Archived

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

-Vintage Canuck-

[Waivers] Jim Vandermeer

174 posts in this topic

Why didn't they waive Barker? Vandermeer has a higher chance of getting picked up...

BTW - How does the waivers work under the new CBA? If someone snatches him, do the Canucks get first claim for the next eligible waiver player?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim Vandermeer will be picked up, I can't see a team passing him up, I can see a team like the Rangers or the Capitals takinga swype at him,

But back to who comes up it better be Schroeder...if its Desbiens or someone like that I will be super PO

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some one once said if you keep trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results it means your are Insane. Canucks keep trying to win the Cup with a soft team year after year.

They should have kept Vandermeer and put him in the lineup when a tough team comes to town. He doesn't need to play big minutes or to play every game. They could even dress 7 Dmen for those games. Hopefully Vandermeer doesn't get claimed.

This is a ridiculous move. I thought MG had learned after losing to LA and BOS the last 2 years.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some one once said if you keep trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results it means your are Insane. Canucks keep trying to win the Cup with a soft team year after year.

They should have kept Vandermeer and put him in the lineup when a tough team comes to town. He doesn't need to play big minutes or to play every game. They could even dress 7 Dmen for those games. Hopefully Vandermeer doesn't get claimed.

This is a ridiculous move. I thought MG had learned after losing to LA and BOS the last 2 years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have been happier seeing Alberts go down. Vandermeer's versatility and grit will be sorely missed if he's picked up, especialy in the playoffs.

Would rather send Ebbet down it's not like anyone else is likely to claim him!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have preferred they send Barker from a skill set perspective but it's a dollars and cents business...soooo. Here's hoping we don't lose him!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some one once said if you keep trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results it means your are Insane. Canucks keep trying to win the Cup with a soft team year after year.

They should have kept Vandermeer and put him in the lineup when a tough team comes to town. He doesn't need to play big minutes or to play every game. They could even dress 7 Dmen for those games. Hopefully Vandermeer doesn't get claimed.

This is a ridiculous move. I thought MG had learned after losing to LA and BOS the last 2 years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barker refocused only 26 contract is stellar.

I really want Vandermeer to stay because this team is sorely lacking a tough guy , with him in the lineup were solid in grit.

Vandermeer, KAssian,Volpatti,Bieksa ,Wiese etc...better grit but if VAndermeer gets picked up we will need to get someone else

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see this, folks?

This is why an average joe isn't a GM.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are quite attached to a player that the Canucks signed to a 2-way contract less then 2 weeks ago.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How quick yo forget. Hamhuis, our best Dman tried to lay a hit on Lucic and was out for the SCF. I guess Lucic's size and toughness had nothing to do with Hammer's injury.

Brown ran around and had his way with the Canucks and all of CDC was up in arms. Countless threads on Brown's ugly mug.

Only an ignorant NHL fan would say Canucks aren't soft. Even Vandermeer him self said the word around the league is Canucks can be pushed around and he could help in that department.

Every hockey fan in Canada knows Canucks are soft.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How quick yo forget. Hamhuis, our best Dman tried to lay a hit on Lucic and was out for the SCF. I guess Lucic's size and toughness had nothing to do with Hammer's injury.

Brown ran around and had his way with the Canucks and all of CDC was up in arms. Countless threads on Brown's ugly mug.

Only an ignorant NHL fan would say Canucks aren't soft. Even Vandermeer him self said the word around the league is Canucks can be pushed around and he could help in that department.

Every hockey fan in Canada knows Canucks are soft.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great.

Lucic and Brown also happen to be very useful players, the latter of whom managed to average a PPG in his team's Stanley Cup run.

I'm not saying the Canucks aren't "soft"; I'm saying that it means absolutely nothing. The only negative about waiving Vandermeer is that Barker becomes our #8 defenseman.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how long it took for people to read the 2-way contract information posted way earlier in the thread. He does not have to go through waivers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah you guys are right, this guy is not what Canucks need on the team.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, fighting gets us far in the playoffs. Great point. We have other players who can fight who actually fill a role on this team. Vandermeer is a good #7 but you're treating this as if we've lost some superstar because of his "toughness". :lol:

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how long it took for people to read the 2-way contract information posted way earlier in the thread. He does not have to go through waivers.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how long it took for people to read the 2-way contract information posted way earlier in the thread. He does not have to go through waivers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have sent Ebbett packing, first off if Schroeder is coming up then we don't need him and even if he isn't we don't need him and who in their right mind would clame Ebbett!?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.