Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

There is a trend here...........and not a good one.


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#1 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 05:26 AM

*
POPULAR

If this were soccer I would agree that AV should carry the can but the Canuck line up is devised primarily by a tandem........more if you include assistants and scouts..........but in the main the team is supplied by MG and coached by AV

Well how has MG helped AV recently? (since the SC)

He has traded Hodgson (and let's not forget Sultzer, someone who never got a real chance) for Kassian and someone (Gragnani) AV/MG threw away after spending the "pre playoff games" messing up the defence trying him out.

Kassian will be good, I have no doubt about that and maybe the moving of Hodgson was forced on MG. That said he should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign. He didn't. As for Pahalsson......more mediocrity.

He ditched Rome and Salo while taking on 2 "hummers" for the Wolves and keeping nice guy Alberts. I'm sorry I love nice guys but only if they are performing. Rome was a very physical, underrated player and boy we could have used him now. Salo was ditched because he "had a history of injuries" in an injury inclined team......big deal! He was still a huge influence on our D, very strong and with a proven lethal snapshot.

He brings in Garrison after one half decent season and awards him the "kingdom" putting him up alongside players like Bieksa and Hamhuis.........who have actually proved they have got what it takes. The much vaunted canon on this guy is in need of sending back to the factory or he needs an appointment with an optician. True it is early days but the guy is an expensive gamble......again.

Sammy and Sturm, he decided were surplus, fair enough. However again he builds a trade that means we are gambling. I mean if Sammy was good enough to get the deal he has with Detroit only last year it makes me think we undervalued him.
Sturm was another Gilis "project ( Mike Gillis acknowledged the risk in signing Sturm, given his two knee surgeries in the past three years) a damned expensive one at $2.5m.........in short another blunder.

This blunder was then "knocked on" by taking yet another overpriced "project" David Booth. Booth is a trier, no doubt, goes to the net and all the other cliches but he is NOT a fit, nor does he have the impact, certainly not, at that price, we needed..........Oh and we lumbered the Aquilnis with the expensive Reinprecht as part of the deal.

Anyone seeing a trend here yet? Mediocrity and projects when what our team needed was bold imaginative moves to enhance our SC prospects. Add to that our less than sterling draft performances.

Hell we could have had draft picks for all the rubbish above and been better placed with a couple of UFAs than we are now.

So you see AV has had f---all help and arguably hinderance from big Mike since dragging his battered and battle weary squad to game 7 in 2011.

Edited by Bodee, 30 January 2013 - 05:29 AM.

  • 6
Kevin.jpg

#2 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,555 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:07 AM

I agree to an extent. Gillis hasn't really done this team any favors for a while, but to absolve AV of all blame for the Canucks supposed shortcomings doesn't seem right.

Your final comment didn't make a lot of sense to me. "AV dragged this team to Game 7 of the SCF"? Did I gather that correctly?
  • 1

#3 Scottish⑦Canuck

Scottish⑦Canuck

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,782 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:08 AM

*
POPULAR

If this were soccer I would agree that AV should carry the can but the Canuck line up is devised primarily by a tandem........more if you include assistants and scouts..........but in the main the team is supplied by MG and coached by AV

Well how has MG helped AV recently? (since the SC)

He has traded Hodgson (and let's not forget Sultzer, someone who never got a real chance) for Kassian and someone (Gragnani) AV/MG threw away after spending the "pre playoff games" messing up the defence trying him out.

Kassian will be good, I have no doubt about that and maybe the moving of Hodgson was forced on MG. That said he should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign. He didn't. As for Pahalsson......more mediocrity.

He ditched Rome and Salo while taking on 2 "hummers" for the Wolves and keeping nice guy Alberts. I'm sorry I love nice guys but only if they are performing. Rome was a very physical, underrated player and boy we could have used him now. Salo was ditched because he "had a history of injuries" in an injury inclined team......big deal! He was still a huge influence on our D, very strong and with a proven lethal snapshot.

He brings in Garrison after one half decent season and awards him the "kingdom" putting him up alongside players like Bieksa and Hamhuis.........who have actually proved they have got what it takes. The much vaunted canon on this guy is in need of sending back to the factory or he needs an appointment with an optician. True it is early days but the guy is an expensive gamble......again.

Sammy and Sturm, he decided were surplus, fair enough. However again he builds a trade that means we are gambling. I mean if Sammy was good enough to get the deal he has with Detroit only last year it makes me think we undervalued him.
Sturm was another Gilis "project ( Mike Gillis acknowledged the risk in signing Sturm, given his two knee surgeries in the past three years) a damned expensive one at $2.5m.........in short another blunder.

This blunder was then "knocked on" by taking yet another overpriced "project" David Booth. Booth is a trier, no doubt, goes to the net and all the other cliches but he is NOT a fit, nor does he have the impact, certainly not, at that price, we needed..........Oh and we lumbered the Aquilnis with the expensive Reinprecht as part of the deal.

Anyone seeing a trend here yet? Mediocrity and projects when what our team needed was bold imaginative moves to enhance our SC prospects. Add to that our less than sterling draft performances.

Hell we could have had draft picks for all the rubbish above and been better placed with a couple of UFAs than we are now.

So you see AV has had f---all help and arguably hinderance from big Mike since dragging his battered and battle weary squad to game 7 in 2011.


I don't even know where to begin with this...

Firstly, where is this "trend"?

Yes, he traded Hodgson for Kassian. Hodgson didn't want to be here and by trading him he acquired something our lineup has needed for years. Kassian also has the potential to develop into something special. Power forwards don't grow on trees. As for Sulzer, he'd been a depth player his whole career. Who knows if he'll have a good season this year? Gragnani was a risk that didn't work out. Big deal. We're no worse off because of it.

