Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

Hesitant to pull the trigger?


  • Please log in to reply
185 replies to this topic

#1 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:47 AM

*
POPULAR

Edit Post Iginla trade. Seeing as so many have misunderstood the point of the commentary below. I have summarized it here. It will save you time and me headaches having to repeat myself explaining this. The comments below are examples.

The hypothesis is rather simple:

This post is not about iginla or any other player in particular. It IS about a confluence of errors by MG that has put us in a position to not compete for the cup today, not compete for it tomorrow and not be in the position to go aquire the players to help us compete now when we have a window. As I mentioned below - we are 'stuck in the middle'. Not good enough to win now, competitive yes, no depth to see a bright future, and no depth to trade to get us over the hump now. These are all things that MG stated he would change taking over from Nonis. This team is largely the same. Its depth is argubaly worse as is its pipeline.


I was initially a fan of MG's when he first came. Given he had years of experience evaluating players as an agent (clearly he had to focus on trying to find the diamonds in the rough and sign them), his desire to address the whole organization from player development in the minors to ensuring his NHL players were well taken care of, he seemed like he was going to come in and make a big difference.

5-6 years (however many he's been here) later, my opinion of him is changing. Not 'changed' yet but starting to lean to a view of happy with above average play and competing for a cup vs. WINNING one.

Now don't get me wrong, I believe he wants to win, but doesn't have the nerve to make the 'big move'. Part of this is due to lack of depth, but then whom do we blame for that? He has been here 5 years and honestly the depth of this organization is probably as bad as its ever been. Here are my thoughts.

1. He has made some good moves, lets not be one sided, and for those he needs to be commended. Signing the Sedins to decent contracts, Schnieds, Edler, Hamhuis, finding Tanev, Burrows, even Garrison is looking like he's coming around.

2. The team went to the cup and has been winning in the regular season. Erhoff for a bag of pucks was a steal and he was not worth what Buffalo paid, so I give him credit on both the catch and the release.

However, since the cup finals he has made alot of bad moves and now at a time when this team is really at a crossroads, seems like he's happy to stand pat. At a time when you see pittsburgh going after Morrow, rumours on Iginla going there, Boston, Chicago, we say we don't want a winger. MG doesn't want a winger with heart and grit? Size, who can score? Even as a rental? This is where his errors begin.


1. He has incorrectly evaluated the character of his team, and ability to compete in the post season. In 2011 his team got hot at the right time and they had a much grittier mix of players. Moroever, his current players that were on that roster, were playing much harder, like they had something to prove (Kesler, Edler, Bieksa, even Lou).

2. He then felt, because of that play, he needed only to 'tinker' with his lineup. Well last year's exit, how we seem to get manhandled by larger teams should say enough, but he still ignores this, almost delusionally thinking, perhaps due to denial, that his choices were correct and they will come around and compete when its time. This is his fatal flaw.

3. Adding marginal players with big salaries who have not played to those salaries. Booth - size, sped and hands apparently - he's been a bust, lets face it. Overpaid for a 30 goal year and he's shown none of that here. Perhaps its just the wrong system but he doesn't use his size, hasn't scored and doesn't seem to be a threat on the ice.

4. Wasting money on ballard. I love ballard and i think he could be a top 4. But there is no room for him and AV hates him. So why did MG spend 4 ml on a player we didnt need? Better off finding a stay at home tough dman for 2-3 ml who makes few errors and is good with the first pass.

5. Timing of the CoHo deal. No need to flog a dead horse here. I love Kassian but the timing was atrocious.

6. Signing Lu to the monster deal when he KNEW he had a stud in Schnieder. His ability to judge talent should have told him, lets at least hedge. I don't anticipate ever trading the guy but keep some flexibility given I should be able to see Schnieds has potential.

7. Allowing Torres to leave over 750k. We lacked intensity and grit and he lets it walk. Its showing now and will in the playoffs

8. Best for last. A lack of willingess to 'go for it'. With Jerome Iginla available, Vancouver on his list, he comes out and says no wingers. Well why is that? Well 1. We need a center. Well why is that? Well he's failed to create depth at the MOST important position in hockey - that is his fault. In addition we have a plethora of wingers. Too bad they are either all too small to compete in the playoffs or are plugs. Futher, we have a lack of prospect depth, not allowing us to provide the other team with enough incentive to trade with us, without taking a roster player (ie Pitts has incredible depth in their system on D and they haven't had great draft positions either).

