Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 6 votes

Should The Canucks Have Gone After Matt Carle Instead of Garrison?


  • Please log in to reply
99 replies to this topic

#61 Moonshinefe

Moonshinefe

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,172 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:46 AM

I'm not going to whine like a crybaby over our team winning their last 6.
  • 0

#62 Derp...

Derp...

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,363 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 12

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:47 AM

+7 hmm so he's been involved in goals even if he's not been the one to shoot or make the last two passes. and obviously he's been solid on the D side of things. What were you expecting exactly Karlsson numbers? or Enstrom numbers!? He's not a European he's canadian and plays with heart and come playoff time you will be loving the JG5 effect trust me :emot-parrot:
  • 1
linden Vey Sig

 


#63 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,728 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:51 AM

Ryan Suter and Shea Weber are busts.

Fall apart when they get split up.
  • 0

#64 Zack_Kassians_Elbow

Zack_Kassians_Elbow

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 12

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:57 AM

No matter which way you slice it folks its evident Jason Garrsion has been a bust with a measly 2 points in 12 games played for the Vancouver Canucks. Being a huuuge Free Agent acquisition everyone was expecting a difference maker, but it could be argued keeping Salo might have been the wiser choice.

I think the Canucks made a regrettable decision in signing Garrison and the brass were more enamored by the fact Garrison was a BC boy. Similiar to the Hamuis effect when they signed Dan during Free Agency a couple years ago.

It's looking more and more like another Florida Panther acquisition gone bad i.e Ballard, Duco, Reinprecht, Oreskevich etc.. Now if we re-signed Salo, signed Matt Carle and waived/traded/demoted Ballard, Malhotra, Raymond our power play would not suck like it does. Matt Carle is a stud and is an upgraded Christian Erhoff. Imagine him on our PP.. Suffice to say it would be lights out for the opposition.

Willing to give it a bit longer before I render my verdict on Jason but frankly it's not looking all rosy and sunny. I'm starting to get buyer's remorse on Garrison. Please don't let it be another Ballard situation.


Like many other posters have said already Garrison is not meant to be an offensive defenseman, he's actually adjusted quite well and i like how he clears the front of the net. Our powerplay is not up to par because we are missing Kes, look what happened to our PP after he got hurt in the SJ series it was non existent vs Boston, also having Kesler and Booth back gives us a more deadly 2nd unit. I honestly do not know why you want to get rid of Ray and Ballard, they have surprised me this year and have contributed a lot to our success.
  • 0

#65 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:59 AM

No matter which way you slice it folks its evident Jason Garrsion has been a bust with a measly 2 points in 12 games played for the Vancouver Canucks. Being a huuuge Free Agent acquisition everyone was expecting a difference maker, but it could be argued keeping Salo might have been the wiser choice.

I think the Canucks made a regrettable decision in signing Garrison and the brass were more enamored by the fact Garrison was a BC boy. Similiar to the Hamuis effect when they signed Dan during Free Agency a couple years ago.

It's looking more and more like another Florida Panther acquisition gone bad i.e Ballard, Duco, Reinprecht, Oreskevich etc.. Now if we re-signed Salo, signed Matt Carle and waived/traded/demoted Ballard, Malhotra, Raymond our power play would not suck like it does. Matt Carle is a stud and is an upgraded Christian Erhoff. Imagine him on our PP.. Suffice to say it would be lights out for the opposition.

Willing to give it a bit longer before I render my verdict on Jason but frankly it's not looking all rosy and sunny. I'm starting to get buyer's remorse on Garrison. Please don't let it be another Ballard situation.


Posted Image


regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#66 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 666 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:41 AM

Garrison scored almost half of his goals and 13 of his assists 5 on 5, on a Florida team that was 27th in offence. And you dont think he could easily beat or match those numbers when playing with one of the top offences in the league? Those numbers were not luck.
Garrison has a rocket of a shot, but like many defencemen when they move to new teams there is always a transition period as they get comfortable with a new team and system. Right now he is just trying to not make to many mistakes while playing a responsible game and getting used to a new partner.