Salo is not worth the contract he got in Tampa Bay. MG signed Garrison, who was younger and just as effective. A player needs time to adjust to a new team. Hell, were you not the one complaining about a lack of a preseason and the fact that the players were out of condition yesterday? Sometimes a player makes an instant impact when he joins a new team. Sometimes they don't. Garrison will be fine. He just needs time.

Samuelsson was getting old and is on the decline. He had a decent contract but the trade for Booth was worth it. Booth is still relatively young, and due to injuries hasn't really had a chance to prove himself. I'm convinced he'll still turn out to be an important part of this team. You were willing to give Mason Raymond all the time in the world, even during his horrendous run of form last season. Yet you have no patience with Booth? Much like AV, you have your favourites as well as players you just don't like (as well as your constant criticism of MG).


Give him some time. See what happens at the deadline. The General Manager job isn't an easy one. This isn't NHL 13.

Edited by Scottish⑦Canuck, 30 January 2013 - 06:09 AM.

  • 19

#4 CityinFlames

CityinFlames

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:07 AM

Who cares about Hodgson he's terrible at playing the defensive side of the game; Kassian is a more useful player then Hodgson is since he can score and play defence. Also Hodgson didn't want to play here since we weren't on our knees praising his mightiness.

No clue why Sulzer was mention since he's a nobody.

Garrison will need time to fit into the western style.

Samuelsson is now on a decline not sure if he has anything left in the tank; Salo isn't worth the money with his resume of injuries the dude lost a nut he's the equivalent to bad luck Brian; Sturm was a waste of money to begin with and good riddance to that waste.

I think Mike Gillis has done a great job; people cried for the Canucks to go big in the free agency so we went for Matt Sundin, people cried for a top 6 forward so we went and got David Booth for basically nothing.

and let's not forget the amount of money he has spent on resigning our top core guys, he has signed guys well below their value on the open market.

Where the Canucks are isn't bad, and Mike Gillis is doing a heck of a job in keeping the team together and drafting for the future.
  • 3

#5 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,734 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:20 AM

"He should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign"...the problem with this is that you can devise all the packages you want, but someone has to accept them at the other end. "Hot" commodities just aren't that easy to acquire (because 29 or so teams are generally interested in those players). It's not like we haven't been in the thick of things, so they haven't missed the mark by much. You don't want to start disassembling a top team in order to tweak a few parts and, often, that's what is required to secure the players you're suggesting. So MG's tried to tweak by keeping his core in place because that's been a pretty sure thing. This chess game requires patience and you don't make bold, brash moves unless they make sense from all angles - not just in the receiving end.
  • 3

Posted Image


#6 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:38 AM

I don't even know where to begin with this...

Firstly, where is this "trend"?

Yes, he traded Hodgson for Kassian. Hodgson didn't want to be here and by trading him he acquired something our lineup has needed for years. Kassian also has the potential to develop into something special. Power forwards don't grow on trees. As for Sulzer, he'd been a depth player his whole career. Who knows if he'll have a good season this year? Gragnani was a risk that didn't work out. Big deal. We're no worse off because of it.

Salo is not worth the contract he got in Tampa Bay. MG signed Garrison, who was younger and just as effective. A player needs time to adjust to a new team. Hell, were you not the one complaining about a lack of a preseason and the fact that the players were out of condition yesterday? Sometimes a player makes an instant impact when he joins a new team. Sometimes they don't. Garrison will be fine. He just needs time.

Samuelsson was getting old and is on the decline. He had a decent contract but the trade for Booth was worth it. Booth is still relatively young, and due to injuries hasn't really had a chance to prove himself. I'm convinced he'll still turn out to be an important part of this team. You were willing to give Mason Raymond all the time in the world, even during his horrendous run of form last season. Yet you have no patience with Booth? Much like AV, you have your favourites as well as players you just don't like (as well as your constant criticism of MG).


Give him some time. See what happens at the deadline. The General Manager job isn't an easy one. This isn't NHL 13.


If you can't see a trend then I doubt there is hope for you. I couldn't be more explicit.

I said Hodgson may have been excusable, so we agree. As for Kassian, you say "he has potential) again you agree. However he hasn't answered the need, and won't for another 2 seasons imo. Sulzer at least had potential to play in the NHL..............but Gragnani and the 2 plugs we sent to the Wolves? So where's your point. We are worse off with the departure of Salo AND Rome AND Ehrhoff.........we get Garrison.

Salo would not have asked for the contract he got in Tampa (opinion based on other players)............but in fact his loss to our team almost says he IS worth what he is getting, given his impact there. I see no correlation to pre-season remarks I made and Salo, and NO Garrison isn't just as effective. He is all over the place and it's having the reverse effect on this team Salo had. Maybe Garrison will come round, the question is when and can we wait that long.

My point about Booth has nothing to do with Raymond. Raymond HAS proved to be a fit and considering the the disparity in Salary my point is we could have done a lot better for $4.2m. I'm more worried about where Booth's head is to be honest and if I thought that would change then I might be convinced. He just doesn't appear to be a team player and he's not good enough to be anything else. It's time he realised that.

I am not favouring AV, I'm saying it is hard to lay ALL the blame on the coach when this is obviously a partnership. If MG had got AV some ready to go pieces, and recognised that the team needed more size and pushback after the Boston series then I would have laid it all on AV. He has patently failed to do that and is therefor culpable in the stalling of this team big time.

Edited by Bodee, 30 January 2013 - 07:40 AM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#7 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,050 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 07:42 AM

Kind of agree on booth as the guy seems injury prone.....maybe he needs some antler extract.