Jerome Iginla gives the 2013 Canucks a fighting chance at the cup. He brings heart, a winner's attitude, leadership, 30 real goals, a guy who can play on the pp, a guy who will teach Kesler, Kassian, Edler what it means to compete and want it - but we don't want that?

MG is showing us, he's happy with a team that competes in the regular season, and has an outside chance at the cup if it gets lucky, but isn't willing to go all in. Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh, are all trying to go all in and they have younger teams.

What this tells me is MG's strategy is really to be what we call in business - "Stuck in the middle". He won't go for it, but he's not weak enough to rebuild. We're starting to look like San Jose, Calgary of the 2000's and soon Toronto.

One would suggest he has to make a choice, my argument is, his confluence of errors means he already has made his choices and now is paying for them.

To have the Sedins in their prime and not be in a position to challenge for a cup is terrible. They are slowing, we can all see it. Kesler is constantly hurt and an egomaniac so not addressing our issues at center is unbelievable. Kassian is being misused and is really our only player with size AND hands, Luongo and his 5.3 million. are wasted on the bench when at worst he could have brought cap releif and picks we could have used as part of a deadline rental.

MG has scuttled this team due to his own willingess to accept mediocrity.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 28 March 2013 - 04:57 AM.

  • 17

#2 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,245 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:55 AM

*
POPULAR

3) booth doesnt use his size? he has underperformed no doubt but one thing he does use is his size and speed.

4) ballard was acquired before hamhuis and was the safety valve incase we didnt get him.

5) i think the canucks knew that with keslers injuries last year was going to be a very difficult task to go anywhere.

7) you have to give to get, we dont have the young assets that boston/pittsburgh have been handed to them by the leafs and to a lesser extent the hurricanes. We arent in a position to trade a top prospect and a 1st round pick for a rental player.


edit: rest of your post is just drivel. there has been 4-5 trades this year total, there isnt a whole lot on the market.

Edited by stexx, 27 March 2013 - 11:56 AM.

  • 5

#3 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,471 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:56 AM

*
POPULAR

Your way off dude. Sorry I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Being a GM is not easy as you think. A lot of moves are made not knowing how it will impact the team. Ballard was pretty much equal to Dan Hamhius when we acquired them back in 2010. No one else can say otherwise. They were = in terms of calibre.


You mentioned we need to go after Iginla,b ut questioned the ballard trade, at least Keith Ballard we get to hang onto him for 5 years. How bout Iginla? he might jet, and will cost more then what we traded Ballard for. So your argument is inaccurate, and really, full of crap.

What I always do, Is ask the person bashing gillis one question.

What would you do?

But they are too chicken crap to answer because they have no clue.

So what would you do? Who would you trade for Iginla? Please answer.
  • 13

Players Nikolaj Ehlers have been compared too by the fan base of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

1 Pavel Bure

2 Markus Naslund

3 Nathan Mackkinon

4 Jonathan Drouin.

5 Jonathan Tavares

 

http://bleacherrepor...d-top-prospects

combine results.  Ehlers 5'11 162 lbs of solid rock.  


#4 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,367 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:58 AM

There's almost no "big, bold moves" happening around the league in case you hadn't noticed. It's the CBA, not MG that you have an issue with.
  • 3
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#5 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:59 AM

3) booth doesnt use his size? he has underperformed no doubt but one thing he does use is his size and speed.

4) ballard was acquired before hamhuis and was the safety valve incase we didnt get him.

5) i think the canucks knew that with keslers injuries last year was going to be a very difficult task to go anywhere.

7) you have to give to get, we dont have the young assets that boston/pittsburgh have been handed to them by the leafs and to a lesser extent the hurricanes. We arent in a position to trade a top prospect and a 1st round pick for a rental player.


edit: rest of your post is just drivel. there has been 4-5 trades this year total, there isnt a whole lot on the market.



3- Booth had one goal - an empty netter. If you think he's played to his contract in Vancouver -well I can't help your blindness.

4. a 4 ml safety valve for a number 6 d? Wow smart decision

5 - yes so why no trade for a center?

