Vancanwincup Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 The complete opposite. A player whom nobody can deny had dropped significantly in on ice performance after a major injury, was not nearly as effective as before his injury. I believe Manny to be very classy, what does that have to do with him playing hockey ? He was not contributing enough all while having an issue with his vision not improving and as was stated before this could be a major safety concern moving forward. Not only was Manny given the opportunity by the team to rehab, and get into game form, the player and team alsready discussed the potential and options which unfolded as the Canucks placing him on the IR. I don't see how a team going out of their way to accomodate a player and try and keep him playing for them is in any way pushing said player into early retirement ? There is zero reason for a team to work with a player as much as they had with Manny, they would have been well within their right to buy him out or whatever options they could be afforded in Manny's situation. It;s too bad for Manny, but Vancouver did nothing but go out of their way for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockhart Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Does Manny not realize even disregarding his "safety" that he still sucks post-injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Thats certainly one way to spin it. I don't think it was Schaefer's intention to be sent down when Burrows returned, as he announced his retirement from the NHL soon after. If that was Gillis' tactic, that in itself is deceitful to Schaefer. The team had proven they could sign their depth players to one-way contracts, i.e. Joel Perreault. AV cites wanting "younger players" as the reason they didn't sign Morrison, yet they signed Schaefer. A bit of a hypocrital move in that sense. Morrison, meanwhile, was not offered a contract of any kind, not even a two-way deal to consider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Well, whatever the reason, I can tell you this: Manny with one eye is still a better option than Andrew Ebbett. He is still the best faceoff man we have, and can kill penalties better than Ebbett, and is a bigger body presence and has the leadership and intangibles. Look. Hockey is a contact sport and it is dangerous out there - especially if you can't see out of one eye. I get that. But to shut a player down because of it? Hockey is his life - that's what he put his entire life towards. I think Manny wants to leave it all on the ice even if that means he may get seriously injured again. There are always risks, and Manny has a slightly higher risk than other players because of his eye. But to shut him down because of that? I don't believe in that. At the same time, because the Canucks have the ample cap space and because Manny is still a more viable option than some of our depth players, it doesn't make sense for the Canucks to shut him down other than for the actual best intentions for Manny's long term health. If anything, they could have made him the 13th forward because he is still valuable. So I don't buy any of the conspiracy crap that people are spewing that Gillis is doing this for some sick selfish reason for his team. Although I don't agree with the decision, this is 100% for Manny, not for Gillis' own benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieCrumbs Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 MG is slimy. He's very good with his words though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xur Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I hope they trade Manny so he can continue to play in the NHL. I really lioke the guy and although I would want him to remain as a part of the management here, I respect him too much to be that selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I hope they trade Manny so he can continue to play in the NHL. I really lioke the guy and although I would want him to remain as a part of the management here, I respect him too much to be that selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 If Gillis could trade our Cody, he certainly could have orchestrated 9/11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 How have we both not been banned yet - they wrote that rule about logic and common sense in invisible ink, didn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I hope they trade Manny so he can continue to play in the NHL. I really lioke the guy and although I would want him to remain as a part of the management here, I respect him too much to be that selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 THe MG hate and general idiocy displayed in this thread is so typical of folk who know little about the NHL .. it would be funny if it were not purposefully negative and misguided .. where does all the angst come from? .. the Missus won't let you have the remote? .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 THe MG hate and general idiocy displayed in this thread is so typical of folk who know little about the NHL .. it would be funny if it were not purposefully negative and misguided .. where does all the angst come from? .. the Missus won't let you have the remote? .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.