The garrison deal needs more time to play out....I thought he would be more prepared to start the season and his and his start here would be a bit more seamless....kind of tough timing for this deal...I'd rather salo here for one more year especially a shortened year to eliminate an unknown....it's obvious our d core misses salo right now....garrison for next year but that's the way she rolls.

If kassian keeps up at even half the pace we are far better off with him than with hodgson who again:

Wanted a trade.
Would never get top six center minutes any time soon.

At this point discussing the CoKass deal is equal to smashing your head into a wall. It's done. Deal with it.
  • 1
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#8 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:01 AM

"He should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign"...the problem with this is that you can devise all the packages you want, but someone has to accept them at the other end. "Hot" commodities just aren't that easy to acquire (because 29 or so teams are generally interested in those players). It's not like we haven't been in the thick of things, so they haven't missed the mark by much. You don't want to start disassembling a top team in order to tweak a few parts and, often, that's what is required to secure the players you're suggesting. So MG's tried to tweak by keeping his core in place because that's been a pretty sure thing. This chess game requires patience and you don't make bold, brash moves unless they make sense from all angles - not just in the receiving end.


We will have to agree to differ on that.

If all you are ever going to do is watch a team that is physically bested every year in the playoffs, what's the point.
We all know what that team needs. We are constantly getting injured and fatigued because of it. We fail to garner points in the playoffs and too many of our players are of the same type.

If you see a problem you do what is required to sort it. If that means giving something up, then if it elevates the team I have no problem. I have said that all along about even players I have been forced to defend like Lu, Ballard, Bieksa, Raymond, Volpatti.

I honestly wonder if MG has the confidence in his bargaining ability to make the moves required. Look at his trades and acquisitions. They are always guys who are projects or who might offer something good further up the road. Our prospects also seem to be of the same type. Meanwhile this team's window is slowly closing.

My point about losing the players we did lose for "picks" instead of "dopes" is a valid one. We would likely not be any further away and yet we would have something which might prove to be better in the long run.

Last year I accused MG of losing focus. Today I'm even more convinced that is the case. He has backed us into some type of salary structure which if you don't have players coming through the ranks as Detroit do, just doesn't work in the end.

He also has this thing about rehabilitating players which I find morally hard to fault........except that again the guys are not what the team needs.
I like MG but I fear that unless he develops a more focussed and ruthless and imaginative approach to improving this team we are destined to just fizzle out and MG will be left sacked and wondering if only.

Edited by Bodee, 30 January 2013 - 08:04 AM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#9 klosetotheheart

klosetotheheart

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:08 AM

If you can't see a trend then I doubt there is hope for you. I couldn't be more explicit.

I said Hodgson may have been excusable, so we agree. As for Kassian, you say "he has potential) again you agree. However he hasn't answered the need, and won't for another 2 seasons imo. Sulzer at least had potential to play in the NHL..............but Gragnani and the 2 plugs we sent to the Wolves? So where's your point. We are worse off with the departure of Salo AND Rome AND Ehrhoff.........we get Garrison.

Salo would not have asked for the contract he got in Tampa (opinion based on other players)............but in fact his loss to our team almost says he IS worth what he is getting, given his impact there. I see no correlation to pre-season remarks I made and Salo, and NO Garrison isn't just as effective. He is all over the place and it's having the reverse effect on this team Salo had. Maybe Garrison will come round, the question is when and can we wait that long.

My point about Booth has nothing to do with Raymond. Raymond HAS proved to be a fit and considering the the disparity in Salary my point is we could have done a lot better for $4.2m. I'm more worried about where Booth's head is to be honest and if I thought that would change then I might be convinced. He just doesn't appear to be a team player and he's not good enough to be anything else. It's time he realised that.

I am not favouring AV, I'm saying it is hard to lay ALL the blame on the coach when this is obviously a partnership. If MG had got AV some ready to go pieces, and recognised that the team needed more size and pushback after the Boston series then I would have laid it all on AV. He has patently failed to do that and is therefor culpable in the stalling of this team big time.


Again you didnt really point out a trend.. other then players being moved in and out.. if all the players were similar and were traded for similar players then you could call it a trend.. also sometimes, if not the majority of then time players can take up to a full season to adjust to a new team and system. Luckily MG doesnt sell out this franchise for a single season as you would have him do, not resigning Salo who was old and injury prone was a good move, as was bringing Garison.

Stop trying to complain about a GM who have won us something like 5 straight NW devision titles and back to back presidents trophies. Yes we have not won a cup, but thats not the GM's fault, he put us in a position to win it, which is all he can do.
  • 0

#10 Scottish⑦Canuck

Scottish⑦Canuck

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,782 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:23 AM

If you can't see a trend then I doubt there is hope for you. I couldn't be more explicit.


I'm still not seeing a trend...

I said Hodgson may have been excusable, so we agree. As for Kassian, you say "he has potential) again you agree. However he hasn't answered the need, and won't for another 2 seasons imo. Sulzer at least had potential to play in the NHL..............but Gragnani and the 2 plugs we sent to the Wolves? So where's your point. We are worse off with the departure of Salo AND Rome AND Ehrhoff.........we get Garrison.


I'd argue that Kassian has been one of the best players on the team so far this season. Four goals in 6 games is a good return. He's fighting. In short, he's putting a lot of effort into every game he plays. I just hope it doesn't take it's toll on him too soon.

I don't think it's suitable to comment on whether we're worse off without Salo yet. We're only six games in and it's not like we had a fantastic start last season either. If 20 games into the season Garrison is really struggling then I'll start to wonder. But he doesn't have the injury history Salo does, so who knows how long Salo can keep it up in Tampa. Give the guy a chance.

