TheCammer Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everybody Hates Raymond Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoewsables Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaMacNamedDre Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 You see this, folks? This is why an average joe isn't a GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 You are quite attached to a player that the Canucks signed to a 2-way contract less then 2 weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoewsables Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaMacNamedDre Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Doctor Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoewsables Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Yeah you guys are right, this guy is not what Canucks need on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gumballthechewy Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 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!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.