Ebbett. What a blow to the kids confidence though. AV is making a mistake Imo..


It's just AV doing what he always does. Ebbett is a veteran and AV has no confidence in rookiues. He wants them to spend years in the minors before he will consider them mature enough for the big team.

It looks llike he's going to rely on a system that is built on aging vets playing the trap and degence-first hocley and hope the twins can score enought to win games. How did that work for him last playoffs?!

PATHETIC!!!
  • 0

#128 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,315 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:57 PM

Schroeder's going to be back up as soon as the team places Booth on LTIR in my opinion. There's no way Gillis would allow AV to play Ebbett over him in that role after seeing their play in camp. This is all strategic.
  • 0

FWYIerW.png


#129 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,420 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:58 PM

If we wanted to bring Schroeder right back up after, we'd either have to put someone else on IR or send them down to get them off the roster. IF anyone wants to explain how it would work differently, I'm happy to listen.


Exactly. I see Barker, Vandermeer, or Volpatti being put on waivers so that they can go to the Wolves.

The likihood of them getting claimed after teams rosters are set goes way down.

It has never been this teams practice to carry 9 D-men though. That's kind of overkill. If we were to have an injury up front now, we would have to put a D-man on waivers, wait for him to clear, and then call up a forward. It seems more logical to just carry an extra forward and two extra D.

Unless of course Vandermeer is our fourth line option. That seems less than ideal though.

Edited by DeNiro, 18 January 2013 - 04:00 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#130 SEAN HARNETT

SEAN HARNETT

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 05

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:00 PM

Stupid move. He was awesome in the inter squad games. He deserves atleast a look, sheesh!
  • 0
:towel:

#131 MattJVD

MattJVD

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:00 PM

Didn't Ebbett play on a line with Perry and Getzlaf at one point? maybe this is just for the anahiem game?
  • 0

#132 wshdrvvn

wshdrvvn

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,296 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:08 PM

Didn't Ebbett play on a line with Perry and Getzlaf at one point? maybe this is just for the anahiem game?


i believe it was the second line with ryan and selanne
  • 0

#133 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,145 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:13 PM

Damn, I wanted to see Ray-Schroe-Kass line to start off the season.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#134 LeanBeef

LeanBeef

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,311 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:16 PM

Given his vet status, he would have been subject to re-entry waivers if we were to call him up.

I don't think so, he's only subject to waivers when being sent down.
  • 0
Sig too big.
"Being a Canuck fan, maybe sometime down the road be a Vancouver Canuck.... that would conquer all my dreams"
-Milan Lucic

#135 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:18 PM

It's the Corrado situation all over again. What's the point of inviting the guy to camp if no matter what he does he can't make the team? **** me. What a joke.


In carrodo's case- it was totally worth it. The kid has had a great year and they wanted to see hopw he did against NHL players in a controlled environment- he did very well, snd now they know where he is in his development,

In schoreder's case, they were only going to keep him if he totally beasted Ebbett. He did well but they also get to see where he is in his development. He showed that he can play at this level-or likely can play at this level which is actually really big news because midweek Botchford was on the radio blasting schroeder and Gillis say that they have a player who will never see NHL ice time.

AV just said that they really want to get him some games soon.
  • 0

#136 TheCammer

TheCammer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:22 PM

we have 24 roster player and one needed to be send down until someone on LTIR...typical cdc panic


THIS
  • 1
Posted Image

#137 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,651 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:23 PM

Wow.

Schroeder seems to have excellent chemistry with Kas and MayRay.

Can't believe they did this. So stupid.
  • 0

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!


CDCFL - Montreal Canadiens GM
CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#138 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,511 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:29 PM

Exactly. I see Barker, Vandermeer, or Volpatti being put on waivers so that they can go to the Wolves.

The likihood of them getting claimed after teams rosters are set goes way down.

It has never been this teams practice to carry 9 D-men though. That's kind of overkill. If we were to have an injury up front now, we would have to put a D-man on waivers, wait for him to clear, and then call up a forward. It seems more logical to just carry an extra forward and two extra D.