And of course we're worse off without Ehrhoff. Everyone can see that. But he wasn't worth what Buffalo are paying him. Crazy money. He clearly didn't feel the same way as other members of the team who have taken discounted salaries in the past.

My point about Booth has nothing to do with Raymond. Raymond HAS proved to be a fit and considering the the disparity in Salary my point is we could have done a lot better for $4.2m. I'm more worried about where Booth's head is to be honest and if I thought that would change then I might be convinced. He just doesn't appear to be a team player and he's not good enough to be anything else. It's time he realised that.



Where's your evidence for this? Unless you have access to the locker room or you're Booth's psychiatrist I don't think you can make any judgement on where his head's at. He's a 20-30 goal scorer in a full season. That isn't bad at all. Nobody comes cheap in the NHL these days.
  • 0

#11 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,943 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:31 AM

Sorry the moment you said we let Rome go and acted like that's hurt our team you lost all credibility. Rome was a plug. Plain and simple. Tanev is a far better defenseman than Rome ever will be. Our defense as a whole is not physical to start the season. I blame that on the lockout more than anything else. Once the players get their "legs" I'm sure the physical stuff will come back.

The Hodgson trade was bad timing. It would have been better in the offseason where hopefully we could have gotten more for him.

Bottom line is it takes something to get something. Gillis can't waive a magic wand and pick up an elite centre, and a Norris calibre defenseman. Trading Ballard or Luongo will not get those type of pieces back either. Could we move Edler and Luongo?
That might get us the pieces we need, but you'd probably be getting a younger prospect who may or may not be NHL ready.
That also doesn't help us short-term.

By the way, Rome in Dallas so far has missed 4 games with a groin strain, and is now day to day with the flu. He's played 1 game and is -2. Garrison who's the new whipping boy, is +2, played 6 games and has 8 hits to Rome's 3. Wow..what a big loss we've suffered.


If there's a problem I'm finding with the Canucks it's scouting. Last season might have been one of the better drafts Gillis has made. But I think there's lots of room for improvement.
  • 2
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#12 canuckster19

canuckster19

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,549 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 03

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:43 AM

I agree to an extent. Gillis hasn't really done this team any favors for a while, but to absolve AV of all blame for the Canucks supposed shortcomings doesn't seem right.

Your final comment didn't make a lot of sense to me. "AV dragged this team to Game 7 of the SCF"? Did I gather that correctly?


AV didn't drag anyone, they were lucky to beat Chicago, Kesler, and Luongo to a degree, carried the team on his shoulders against Nashville and the Sedins finally decided to show up against San Jose.
  • 0
Posted Image
Trekkie Monster says: GO CANUCKS GO!

Please read the Board Rules

#13 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,667 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:45 AM

Wait, we are talking about the same MG who was voted the leagues best GM just a year and a half ago right?
  • 1
Posted Image

#14 Raiun

Raiun

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,112 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:24 AM

I think it's funny that people ask for "big bold moves that make impacts etc etc" but to me the only difference between a gamble that is a bust and a gamble that is a "big, sweeping, imaginative bold move blah blah" is that it turns into a gem instead of coal.

None of MG's moves so far have been coal, and some still look like they have potential to be gems. Look at Kassian, he could really develop into a star for our team. Booth didn't get a fair shake last season, he started off hot and then got a cheap knee on knee hit that took him out for ages, and he couldn't get back to form. Kesler was injured and dragging his linemates down. Garrison has only had a couple of games with us, a handful of practices, and a short training camp. GIVE IT SOME TIME.
  • 1

#15 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,485 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:49 AM

There is nothing wrong with the Hodgson / Kassian trade. Win/win for both clubs.
After seeing COHO give the puck away twice in the third period against the Leafs the other night and his attempts to get to the front of the net were easily thwarted by the Leafs defense, I am glad he's not on our team.
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#16 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,831 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:57 AM

*
POPULAR

MG has made smart moves from the time of his arrival. Yes, you can talk about the bad signing in Sturm, but look who we packaged to get Booth, an overpriced reclamation project in Sturm and an aging Samuelsson for a 26 y/o with a proven ability to pot 60 points. The only negative about Booth is his contract, which you failed to mention in your post.

Instead your ramblings are directed towards things that you don't think 'fit' or you judge subjectively as not working. There is no clear thesis as to what you define as the 'trend'. You seem to imply throughout your post that we could be a more competitive team had some of these risks not been taken, then you imply that it would have been better just to stockpile picks? That would make this team less competitive.

It seems your posting just to be different, despite the clear logic in front of you. Salo was a leader on our D-core, no question, but he was also asking for term on a 35+ contract (which means we pay the full value of the contract, regardless of potential retirement). MG did offer Salo a 1 year deal, but Tampa offered 7m over 2 years, to a guy who hasn't played a full season in his career.

Garrison as a replacement hasn't worked out 6 games into the season, I think we can wait for a bigger sample size before we complain about that. He has been solid defensively, though he hasn't put up points yet. He has also been a horse on our backend averaging 23:05 of ice time a game.

What MG has done since getting here is creating a culture of winning. Let me remind you again of our last GM in Dave Nonis, who in 07-08 signed Brad Isbister at free agency, and then went on to acquire Matt Pettinger at the deadline. At least with MG we are getting quality players to build upon a strong core. At the deadline every year we have gotten roster pieces, namely Lapierre, Higgins, Kassian etc. At free agency Gillis is actually able to attract free agents here, Demitra, Hamhuis, Garrison, Sundin etc. all signed here under Gillis's tenure while Nonis couldn't attract a single FA. On top of all this Gillis has locked up core players to long term deals, the Sedins, Bieksa, Luongo, Kesler, Schneider and more recently Edler. If that wasn't enough, he's gone over the top by hiring sleep specialists who then lobbied the NHL for a more lenient travel schedule. So ya, Gillis is sabotaging this team with the 2 players you were able to mention that haven't worked out here, or have yet to work out - TOTALLY.
  • 8

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#17 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,851 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:07 AM

*
POPULAR

The only bad trend I see here is someone starting threads after staying up all night drinking.