7 - yes we dont have young assets..why is that those teams competing for players have been finishing close to us every year since MG has been here, drafting around us not at the top...so?
  • 3

#6 schneider

schneider

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 11

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:00 PM

0/10 thread
  • 1

#7 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,497 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:01 PM

I read the first couple paragraphs and then part of the third. There is no need to read the rest of it IMO.

If you think you can do a better job then go to RA and apply for MG's job.

You have no idea what MG discusses with teams, what deals are close and fall apart etc.
  • 3

#8 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:01 PM

Your way off dude. Sorry I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Being a GM is not easy as you think. A lot of moves are made not knowing how it will impact the team. Ballard was pretty much equal to Dan Hamhius when we acquired them back in 2010. No one else can say otherwise. They were = in terms of calibre.


You mentioned we need to go after Iginla,b ut questioned the ballard trade, at least Keith Ballard we get to hang onto him for 5 years. How bout Iginla? he might jet, and will cost more then what we traded Ballard for. So your argument is inaccurate, and really, full of crap.

What I always do, Is ask the person bashing gillis one question.

What would you do?

But they are too chicken crap to answer because they have no clue.

So what would you do? Who would you trade for Iginla? Please answer.



Yes I would trade for Iginla - what part of that don't you get? its plain as day in my post. If you think this team is not going to get knocked out of the first or second round this year, you're drinking too much koolaid kid.

We don't have the size nor intensity to match up against a number of teams in the west.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 27 March 2013 - 12:05 PM.

  • 3

#9 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,311 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:02 PM

*
POPULAR

C-

Please see me after class.
  • 15

FWYIerW.png


#10 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:05 PM

*
POPULAR

Your way off dude. Sorry I disagree with pretty much everything you said. Being a GM is not easy as you think. A lot of moves are made not knowing how it will impact the team. Ballard was pretty much equal to Dan Hamhius when we acquired them back in 2010. No one else can say otherwise. They were = in terms of calibre.


You mentioned we need to go after Iginla,b ut questioned the ballard trade, at least Keith Ballard we get to hang onto him for 5 years. How bout Iginla? he might jet, and will cost more then what we traded Ballard for. So your argument is inaccurate, and really, full of crap.

What I always do, Is ask the person bashing gillis one question.

What would you do?

But they are too chicken crap to answer because they have no clue.

So what would you do? Who would you trade for Iginla? Please answer.



Way off? You disagree with everything i said?

1. You disagree that 4.25 ml for Booth who has done nothing was a good deal? On that logic Hansen will deserve 7 million when he resigns

2. Ballard - 4.25 million is good for a number 6 dman? That is where he has played since day one and he has been in and out of the lineup and is on the wing - meaning he is considered the least valuable defenceman. Argue that with AV

3. 5.3 million for a backup goalie is good?

4. Not addressing our problems at center for the 6 years he's been here is good?

5. Not having depth in our system is good?

Wow take off your rose colored glasses
  • 11

#11 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:05 PM

Just a little while ago, I felt exactly the way you are thinking right now, but I realized that nothing is easy in the NHL. There are 29 other GM's who also want the very best for their team , and they aren't giving up players very easily. MG can't make that big bold move if no one wants to deal with him. Luongo's contract is probably ridiculously tough to move, and his cap hit isn't all that flowery.

It really isn't an easy job, so while I see where you're coming from, there isn't much we can do at this point but hope that a team becomes desperate.
  • 3
Posted Image

#12 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:06 PM

There's almost no "big, bold moves" happening around the league in case you hadn't noticed. It's the CBA, not MG that you have an issue with.


Its about Iginla - PLEASE READ THE WHOLE POST
  • 0

#13 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:09 PM

C-

Please see me after class.


ADD SOME VALUE PLEASE

OOps thats asking too much of you. I read other posts of yours. Carry on.
  • 1

#14 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:09 PM

0/10 thread


USELESS RESPONSE YOU'RE MY HERO
  • 1

#15 GLASSJAW

GLASSJAW

    LEGENDARY POSER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,907 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 04

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:10 PM

LOL @ Iginla.

Can you imagine the king's ransom that the flames would demand from us for Iginla?