He is already doing very well defensively, the offence will come with time, and right now I would much rather have a defencemen that a defencemen who recons himself a foward...


First, going from a bad team to a good team doesn't automatically mean a player's stats will improve. Playing on a deeper team often means you get less opportunity, and Garrison is getting 2 minutes less ice time a game so far.

Secondly, it is just incontrovertible that his shooting percentage in the first half of last year was unsustainable. In the first 37 games of last year, he shot 12.5% (11 goals on 88 shots.) That is basically impossible for a D-man to sustain over a full season. For comparison, here are the best shooting percentages for some notable defenseman. Remember, these are their single season bests, not career averages:

Shea Weber - 11.2% (06/07)
Zdeno Chara - 9.5% (01/02)
Nicklas Lidstrom - 11.1% (94/95)
Erik Karlsson - 9.7% (11/12)
Al MacInnis - 10.2% (87/88)
Chris Pronger - 7.8% (06/07)
Scott Niedermayer - 9.2% (07/08)

The only one of these players to have two years above 10% was Nick Lidstrom, who did it all of twice. In other words - Lidstrom, MacInnis, Pronger and Niedermayer combined played more than 75 years, and never once did one of them shoot as well as Garrison did to start last year. So either he got lucky last year, or he's an inherently better shooter than all of the players I listed above. I'm gonna say he was lucky.

Having said that, I think he is a good player, all I'm saying is that if you're basing your expectations on his 16 goals from last year, you will be very disappointed going forward. Even Hall of Fame players can't sustain what he did last year.

Edited by boxiebrown, 14 February 2013 - 01:43 AM.

  • 0

#67 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,271 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:43 AM

Ryan Suter and Shea Weber are busts.

Fall apart when they get split up.


Shea Weber has 1 point in 13 games this season.

OMG he's a bust! :frantic:
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#68 Papayas

Papayas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,606 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 09

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:30 AM

Stopped reading at, "Jason Garrison has been a bust with a measly 2 points in 12 games."


I stop reading when I saw the ops name... He said garrison is a bust? Nice...
  • 0

#69 Canuckfan1968

Canuckfan1968

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 05

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:03 AM

wow you guys are amazing if I can count the times people complained about not having enough canadian talent on this team. So MG signs Garrison, a canadian boy. why we have these high expectations for him too match what he did in florida. Give your head a shake, like alot of people said he doesnt have a great setup guy, so its hard for him to get that big booming shot off. I also haven't seen him getting alot of power play time and yes its only 12 games. He's better then salo china glass.
  • 0

#70 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:10 AM

I know it's been said before, but it's worth saying again. Anyone who was expecting big offensive numbers out of Garrison this year was fooling themselves. He scored 16 goals last year based on an unsustainable hot streak - he had 11 goals in the first 37 games, and then only 5 in the last 45, when his shooting percentage inevitably regressed to the mean. He was simply never going to score at a 16 goal pace this year.

Also, if people were expecting a slick passing point man who would rack up assists, they weren't paying attention. He only had 17 last year, despite getting a ton of PP time.

Having said all that, it was still a very good signing, and to call him a bust is completely ridiculous. Garrison is an excellent shut down defenseman - one of the best in the league by some measures. He's already fulfilling that role here. He has the second highest Corsi of D-men on our team. He's slightly behind Ballard, but Garrison has faced much more difficult competition. In other words, he's arguably been our best defenseman so far.

Anyone expecting an offensive dynamo was being foolish, but we should appreciate what we've got - a top notch shut down d-man who can chip in on offense, at a very reasonable price.


Couldn't have said it any better myself.

All the Garrison haters are morons who just watched his goal clips and have no idea what kind of player he was with Florida. His Corsi numbers were phenomenal last year, and again this year are good so far.
  • 2

RIP LB RR PD


#71 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:26 AM

To OP

You need to acquire some patience.