- Hodgson was a whiny b**** that didn't want to be here, and Kassian looks like a perfect fit for what the team needed. Total win. Sultzer (sic)? Really? We signed him for nothing earlier in the year, and didn't need him anyways.

- 'Something "hot"' is freakin expensive, even if just a rental. Would you have been happy trading Jensen, or the pick that ended up Guance, for a flashy rental, only to be bounced by the hottest team in the league in the 1st round? As for Pahalsson (sic), what the hell? He had one more goal then Daniel Sedin, Kesler, Salo, Booth, or Raymond.

- Gillis didn't "ditch" Rome and Salo, he simply wasn't willing to match their contract offers. Rome got a 3 year deal at 1.5 per - he's a fine defenseman, but considering where he was in our depth chart, he's wasn't worth a 200% raise, and he wasn't in our long-term plans. Salo is always fantastic at the beginning of the season, but he's a walking IR timebomb who started showing his age at the end of last season. I wouldn't want to give him a 2-year deal at 3.75 with a NMC either. Alberts hits more than anyone we have on defense, and always shows up to play when he's needed. Plus, his contract expires at the end of this season, just in time for the cap to go down. As for your 2 "hummers" - are you talking about Barker and Vandermeer? When we have a few injuries, and these guys step in and hold the fort, and you're raving about how great it is that we have them, I'm totally pulling up this thread.

- Garrison is adapting to a new system and a new team. Other than the one brutal giveaway to SJ, he's been fine. Had his two posts actually bounced in, everyone here would be raving about him.

- Sturm was useless, and Sammy was injured, and didn't end up playing a game until December. We already had Kesler coming off of injury. Samuelsson has publicly said he wasn't on good terms with Canucks' management, so perhaps Gillis had confirmation that he wasn't going to re-sign in Vancouver at the end of the season. We definitely need a physical winger of the Samuelsson/Booth ilk, and the Sturm experiment showed how hard it was to acquire a player like that. So the Booth trade was an excellent move at the time. If it weren't for a bad injury and a dry spell for Booth at the end of the year, people would be raving about this trade as highly as the Ehrhoff one.

- "We lumbered the Aquilnis with the expensive Reinprecht" - are you kidding me? Who cares? Reinprecht would have came in handy had Keith elbowed Henrik instead of Daniel.


The next time you think a thread like this is a good idea, put down the bottle and go to bed. Once you're sober and well-rested, you'll probably just stick to praising Raymond.

Edited by D-Money, 30 January 2013 - 11:24 AM.

  • 5
Posted Image

#18 frazzY

frazzY

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,390 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 09

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:11 AM

The team needs a fire under there ass, a new voice in the room. If any of you cant see that you're blind.. It might not even be AV, but a change is needed and what better change than a new bench boss, the potential is there!

AV doesnt help by saying things like "i dont talk to players.. " bla bla

I BET NO OTHER COACH IN THE LEAGUE TAKES HIS APPROACH! No other successful team anyway.

Drew Doughty said Darryl Sutter was the hardest coach hes ever had. Look at doughtys play last post season and tell me that didnt have a positive affect on his play..

AV's got to go. When it matters most (the playoffs) the boys need that extra push. For example, when you go to the gym u probably have a better work out with a partner pushing you, an even better work out with a personal trainer pushing you.. AV doesnt do that...

He doesnt talk to his players (his words not mine)

Hes got to go, NEXT
  • 0

#19 Dral

Dral

    Puts the Dr in Drunk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,913 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:24 AM

If Kassian hasn't answered a need for the canucks, like you say... WOW, I really can't wait to see him in 2 years.

We can start calling him NGO!

Next Great One
  • 0

Fruits?

Lord Peaches' gut is telling him that the drunken fool, aka Dral, is 100% mafia.

 MVP?

Dral is 100% mafia or I will masteb_ _ _ _ a cow and like it

GOATis?

Vig kill dral he never talks like this when he's not mafia.

 


#20 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:25 AM

Didn't we saddle Florida with with Sturm when they saddled us with Reinprecht?
  • 0
Posted Image

#21 nuck luck

nuck luck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 532 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:36 AM

If this were soccer I would agree that AV should carry the can but the Canuck line up is devised primarily by a tandem........more if you include assistants and scouts..........but in the main the team is supplied by MG and coached by AV

Well how has MG helped AV recently? (since the SC)

He has traded Hodgson (and let's not forget Sultzer, someone who never got a real chance) for Kassian and someone (Gragnani) AV/MG threw away after spending the "pre playoff games" messing up the defence trying him out.


I think you need to adjust your scope because your focusing on the wrong person....and you admitted to it in your first example for "Well how has MG helped AV recently?"

In the first sentence to the above answer you said,

"He has traded Hodgson (and let's not forget Sultzer, someone who never got a real chance) for Kassian and someone (Gragnani) AV/MG threw away after spending the "pre playoff games" messing up the defence trying him out."

How is this MG's fault? His job is to gather the right pieces for now and the future....it's the coaches job to put those pieces together for the best results. He can't order AV to play anyone and he can't tell him what lines to make. MG is not the issue.