Not worth it.
  • 0

1999_1.jpg
 
i'm not alone; i'll never be
 


#16 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,214 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:12 PM

I dunno I partially agree with you on it but I'm not counting him out yet.. last years deadline deals weren't very good. Granted we haven't seen the final rewards but yes the timing was off.

I think his timing overall is ok.. We are not in Pittsburgh's position to go for it. We need kesler to return to form before we think about selling the farm for a run.. Go ahead and add iginla for Jensen and a 1st but your not going anywhere if kes doesn't regain for this year. That is a major risk that I think he is spot on with his risk management.

I know the twins aren't getting younger but IMO this is not the year to go all in. A good centre addition and if kesler returning to form we can contend anyways.

If you can get a goalie trade done now then great that helps us this year. IMO lets get through this rash of injuries with a decent deadline pickup, not a home run. Then let kesler and edler have a solid offseason of getting strong and ready to be themselves and not a player struggling to find his way after injury.

Then you got another pack of picks, another first round gem, maybe another corrado steal to go along with Jensen gaunce corrado Schroeder. Maybe lain mallet or blomstrand looks promising?

When I break it down next year we will have the prospect pool to make some sacrifice and load the team up.

Be patient B2M, we got a chance to surprise this year and make a major run next year.. This window ain't closed yet!
  • 2

#17 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:16 PM

LOL @ Iginla.

Can you imagine the king's ransom that the flames would demand from us for Iginla?

Not worth it.


Depends on what it is. Reality is, everyone knows he's a rental. So no one will overpay and Calgary will face much the same situation as Lou, but worse. Do you get something for him and attempt to resign anyways in the summer. Or just re-sign.

The value will come down as the deadline approaches and giving up a roster player and a second rounder may do it.
  • 0

#18 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,299 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:18 PM

So much is assumption....do you really think the fans are privvy to what is going on behind the scenes? And just because a GM says something to the public doesn't mean it's "how it is"...it's a game that is played. Teams that seem desperate are played upon with regard to that. You have to say you're not going after something, at times, when you really are. It's how bargaining works.

If you go out with a laundry list of what you: want, need, are willing to pay/trade, etc. then you have no ability TO bargain...you put yourself in the passenger seat with someone else at the wheel. If you rush to a market where offers are accepted, do you say "I really, REALLY want/need that?" Or do you play it cool to see what you can work out? Buying a house? It's a chess board mentality.

GM's don't have the luxury of hindsight either...they must act based upon what they "think" at the time. Nothing is a given when it comes to human beings and their performance...too many variables. And the prices are inflated when everyone's in the market for the same, few available commodities.

He plays his hand close to his chest. He gives media friendly information that pacifies, but it doesn't mean he doesn't have an ace up his sleeve. It doesn't mean he hasn't tried things that just isn't public information.

Iginla is awesome...love him. But he's at the downside of his career and has slowed down a lot...for the $$$$ that he'll command, really?...do we really want to go in that direction?

We have some grit for the playoffs and this group, better than anyone, likely knows what a battle it will be...I think they're more prepared for that now.
  • 3

Posted Image


#19 Honky Cat

Honky Cat

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,635 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 10

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:20 PM

If there's no deal to be had,you dont/can't make it...saying that MG is 'timid' or has no balls is a bit of a laugh.
  • 1

#20 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:22 PM

I dunno I partially agree with you on it but I'm not counting him out yet.. last years deadline deals weren't very good. Granted we haven't seen the final rewards but yes the timing was off.

I think his timing overall is ok.. We are not in Pittsburgh's position to go for it. We need kesler to return to form before we think about selling the farm for a run.. Go ahead and add iginla for Jensen and a 1st but your not going anywhere if kes doesn't regain for this year. That is a major risk that I think he is spot on with his risk management.

I know the twins aren't getting younger but IMO this is not the year to go all in. A good centre addition and if kesler returning to form we can contend anyways.

If you can get a goalie trade done now then great that helps us this year. IMO lets get through this rash of injuries with a decent deadline pickup, not a home run. Then let kesler and edler have a solid offseason of getting strong and ready to be themselves and not a player struggling to find his way after injury.

Then you got another pack of picks, another first round gem, maybe another corrado steal to go along with Jensen gaunce corrado Schroeder. Maybe lain mallet or blomstrand looks promising?