I'm not over the moon with Garrison but that is because he never came with what I wanted in the first place.......a nasty push back edge to his game.
However he is here now and it is too early to say he is a bust. He needs to work on his gunnery sight though, that's for sure.

As for Ballard, as soon as he got fit and was played decent minutes on his natural side, he was the player we signed.......a thoroughbred D man, with a deceptive gliding style, a good slap when it's set up and a mean mf when the occasion calls for it. Over and above that he has terrific chemistry with Tanev. You only had to watch Tanev in Chicago to see how he missed his sidekick.

Edited by Bodee, 14 February 2013 - 03:27 AM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#72 Canuck or Die

Canuck or Die

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,518 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:27 AM

Garrison will be an absolute beast for us once he finally settles in, especially in the playoffs. I'll laugh when you haters will eat your words.
  • 0
EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GO CANUCKS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


We WILL be drinking from Lord Stanley's Cup soon, Canucks Nation!

Posted Image

#73 Dildo Faggins

Dildo Faggins

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:37 AM

The Canucks defense has been very solid so far this season, and Garrison is a big part of the reason. Ballard is finally coming into his own and playing they way he was expected and Garrison adds to that dimension and makes the team more balanced. Even when missing Kesler and Booth and with the Sedins still finding their game, the Canucks are racking up the wins and are very hard to play against. In time Garrison wil start unleashing his huge slap shot and be used on the PP, but right now he's focusing on effective shut down defense, and he's doing a great job.
  • 0

#74 mcgillnuck

mcgillnuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,504 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 06

Posted 14 February 2013 - 08:58 AM

I am actually impressed by Garrison's defensive play. Big and strong guy, capable of clearing people away from the net.. I didn't expect him to be as good as he has been...

His offensive play has been disappointing so far for sure though. He doesn't shoot the puck enough, and when he does, it's usually blocked or misses the net.. We are gonna need him to start producing soon


Spot on.

After watching Garrison take point shots I'm thinking I never gave enough credit to Salo and Edler for finding ways to get pucks through to the net. He obviously has a rocket, but everytime I see Garrison wind up I'm thinking "well we're about to lose the puck."

But defensively he's been better than advertised so it's tough to complain too much. If he finds a way to hit the net he'll be a great addition.
  • 0

Props to canuckbuddy for the sig

#75 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,105 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:18 AM

Spot on.

After watching Garrison take point shots I'm thinking I never gave enough credit to Salo and Edler for finding ways to get pucks through to the net. He obviously has a rocket, but everytime I see Garrison wind up I'm thinking "well we're about to lose the puck."

But defensively he's been better than advertised so it's tough to complain too much. If he finds a way to hit the net he'll be a great addition.


I contribute that mostly to Newell Brown who is a complete idiot. He doesn't teach our players anything on the PP as we continually make the same mistakes on it and have for years. Salo and Edler, although they scored were not good at getting the puck on net either.

Also, Edler is no where near the player that Campbell is. Campbell is one of the slickest players in the league. He has speed, calm, skill, and intelligence. Edler couldn't make a quick read if his life depended on it.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#76 Onions

Onions

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 449 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:48 AM

Luo and Schnieds are busts, 0G 0A between them and we're paying 9+ mil for them.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#77 kloubek

kloubek

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,565 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 06

Posted 14 February 2013 - 09:49 AM

I think it is hard for a player to adjust to a completely new system.

Look at Ballard. He's been one of our more solid d-men, and it took him forever to "get it". I see some pretty good talent from Garrison, but I'm sure everyone was aware of the potential risk of signing him to a big contract with a fairly small sample size of his abilities.

I think it is too early to call him a bust - especially considering he leads the team in +/-.
  • 0
Biggest Canucks Fan this Side of the Rockies.