I think MG has been excellent and a HUGE reason why we have been so successful, simultaneously proving that CDC is truly delusional! Do you not remember the years...DECADES that we had to go through mediocrity and cheer for a team that was always swimming in the lower half of the barrel? There were highlights, but nothing that we could savor for extended periods.

With MG arriving and finally the Canucks having winning season after winning season....we think the GM is doing a bad job? If memory serves correct, the way our teams future looked pre-MG... No one on CDC would have imagined that we would win the President's Cup twice and been to the Finals.....or be in Playoffs every year within such a short span of time.

MG comes in and changed things immediately:

- making the Canucks a destination choice for FA

- he set precedence with innovations that other GM's have noticed and now utilize on their own teams (locker room changes, specialists, etc).

Signing / Re-sign - He's re-signed all the essential players we have on this team for a discount, sure you can bring up Lou...but, you might be overlooking the 'butterfly effect' with re-signing him. Lou is one of the biggest reasons why we have been considered an elite team....without him, we would have been mediocre and probably wouldn't have picked up players like Tanev & Sweatt or signed RFA's. Remember when the Canucks were never mentioned as a team that RFA's wanted to play for? We had to overpay to get any...

Let's not forget the goalie situation we would have had to go through to find a true #1, look at Toronto if you want to see a glimpse of what could have been. Another possible result might have been playing Schneids too early in his career and the Canucks destroying his confidence.... playing alongside Lou has been a benefit for Schneids in so many ways. Schneids wouldn't be the player he is today if he didn't have the opportunity to hone his skills behind Lou, watch and learn how a professional handles a crazy fanbase and have a mentor to tutor him throughout his early career.

Sure, he might have signed him for too long...but if that's what it took to keep him here, than it was worth it. Anyways, the pros of re-signing Sedins, Kes, Burr, Bieksa, Edler and Schneids on their discounted contracts far outweigh the length of Lou's (The amount and cap is pretty good). Any argument regarding MG and bad signings should be mute.

Trades / Picks - He's made some bad trades or picks, but his good ones far outweigh those too....I can't wait to see Gaunce, Jensen, Mallet, Corrado, Lack, etc. Look at Edmonton if you want an example of a bad GM....what boggles my mind is the absence of depth in their farm? Sure, they had picked some superstar players, but that's what happens when you are the bottom feeders for 4 years straight...however, what happened with the picks that weren't #1? Our first pick is so close to their second, our second pick to their third, etc.... and their other prospects aren't producing much or grabbing anyone's attention like some of ours have... from our positioning during the Draft Picks, I think MG has done pretty good.

No fan is 100% satisfied with every decision their team's GM makes so we have to base our judgements on his history, results and future that the GM has developed or is developing.

Hodgson / Kass - It's been pointed out he wanted out of here. Shocked when it was first announced, I like this trade and it shows that MG knows better than any of us. You mentioned that you wanted something "hot" for the pending campaign...I'm sure he did too, but I prefer to trade a young top 6 rookie for another top 6 rookie that will fill our needs, now and later. For us to get that 'hot' player...it might not have been an option and the odds are it wouldn't be a young guy, he wouldn't fit our needs or any other multiple reasons....AND, the other team might not want the trade or want too much. I luv Coho, but I LOVE Kassquatch!

Salo / Garrison - Sure, we all loved him and he was getting old. He should have signed for 1 year...I'd rather have Garrison anyways. The situation right now with Garrison is nothing new, look at Suter with the Wild this year; often being beaten to the net, losing battles in front and defensive lapses AND a -5 (I think Garrison is even or +). If a slow start can happen to such an experienced Dman like Suter on a new team....let's expect it will happen to others too.

Sammy / Booth - An aging Sammy for Booth is a good deal. Sure, Booth wasn't playing up to par since his concussion, but early on...it looked like the trade paid off. It's not MG's fault for not being able to predict the knee-on-knee hit... if not for this hit, he looked to be having a statement year.

You have to see a trend here. Our team is younger, better, tougher and our future prospects are looking good too....what more could you ask from a GM? Now...it's just a matter of putting the right pieces together and motivating them, not MG's job.

And let's not forget that there's more to come from MG in the near future....He still has two #1 goalies and when he trades Lou, we can expect a combination between prospects, picks and a roster player. Makes our future look better...

Oh....the Ballard trade is good too, in my books. He just hasn't been given a fair shake (not MG's fault) and he's been playing great recently and increasing his value....Ballard makes our D much better now and there is a desperate need for Dmen in the league, I expect MG will get something good in return (since we can't afford his cap next year).

While I'm at it.... look at Mayray, most GM's would have given up on the guy and all of BC was demanding a trade (including myself). Had MG not taken a chance, we would have lost him for nothing.... this year, Mayray and MG is proving us all wrong and Mayray is increasing his value. Not every risk will pan out like expected, but that's why we call them risks....his positives far outweigh his negatives here too.

Edited by nuck luck, 30 January 2013 - 10:58 AM.

  • 0

#22 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,862 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:53 AM

People do these evaluation threads to death (how many have there been since the weekend already?) but here are some points in reply:

- Hodgson wanted icetime we couldn't give him so we got a different asset in return. No better, no worse. Sulzer was a decent depth guy and never complained about his limited playing time (unlike Hodgson/Hodgson's agent/Hodgson's father), but he was behind Hamhuis, Edler and Ballard on the depth chart. He offered us a different look than Alberts as a replacement but was tried on the right side when we had opportunity but never worked out. Gragnani was a little different in that he really wasn't fitting in a number of situations and made some really bad reads. His offence probably would have come but Gillis felt it was better to allow for the opportunity for someone like Connauton to fill that role.