When I break it down next year we will have the prospect pool to make some sacrifice and load the team up.

Be patient B2M, we got a chance to surprise this year and make a major run next year.. This window ain't closed yet!


Fair point, but that is the essence of my point. MG has sold us on "we're almost there" type attitude vs, we are going for it now. And this is not just this year. We all know/have known for years this team needed to address 4 things.

1. A real second line winger who can add scoring depth and take pressure away from Kesler

2. Depth at center

3. A puck moving Dman

4. Size on D

5. More grit

Now before the last run, MG made a great deal for Erhoff, which I credited. But he lost that and didn't replace it. All the other issues have not been addressed and that is the essence of my argument. He has got us no closer, really and if anything further away.The mix of this team is his responsibility and its not the type of mix that can win. We all know it. As canucks fans we hope and pray we're wrong but honestly, anyone who knows and watches hockey can tell you this is not a stanley cup team. Boston, Chicago, Pittsburgh are. Even if we made it to the conf finals we won't beat Chicago with this team. And No WAY in hell we'd beat Boston or Pittsburgh with our talent and compete level.
  • 0

#21 Gustavo Fring

Gustavo Fring

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 11

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:23 PM

With the way Schneiders playing, I don't think we need any trades. He is the saviour.
  • 0
Posted Image

#22 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:26 PM

So much is assumption....do you really think the fans are privvy to what is going on behind the scenes? And just because a GM says something to the public doesn't mean it's "how it is"...it's a game that is played. Teams that seem desperate are played upon with regard to that. You have to say you're not going after something, at times, when you really are. It's how bargaining works.

If you go out with a laundry list of what you: want, need, are willing to pay/trade, etc. then you have no ability TO bargain...you put yourself in the passenger seat with someone else at the wheel. If you rush to a market where offers are accepted, do you say "I really, REALLY want/need that?" Or do you play it cool to see what you can work out? Buying a house? It's a chess board mentality.

GM's don't have the luxury of hindsight either...they must act based upon what they "think" at the time. Nothing is a given when it comes to human beings and their performance...too many variables. And the prices are inflated when everyone's in the market for the same, few available commodities.

He plays his hand close to his chest. He gives media friendly information that pacifies, but it doesn't mean he doesn't have an ace up his sleeve. It doesn't mean he hasn't tried things that just isn't public information.

Iginla is awesome...love him. But he's at the downside of his career and has slowed down a lot...for the $$$$ that he'll command, really?...do we really want to go in that direction?

We have some grit for the playoffs and this group, better than anyone, likely knows what a battle it will be...I think they're more prepared for that now.



Iginla's salary barely affects us if its a deadline deal and he's a UFA at the end of the year. We have no one in this organization with the heart that man has. And while he has slowed down, he still scored 32 on a crap team last year and is on pace for similar this year.

He wants a cup more than anyone, and that hunger is infectious in a room. You are measuring dollars when I am measuring character, desire and a willingess to do what it takes.

This team is not the same team as 2011 Deb. It doesn't have that heart. It doesn't have that drive. Iginla shocks this team back there. Moreover, he will show Kesler what it means to check your ego at the door and become the player he was during the Selke year, and also teach Kassian what it takes to be the best power forward in the game.

You and many others here are completely ignoring the intangibles and thats why you trade for Jerome Iginla.
  • 0

#23 GLASSJAW

GLASSJAW

    LEGENDARY POSER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,907 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 04

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:26 PM

If Brenden Morrow commands a pick and Joe Morrow, who hockeysfuture projects as being a solid top 4 player, then I don't want to see what Iginla would get.

And even if we had the resources to go get aged worldclass stars, we couldn't afford to sign him in the off season anyway. The Canucks only have 14 players under contract for next year, and we're already over the cap. How could we afford Iginla? That's one expensive rental, and not at all worth it imo.
  • 3

1999_1.jpg
 
i'm not alone; i'll never be
 


#24 ZephyrsSong

ZephyrsSong

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 10

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:28 PM

I'm just wondering what you would give up for Iginla.

Unless it's a guarantee that he gets us a cup, I wouldn't sell the farm to get Iginla.
  • 0

#25 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:29 PM

Honestly, I'm no big fan of MG but I think you have twisted so much of the down side to suit your argument.