#78 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:05 AM

:picard:
  • 0

#79 Jinx_RK17

Jinx_RK17

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Joined: 27-March 12

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:13 AM

It's only been 12 games why the hell hasn't this guy learned a completely new different system in such a short amount of time god dammit i want a 30 goal Dman NOW!
  • 0

#80 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,245 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:30 AM

Matt Carle is a great puck moving D for sure, but I think what Garrison adds to our defense is of much greater value.
As others have said, he will be a 'breath of fresh air' in the playoffs. Just can't see a Byfuggy type bullying our goalies. He's a massive guy, who will withstand the punishment during the playoffs. The bonus will be when his offensive side kicks in.
  • 0

#81 5minutesinthebox

5minutesinthebox

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,683 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 09

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:50 AM

I still can't figure out why everyone thinks his season was so great last year. He scored less than 0.5 points a game. There are lots do D that average better than that.


Wake up, he's a defensemen. Look at his defensive stats. On top of that being 16 goals on one of the worst offensive teams in the league (3rd among d men in the league), and a team leading + 6 (and the only + d man on the Panthers).

His defence is far more valuable than his offence. The fact that he is a team leading + 7 with only 2 points speaks volumes.
  • 0

#82 5minutesinthebox

5minutesinthebox

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,683 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 09

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:10 AM

First, going from a bad team to a good team doesn't automatically mean a player's stats will improve. Playing on a deeper team often means you get less opportunity, and Garrison is getting 2 minutes less ice time a game so far.

Secondly, it is just incontrovertible that his shooting percentage in the first half of last year was unsustainable. In the first 37 games of last year, he shot 12.5% (11 goals on 88 shots.) That is basically impossible for a D-man to sustain over a full season. For comparison, here are the best shooting percentages for some notable defenseman. Remember, these are their single season bests, not career averages:

Shea Weber - 11.2% (06/07)
Zdeno Chara - 9.5% (01/02)
Nicklas Lidstrom - 11.1% (94/95)
Erik Karlsson - 9.7% (11/12)
Al MacInnis - 10.2% (87/88)
Chris Pronger - 7.8% (06/07)
Scott Niedermayer - 9.2% (07/08)

The only one of these players to have two years above 10% was Nick Lidstrom, who did it all of twice. In other words - Lidstrom, MacInnis, Pronger and Niedermayer combined played more than 75 years, and never once did one of them shoot as well as Garrison did to start last year. So either he got lucky last year, or he's an inherently better shooter than all of the players I listed above. I'm gonna say he was lucky.

Having said that, I think he is a good player, all I'm saying is that if you're basing your expectations on his 16 goals from last year, you will be very disappointed going forward. Even Hall of Fame players can't sustain what he did last year.


Actually if you want proof that going from a bad team offensive team to a good one wont improve ones stats, look at half of the players the Canucks have brought in over the years. Ehrhoff, Samuelsson, Hamhuis, Higgins all had either career years or a complete resurgence after coming to the Canucks.

You can call it whatever you want, but luck isnt something that happens over that period of time. He just had more room to shoot earlier in the season, than he did once other teams started to focus on his shooting. That being said his assist numbers rose dramatically over the 2nd half of the season. So far we have barely seen anyone even set Garrison up with a a proper one timer at all, which is necessary in order to get a decent shot from the point.

Im not saying he will shoot 12% for his career, but he has a rocket and it is pretty damn accurate when it is utilized correctly. To think that he couldnt out match his previous season numbers while playing for this team is pretty narrow minded. He doesnt need to be nearly as accurate, he just needs to shoot more often. And being that he is on a shoot first offensive minded team like the Canucks, I would expect him to. WIll he do it this year? Probably not, but then I didnt expect him to jump right in and leave off where he ended last season. Thats just not realistic, but I gaurantee he will beat those point numbers with the Canucks eventually.

All of this is besides the point. What we do agree on (and why I liked the signing in the first place) is the fact that Garrison is an excellent defencemen. That to me is far more valuable to this team than potting the odd goal.
  • 0

#83 Horvat x 53

Horvat x 53

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 152 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:12 AM

Although having carle would be nice i don't think it could have happened. Carle makings 5.25 i believe and garrison makes 4.6

talking about resigning salo GM MG i dont think was looking at a 3.75 range rather than a 1-2 range

Don't forget luongo is still around and cap dips next season.