- Pahlsson has the credentials to be a good 3rd line center, but it didn't work out. In the end we gave up next to nothing to get him so we suck it up and move on.

- Rome was let go in favour of other defencemen even though he was steady for a depth guy, but Salo wasn't let go. Salo was offered a contract, which he declined in favour of more money and term in Tampa. The Wolves need players too, so I'm not sure why Mullen and Joslin should have any bearing on what we do. I don't think Barker will work out in our favour, but he's cheap and Vandermeer does give us an even tougher option in our depth while still being reasonably reliable (and, again cheaper than Rome).

- Garrison was not awarded the kingdom and Garrison's proof that he has what it takes is in his defensive ability. He was a top shutdown guy for Florida for two seasons and was ranked behind only Hamhuis as the best shutdown defenceman two years ago. We paid a little extra in hopes he'd contribute offensively like he did last year, but others would have paid more and we signed him for less than market value. You said it yourself, it's still early in the season.

- Sturm didn't work out and Gillis recognized that and dumped him. It was a mistake to sign him. Samuelsson had been good for us, but injuries were becoming a problem and we needed a better option in our top 6. He managed to move both for a young, fast, power forward style player - much better value than he gave away even if the contract is larger. We still haven't seen the best of Booth after a knee injury that wasn't his fault and some bad luck with the groin injury (which plenty of players are having issues with, it's even kept Samuelsson out of games this year). And if Aquilini cared about how much Reinprecht cost, he wouldn't have signed off on the deal.

I'm definitely seeing a trend, but it's actually for mediocre threads in a forum filled with other mediocre threads all about the same topic. Unfortunately you've cherry picked things you think support your argument when they actually don't (at least not as much as you think) and have chosen to ignore indisputably good pickups, like Hamhuis, Higgins, Lapierre and even Malhotra (whose effectiveness was limited by a freak injury through no fault to Gillis). He's also re-signed players brought in by other GMs to affordable deals and helped put in the extra pieces that make this team more competitive than it ever has been.

If you can't see that, then I wonder about your comment about having hope for others.
  • 3

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#23 jono2009

jono2009

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 08

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:55 AM

Care to ellaborate on this a little more?

"So you see AV has had f---all help and arguably hinderance from big Mike since dragging his battered and battle weary squad to game 7 in 2011"

I don't agree with that whatsoever.
  • 0

#24 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:55 AM

I'm definitely seeing a trend, but it's actually for mediocre threads in a forum filled with other mediocre threads all about the same topic.


  • 1
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#25 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,579 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:01 AM

If this were soccer I would agree that AV should carry the can but the Canuck line up is devised primarily by a tandem........more if you include assistants and scouts..........but in the main the team is supplied by MG and coached by AV

Well how has MG helped AV recently? (since the SC)

He has traded Hodgson (and let's not forget Sultzer, someone who never got a real chance) for Kassian and someone (Gragnani) AV/MG threw away after spending the "pre playoff games" messing up the defence trying him out.

Kassian will be good, I have no doubt about that and maybe the moving of Hodgson was forced on MG. That said he should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign. He didn't. As for Pahalsson......more mediocrity.

He ditched Rome and Salo while taking on 2 "hummers" for the Wolves and keeping nice guy Alberts. I'm sorry I love nice guys but only if they are performing. Rome was a very physical, underrated player and boy we could have used him now. Salo was ditched because he "had a history of injuries" in an injury inclined team......big deal! He was still a huge influence on our D, very strong and with a proven lethal snapshot.

He brings in Garrison after one half decent season and awards him the "kingdom" putting him up alongside players like Bieksa and Hamhuis.........who have actually proved they have got what it takes. The much vaunted canon on this guy is in need of sending back to the factory or he needs an appointment with an optician. True it is early days but the guy is an expensive gamble......again.

Sammy and Sturm, he decided were surplus, fair enough. However again he builds a trade that means we are gambling. I mean if Sammy was good enough to get the deal he has with Detroit only last year it makes me think we undervalued him.
Sturm was another Gilis "project ( Mike Gillis acknowledged the risk in signing Sturm, given his two knee surgeries in the past three years) a damned expensive one at $2.5m.........in short another blunder.

This blunder was then "knocked on" by taking yet another overpriced "project" David Booth. Booth is a trier, no doubt, goes to the net and all the other cliches but he is NOT a fit, nor does he have the impact, certainly not, at that price, we needed..........Oh and we lumbered the Aquilnis with the expensive Reinprecht as part of the deal.

Anyone seeing a trend here yet? Mediocrity and projects when what our team needed was bold imaginative moves to enhance our SC prospects. Add to that our less than sterling draft performances.

Hell we could have had draft picks for all the rubbish above and been better placed with a couple of UFAs than we are now.

So you see AV has had f---all help and arguably hinderance from big Mike since dragging his battered and battle weary squad to game 7 in 2011.


Interesting take on MGs choices over the years. Criticism of MG does not go over well around here, so you will get a lot of feedback.

The key to your message seems to be the timeline for the current team to win a SC. I agree with you that the window is closing (and may already have closed). The Canucks have made the SCF three times in 40 years, which indicates how difficult it is to get there.

MG inherited many of the important pieces that has taken the team to great heights. He did a good job adding players to the team, but there have been a few duds along the way.

The Nucks always seem to be 'right at the cap' with lots of unmoveable parts, which ties MGs hands as far as impactful trades. He has done well with UFA's, but I'm not sure if he has made Vancouver a "desirable destination". Recent UFAs are BC boys returning home (Hammer, Garrison, Maholtra) and the Nucks winning record is appealing.

He does think 'out of the box' but his reclamation projects have been 50/50 at best.