The character of this team is if anything stronger imo than 2 years ago.

Do you even watch how they are playing and coping in adversity.

Sorry that's as far as I.m willing to go on this as I feel I would be wasting my time.

I think MG has failed the team only in his inability to bring in a big gritty sniper (of proven ability) and a bigger ass kicking 1st/2nd line D.
I don't like his rehabs. I would not have traded for Booth and I say that in the full knowledge that the guy has still to have a long injury free run.
Other than that I think he is doing a great job but he needs to do more.
  • 1
Kevin.jpg

#26 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:34 PM

Honestly, I'm no big fan of MG but I think you have twisted so much of the down side to suit your argument.

The character of this team is if anything stronger imo than 2 years ago.

Do you even watch how they are playing and coping in adversity.

Sorry that's as far as I.m willing to go on this as I feel I would be wasting my time.

I think MG has failed the team only in his inability to bring in a big gritty sniper (of proven ability) and a bigger ass kicking 1st/2nd line D.
I don't like his rehabs. I would not have traded for Booth and I say that in the full knowledge that the guy has still to have a long injury free run.
Other than that I think he is doing a great job but he needs to do more.

Honestly, I'm no big fan of MG but I think you have twisted so much of the down side to suit your argument.

The character of this team is if anything stronger imo than 2 years ago.

Do you even watch how they are playing and coping in adversity.

Sorry that's as far as I.m willing to go on this as I feel I would be wasting my time.

I think MG has failed the team only in his inability to bring in a big gritty sniper (of proven ability) and a bigger ass kicking 1st/2nd line D.
I don't like his rehabs. I would not have traded for Booth and I say that in the full knowledge that the guy has still to have a long injury free run.
Other than that I think he is doing a great job but he needs to do more.


so you basically just agreed with me lol...other than disputing the character comment since most of my issues were just agreed to.

1. Dont like the bad signings
2. Didnt bring in the depth
3. Don't like the fact we dont have the right d mix.

you are actually pretty close to the same point.

only thing you didnt mention was lack of depth to trade and a center and those are simply facts, so i can't see how you can disagree with that lol
  • 1

#27 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,299 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:37 PM

*
POPULAR

Iginla's salary barely affects us if its a deadline deal and he's a UFA at the end of the year. We have no one in this organization with the heart that man has. And while he has slowed down, he still scored 32 on a crap team last year and is on pace for similar this year.

He wants a cup more than anyone, and that hunger is infectious in a room. You are measuring dollars when I am measuring character, desire and a willingess to do what it takes.

This team is not the same team as 2011 Deb. It doesn't have that heart. It doesn't have that drive. Iginla shocks this team back there. Moreover, he will show Kesler what it means to check your ego at the door and become the player he was during the Selke year, and also teach Kassian what it takes to be the best power forward in the game.

You and many others here are completely ignoring the intangibles and thats why you trade for Jerome Iginla.


So why hasn't he had this effect in Calgary, who sits near the bottom of the pack? If he's going to turn things into gold here, why not there? It isn't some magic deal, whereby he'll click here but hasn't managed to there. If this is what you describe as a "needy/lacklustre" team then what makes you think that he'll be the solution (if he didn't have the impact you're describing where he currently plays?).

And the group here have an off ice chemistry that is undeniable...a brotherhood. So you want to bring "Dad" into the room to keep them all in check? I'm sure that'd go over well.
  • 5

Posted Image


#28 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,311 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:38 PM

*
POPULAR

ADD SOME VALUE PLEASE

OOps thats asking too much of you. I read other posts of yours. Carry on.


Okay, if that's what you want (tell me what you want, what you really really want).

1. He has incorrectly evaluated the character of his team, and ability to compete in the post season. In 2011 his team got hot at the right time and they had a much grittier mix of players. Moroever, his current players that were on that roster, were playing much harder, like they had something to prove (Kesler, Edler, Bieksa, even Lou).


You provide examples of the players doing well, but provide absolutely no examples of the players who failed to compete in the post season. Though I do agree with you partly, Pahlsson was a bit of a failure in his time here and did not compete in the post season. I'd need more examples than just one though. The same players you mention competing like they had something to prove are the same players who let us down later, is that what you mean? I don't see how that's Gillis' fault, that's up to the players to play their hardest and the coaching staff to get the most out of their players.