Ballard is playing well with Tanev as a steady partner, vice versa.
Mayray is one of our top goal scorers at the moment.
Garrison looks slow and shaky at times but it's only 12 games in and Van is 8-2-2.
  • 0

uA4Bucw.png

 

Leaguegaming.com 

Largest 6's league in the world for the xbox360/one

 

LGHL S18 Minnesota Wild LW 

LGPS S2 Money Tournament Dream Team LW 


#84 jono2009

jono2009

    Comets Regular

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

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:16 AM

why did i open this thread?
  • 0

#85 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 666 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:30 AM

Actually if you want proof that going from a bad team offensive team to a good one wont improve ones stats, look at half of the players the Canucks have brought in over the years. Ehrhoff, Samuelsson, Hamhuis, Higgins all had either career years or a complete resurgence after coming to the Canucks.

You can call it whatever you want, but luck isnt something that happens over that period of time. He just had more room to shoot earlier in the season, than he did once other teams started to focus on his shooting. That being said his assist numbers rose dramatically over the 2nd half of the season. So far we have barely seen anyone even set Garrison up with a a proper one timer at all, which is necessary in order to get a decent shot from the point.

Im not saying he will shoot 12% for his career, but he has a rocket and it is pretty damn accurate when it is utilized correctly. To think that he couldnt out match his previous season numbers while playing for this team is pretty narrow minded. He doesnt need to be nearly as accurate, he just needs to shoot more often. And being that he is on a shoot first offensive minded team like the Canucks, I would expect him to. WIll he do it this year? Probably not, but then I didnt expect him to jump right in and leave off where he ended last season. Thats just not realistic, but I gaurantee he will beat those point numbers with the Canucks eventually.

All of this is besides the point. What we do agree on (and why I liked the signing in the first place) is the fact that Garrison is an excellent defencemen. That to me is far more valuable to this team than potting the odd goal.


I agree that it's not impossible for him to score 16 goals again, but it will be very difficult. Even if you assume an 8% shooting percentage (which is still very good for a defenseman, but not impossible) he would need to get 200 shots to score 16 goals. Last year he had 168 in 77 games, so increasing that to 200 on a team in which he's not guaranteed PP time is a very tall order. So far this year he has 19 shots in 12 games, which is a slower rate than he had last year.

You make a good point about his assists and the second half, though, and it kind of illustrates how he was affected by puck luck. I would guess that a lot of those assists were off rebounds or deflections on the powerplay - shots that were going in for him in the first half. It shows that any drop in his shooting percentage should be partially compensated in more assists. Going forward, I think it's reasonable to expect between 5-10 goals and 30-35 points for Garrison.
  • 0

#86 gurn

gurn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,516 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:39 AM

" I don't hate him or anything, i just know he's pretty much on the ice like 80% the time we're scored on the PP. "


Since the Canucks have only given up 3 or 4 short handed goals this problem you see in his play could just be a temporary statistical blip.
Also as he is not playing on the powerplay anymore I don't think this problem you see will continue to be a problem.

Edited by gurn, 14 February 2013 - 11:40 AM.

  • 0

#87 TheCammer

TheCammer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,634 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:53 PM

This OP never brings anything of value to the table. Trolling or the most negative dud on the planet.

Garrison has been fine.
  • 0
Posted Image

#88 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,972 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:59 PM

lol @ bust

shut up


It's looking that way thus far. Nobody can argue differently.

Edited by Tortorella's Rant, 14 February 2013 - 01:59 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#89 Viking13

Viking13

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 538 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 03

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:01 PM

12 games in a new system... no training camp really... not yet acclimatized on his new team... really, was this question worth asking???
  • 0
Bush league fans have made Luongo the scapegoat for Vancouver's shortfall... Typical...

#90 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,728 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:03 PM

It's looking that way thus far. Nobody can argue differently.

No it isn't and yes they can.
  • 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.