Letting Erhoff go and his inability to replace him really stands out on this team.

I think the real test for MG will be what happens with the goalie situation. Fans have huge expectations for a trade and Van has some big holes in their lineup. If he fails to acquire a valuable piece, or keeps two #1 goalies at the expense of filling these holes, the fans will turn on him.
  • 1

#26 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,940 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:28 AM

Briefly started reading the OP. Then I saw the name of who created it. I stopped reading immediately.
  • 2
Posted Image

#27 VicNuckleHead09

VicNuckleHead09

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 361 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 09

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:30 AM

If you can't see a trend then I doubt there is hope for you. I couldn't be more explicit.

I said Hodgson may have been excusable, so we agree. As for Kassian, you say "he has potential) again you agree. However he hasn't answered the need, and won't for another 2 seasons imo. Sulzer at least had potential to play in the NHL..............but Gragnani and the 2 plugs we sent to the Wolves? So where's your point. We are worse off with the departure of Salo AND Rome AND Ehrhoff.........we get Garrison.

Salo would not have asked for the contract he got in Tampa (opinion based on other players)............but in fact his loss to our team almost says he IS worth what he is getting, given his impact there. I see no correlation to pre-season remarks I made and Salo, and NO Garrison isn't just as effective. He is all over the place and it's having the reverse effect on this team Salo had. Maybe Garrison will come round, the question is when and can we wait that long.

My point about Booth has nothing to do with Raymond. Raymond HAS proved to be a fit and considering the the disparity in Salary my point is we could have done a lot better for $4.2m. I'm more worried about where Booth's head is to be honest and if I thought that would change then I might be convinced. He just doesn't appear to be a team player and he's not good enough to be anything else. It's time he realised that.

I am not favouring AV, I'm saying it is hard to lay ALL the blame on the coach when this is obviously a partnership. If MG had got AV some ready to go pieces, and recognised that the team needed more size and pushback after the Boston series then I would have laid it all on AV. He has patently failed to do that and is therefor culpable in the stalling of this team big time.


We got rid of Cody cause he was a bitch,
We got rid of Salo cause he had one nut and his bones were made of wet paper,
We got rid of Rome cause he cost us the cup with a late hit on Horton and has to be held accountable,
We got rid of Samuelson cause he was under preforming year in and year out and had the work ethic of a hamster,
We got rid of Sturm... wait who?? I forgot he even played for us.

Now,

We got Garrison cause he was second in D-man scoring last year and is a BC native who has potential to get better.
We got Booth cause he is a top-6 forward and will make an impact in his many years here. (Just you have patience)

MG's time will be determined by what he does with Lou/Cory/Eddie.... and that is all. AV is a good coach but he cannot be absolved of all wrong in this case. Coaches learn too.

Keep your stick on the ice.
  • 0
Posted Image
"Louuuuuuuuuu!" - Last game Attended: Vancouver vs. Penguins
Email me

#28 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,684 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:37 AM

If you can't see a trend then I doubt there is hope for you. I couldn't be more explicit.

I said Hodgson may have been excusable, so we agree. As for Kassian, you say "he has potential) again you agree. However he hasn't answered the need, and won't for another 2 seasons imo. Sulzer at least had potential to play in the NHL..............but Gragnani and the 2 plugs we sent to the Wolves? So where's your point. We are worse off with the departure of Salo AND Rome AND Ehrhoff.........we get Garrison.

Salo would not have asked for the contract he got in Tampa (opinion based on other players)............but in fact his loss to our team almost says he IS worth what he is getting, given his impact there. I see no correlation to pre-season remarks I made and Salo, and NO Garrison isn't just as effective. He is all over the place and it's having the reverse effect on this team Salo had. Maybe Garrison will come round, the question is when and can we wait that long.

My point about Booth has nothing to do with Raymond. Raymond HAS proved to be a fit and considering the the disparity in Salary my point is we could have done a lot better for $4.2m. I'm more worried about where Booth's head is to be honest and if I thought that would change then I might be convinced. He just doesn't appear to be a team player and he's not good enough to be anything else. It's time he realised that.

I am not favouring AV, I'm saying it is hard to lay ALL the blame on the coach when this is obviously a partnership. If MG had got AV some ready to go pieces, and recognised that the team needed more size and pushback after the Boston series then I would have laid it all on AV. He has patently failed to do that and is therefor culpable in the stalling of this team big time.


So leading the team in goals and being 7 th in the NHL in goals isn't enough?
  • 0

#29 cloutier123

cloutier123

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:46 AM

First off "AV should carry the can" was stupid.

Trading COHO (midget-boy) playing 3rd line center and Sulzer (not "Sultzer") a mediocare cast off for Kassian (true-champ) and Gragnani, another cast off. A great trade, Kassian will help this team more than midget-boy and or Sulzer ever could. nuff said.

"That said he should have devised a package that got something "hot" for the pending campaign. He didn't."
Kassian's 4 goals in 6 games, leading the Canucks in scoring is "hot". Nuff said.

Salo should have stayed. He was a core part to this team for many years, and he scored alot of big goals. Salo's career is almost wrapped up, replacing him with home-town Garrison was a smart choice.

David Booth. He hasn't earned his Nuck stripes. It goes without saying that I hope he does.

"Oh and we lumbered the Aquilnis with the expensive Reinprecht as part of the deal."
The Aquilini family are billionaires they can easily afford to pay Reinprecht a few mil to play in the minors, it's a non-issue.

We have the best GM and Coach in the NHL. Nuff said.
  • 0

#30 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:49 AM

I'm definitely seeing a trend, but it's actually for mediocre threads in a forum filled with other mediocre threads all about the same topic.


  • 0

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....






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.