3. Adding marginal players with big salaries who have not played to those salaries. Booth - size, sped and hands apparently - he's been a bust, lets face it. Overpaid for a 30 goal year and he's shown none of that here. Perhaps its just the wrong system but he doesn't use his size, hasn't scored and doesn't seem to be a threat on the ice.


Last season when Booth was on his game inbetween injuries he played up to his salary. He didn't just have one good season either, he's had two fourty point seasons and the sixty point season. He was on pace for 42 points last season if he had played all 82 games. That's not bad at all. This season has been a different story though, but he's been too busy getting injured to play hockey.

6. Signing Lu to the monster deal when he KNEW he had a stud in Schnieder. His ability to judge talent should have told him, lets at least hedge. I don't anticipate ever trading the guy but keep some flexibility given I should be able to see Schnieds has potential.


As far as they were concerned at the time, Luongo was the face of the franchise and Schneider would be traded. Schneider had not proven anything at this point (and realistically still hasn't). We still don't know for sure if Luongo will be moved or not, and the contract is decent for a goalie who is one of (if not the best) in the league when he's rolling.

7. Allowing Torres to leave over 750k. We lacked intensity and grit and he lets it walk. Its showing now and will in the playoffs


Torres was good at one thing: being suspended. You can't have that on your team, letting him walk was the right decision.

8. Best for last. A lack of willingess to 'go for it'. With Jerome Iginla available, Vancouver on his list, he comes out and says no wingers. Well why is that? Well 1. We need a center. Well why is that? Well he's failed to create depth at the MOST important position in hockey - that is his fault. In addition we have a plethora of wingers. Too bad they are either all too small to compete in the playoffs or are plugs. Futher, we have a lack of prospect depth, not allowing us to provide the other team with enough incentive to trade with us, without taking a roster player (ie Pitts has incredible depth in their system on D and they haven't had great draft positions either).


How was Gillis supposed to have foresight to all the injuries we've had? When you look at our NHL able depth when everyone was healthy at center (Henrik, Kesler, Malholtra, Lapierre, Schroeder, Ebbett) it's perfectly fine.

As for the size of our wingers:
Daniel Sedin: 6'1" 187
Alex Burrows: 6'1" 188
David Booth: 6'0" 212
Mason Raymond: 6'0" 185
Jannik Hansen: 6'1" 195
Zack Kassian: 6'3" 214
Chris Higgins: 6'0" 205

Then you have Weise (6'2" 210) who's a fine fourth line forward, and Tom Sestito (6'5" 228) who is fine as a 13th forward.

Wow would you look at that? None of them are under 6'0". Not exactly small.

Edited by BananaMash, 27 March 2013 - 12:38 PM.

  • 8

FWYIerW.png


#29 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:38 PM

I'm just wondering what you would give up for Iginla.

Unless it's a guarantee that he gets us a cup, I wouldn't sell the farm to get Iginla.

I'm just wondering what you would give up for Iginla.

Unless it's a guarantee that he gets us a cup, I wouldn't sell the farm to get Iginla.


Im not suggesting give up the farm. But this is all about how MG has not positioned us to actually go for it. That was my point, perhaps not transparent enough.

But if you look at teams like pitts/chic/boston, not only have they positioned themselves with strong lineups, they have depth. Granted we have injuries but even when healthy we still have holes and lack prospect depth.

When you have holes and lack prospect depth, and have overpaid players, it makes it hard to trade.

If the asking price for Iginla is a first and Jensen of course I say no. But MG has put us in a position where we HAVE no choice to say no, that is my point.

Meanwhile Pitts can say yes...so who's GM is doing a better job?

I think we've been teased by having two superstars in our lineup and great goaltending that has somewhat 'hidden' MG's failings.

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 27 March 2013 - 12:41 PM.

  • 0

#30 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:38 PM

With respect these are not the stats of someone who is over the hill. Especially when you consider his team and team mates.

Jerome Iginla

2007–08 Calgary Flames 98

2009–10 Calgary Flames 69

2010–11 Calgary Flames 86

2011–12 Calgary Flames 67

Edited by Bodee, 27 March 2013 - 12:51 PM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg




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.