Unless of course Vandermeer is our fourth line option. That seems less than ideal though.

Perhaps. They could have players trade spots after a few games to evaluate their play as well.

For instance, if Ebbett's ok/bad, or one of our depth D just isn't cutting it, we could bring Schroeder back up and waive whoever hasn't impressed. I'm not as sure we'd waive Volpatti, unless we plan on reshuffling the roster to move Kassian down to the 4th, or use Vandermeer there.

I haven't been able to watch closely enough to say that Barker, Vandermeer or Volpatti should be sent down, or one should be kept up, so I'm not sure what the Canucks thought process will be.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#139 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,150 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:31 PM

Kesler looked pretty good baggin groceries in N Van! :bigblush:

... means one of two things... kesler will be back soon or a second line center is coming to van soon via trade or signing.


Ahem, cough; Players STILL need to clear waivers going down!

Re-entry waiver have been eliminated in the new CBA. NO MORE RE-ENTRY WAIVERS for anybody.


Yeah well for guys dreaming of keeping all of them; pencil Schroeder in for one of Malhotra and Lapierre, Jensen in for one of Hiigins or Raymond and Connauton will have a crack at a roster spot next year (that's less obvious) for Alberts, Vandy or Barker.

Astute point Dasein!

A very real possibility if we win the Cup. Our UFAs following this season:

Mason Raymond
Chris Higgins
Maxim Lapierre
Manny Malhotra
Andrew Ebbett
Aaron Volpatti

Alex Edler
Andrew Alberts
Jim Vandermeer
Cam Barker

Bolded are players that will play a role if we are going to go on to win our first championship, and they'll all then be due for a pay day come July 1st. My hope is that we are able to keep Edler and Lapierre. It would be nice if we can re-sign Raymond and Higgins for cheap.

Otherwise, there is a very real chance that we start with a roster that has all 4 as you said.

ie,

D Sedin - H Sedin - Burrows
Booth - Kesler - Kassian
Jensen - Schroeder - Hansen
Archibald/UFA - Lapierre - Weise

Edler - Garrison
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Tanev

Of course, there will be competition as I expect GMMG to fill those holes with veterans, most likely some more reclamation projects.


Not quite; Tambellini made the roster in spite of having to clear waivers where Hodgson could be sent down with no fear. But with Tamby's salary near the cap minimum and Hodgson near a mill higher; we would have had to have waived an additional player to make salary cap room for CoHo.

To be fair; Tamby was better suited to a 4th line role regardless. And we don't have the same cap problem this year, but Ebbet is here so we do not have to rush Schroeder also. His salary is lower as well so that as a depth guy he does not cost us other moves. Just for context... <_<

Didnt they do that with Tanev a couple of years ago? and he ended playing a lot of games for the Canucks. I think they did it with Tambellini as well..cap/waiver issues.


I was surprised Jensen was not on a plane when Booth went down... :shock:

to be fair, Jensen should have had a shot before Schroeder if we are going by performance.


  • 0

#140 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,887 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:34 PM

The likihood of them getting claimed after teams rosters are set goes way down.


I entirely disagree... the best time to put guys on waivers (if you don't want them claimed) is today. There will be dozens of other players on the wire at the same time as every team has to drop to the 23 man roster and it would be much less likely that it would be your guy picked up.

Putting someone on waivers a couple of days from now (or even tomorrow) risks other teams finding out a player on their roster sucks or someone gets hurt (expect a dozen groin pulls over the weekend) and they don't have the depth on their own farm teams.

I think this is a reasonable roster:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Ebbett-Kassian
Higgins-Lapierre-Hansen
Volpatti-Malhotra-Vandermeer
Weise

Bieksa-Hamhuis
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Tanev
Barker-Alberts

Edited by Provost, 18 January 2013 - 04:36 PM.

  • 1
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#141 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,500 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:38 PM

I hope Vandermeer is the guy getting put on waivers. Volpatti is a solid role player and I want to see what Barker can do when given a chance.

I doubt anyone will pick up Vandermeer.
  • 0

#142 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,315 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:38 PM

I entirely disagree... the best time to put guys on waivers (if you don't want them claimed) is today. There will be dozens of other players on the wire at the same time as every team has to drop to the 23 man roster and it would be much less likely that it would be your guy picked up.

Putting someone on waivers a couple of days from now (or even tomorrow) risks other teams finding out a player on their roster sucks or someone gets hurt (expect a dozen groin pulls over the weekend) and they don't have the depth on their own farm teams.

I think this is a reasonable roster:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Ebbett-Kassian
Higgins-Lapierre-Hansen
Volpatti-Malhotra-Vandermeer
Weise

Bieksa-Hamhuis
Edler-Garrison
Ballard-Tanev
Barker-Alberts


:sick:
  • 2

FWYIerW.png


#143 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,943 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:40 PM

You guys realize he can't be plucked off of waivers? It's the only move that makes sense. Ebbett would probably be scooped up. Send him down, and then call him back up shortly after.


This is what some of us have been trying to say. Waivers are the only reason Jordan was sent down. Any of the other bubble players would have been claimed.
  • 1
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...

#144 lee goren rulez69

lee goren rulez69

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 12

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:40 PM

hahahahaa totally expected this, frack AV and his love for career AHLers/fringe NHLers
  • 0

#145 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,651 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:41 PM

Mash, why do you hate Ebbett so much?
  • 1

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!


CDCFL - Montreal Canadiens GM
CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#146 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,315 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:41 PM

This is what some of us have been trying to say. Waivers are the only reason Jordan was sent down. Any of the other bubble players would have been claimed.


Anyone who hasn't read Stexx breakdown of this in the Prospects thread of Schroeder probably should. It makes it very easy to kind of get an idea of what is going on.

Mash, why do you hate Ebbett so much?


He's a 13th forward good for some spot duty here or there, he has no place in the top six of a "contending" team under any situation.

Edited by BananaMash, 18 January 2013 - 04:42 PM.

  • 2

FWYIerW.png


#147 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,178 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:42 PM

This thread is so full of fail.

To the people freaking out about this and calling the move stupid, you need to relax. It has been said already in this thread but some people don't seem to read. This was entirely a move about getting down to 23 players. Very little doubt in my mind that Shroeder is back up with the big club sooner than later.
  • 0

#148 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:44 PM

Schroeder came up and played well so he is ready so he will be slowly brought in to play at the pro level.

He is going to get his playing time and will be in the Canucks line up this season,probably much sooner than later.

However,with Manny,Lappy,Hank,Ebbett and Kes all ahead of Jordan it is tough for him to get quality minutes on the big club and that is not good for anybody.

I would rather see him get bigger and stronger down on the farm and then come up and play a full season next year.

I could see him come in with limited minutes ,playing second unit PP time.I am sure the club will not hurt his mental or physical development in this manner.

My guess is he will be a tweener this season.
  • 0

#149 Spotted Zebra

Spotted Zebra

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,051 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:44 PM

All I ask is that once Jordan comes up, GIVE HIM THE SECOND LINE CENTRE SPOT.

Let Ebett play as the 13th forward, unless he scores at a .66 ppg pace
  • 0
Posted Image
Thanks Vintage Canuck!

#150 Trebreh

Trebreh

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,052 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:46 PM

Why send down Schroeder? we couldnt send down one of Volpatti/Weise/Malhotra and make room for him when we NEED secondary scoring? Dafuq is that?

I know its just a scrimmage last night, be he really had some chemisty with Kas and Mayray. We find a temporary 2nd line and then he gets sent down..

I thought the training camp is where players get to earn their spots, as far as im concerned, he has done enough to earn a spot on the starting lineup.

What has Malhotra, Volpatti done again? this is ridiculous.
  • 0




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.