Angry Goose Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 People need to stop going nuts over the pick up of Stanton. How could Chicago waive him!?!? How did he manage to fall into our lap!??? How did teams pass on this stud!?! No one knew who he was when we picked him up. Actin like he was an all star that got waived No one thinks he was an all star but obviously MG and co saw some talent there and good on them for picking him up. given how well it has worked out so far you can't help but say Mg & co did a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck luck Posted November 9, 2013 Author Share Posted November 9, 2013 People need to stop going nuts over the pick up of Stanton. How could Chicago waive him!?!? How did he manage to fall into our lap!??? How did teams pass on this stud!?! No one knew who he was when we picked him up. Actin like he was an all star that got waived Wow...someones hard to please? Yes...how could Chicago waive him! Is their D that good that they could waive a player with his caliber and potential? Sure he's not a stud, but he's still young and comes with a cap friendly hit. CDC would explode if Gillis did this with one of our prospects with similar attributes... He's been a great acquisition and it didn't cost us a dime, he's got another year left at his meager salary and he brings a lot of what the Nucks need on the backend. He improves our D period. What's there to complain about? Just giving credit where it's due...Gillis and his scouts are doing their job and obviously a lot of other teams had a brain-fart on this one. I'd think every team...except Chicago (I guess)...are always looking to improve their D and some teams are desperate, like Edmonton. MacT obviously wasn't doing his job and MG was....why you so upset about giving him credit? And you even admitted this in your post, "No one knew who he was when we picked him up.", this is the point! No one knew who he was and MG and his scouts did...how can you not be happy about this? Come to think of it, if Gillis passed on him and the Sharks, Ducks, Yotes or Kings picked him up, I bet you'd the post the first thread trashing MG for not doing his job.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Psst.The Rangers coach is now our coach. Tootsie had 19 post season victories over 5 years in NY. AV had 33 post season victories as the Canucks coach. Torts has a stanley cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 People need to stop going nuts over the pick up of Stanton. How could Chicago waive him!?!? How did he manage to fall into our lap!??? How did teams pass on this stud!?! No one knew who he was when we picked him up. Actin like he was an all star that got waived Perhaps you should go look up the interview Quenneville gave about it. Literally nobody is acting like an all star got waived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 can't really call the Booth trade bad considering what the team gave up an aging soon to be retired Samuelsson and Sturm who isn't in the NHL anymore Booth 1g 2a 11 games age 28 soon to be 29 Samuelsson 1g 0a 6 games age 36 soon to 37 the Ballard and Hodgson trade are on close to the same level in terms of bad trades Ballard-Canucks gave up a 1st and Grabner and no longer have any of the players from the trade although Florida only has Howden currently from that trade Hodgson-no matter what you think about Kassian or Hodgson right now Hodgson is the better player and would look good on the 2nd line you can say the Roy and Pahlsson trades were bad both being rentals but it's not like he went after plugs during the deadline like Nonis and Burke did numerous times every year it seemed the team was getting plug trade after plug trade at least Gillis goes after decent players as much as people say he sucks at trading no GM is perfect in trades they well always have good trades and bad trades it's about making more good trades than bad which i think he has done so far with the Canucks Dude, Kassian over Hodgson any day of the week!! Any Day!! Why do people still bring this up, get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 MG is a solid GM and is severely underrated by many on this board. I really like his FA and waiver pick ups but at the same time I have to admit that he isn't the best at trading. I think he did a great job hiring Torts though. Props to MG Ummm all I heard in the media initially when we got torts was "Aquilini forced MGs hand to hire Torts. The owner is now involved ..." W.e im happy, at least he smartened up and kept the BETTER goalie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Ummm all I heard in the media initially when we got torts was "Aquilini forced MGs hand to hire Torts. The owner is now involved ..." W.e im happy, at least he smartened up and kept the BETTER goalie. Lol and u believe the media??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Lol and u believe the media??? It wasn't a MG move. I can tell for myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Ummm all I heard in the media initially when we got torts was "Aquilini forced MGs hand to hire Torts. The owner is now involved ..." W.e im happy, at least he smartened up and kept the BETTER goalie. All we heard in the media for months was how Luongo was done with this team. The media, especially the Vancouver sports media doesn't know ****. Most owners are involved in most decisions. The hiring was ultimately made by Gillis. If not Gillis would have been fired with the jackass he fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Only reason people think MG is bad at trades is because he has to take what others are willing to give, given the circumstances IF Booth had played better it would have been an absolute steal The Ballard trade was of necessity, with risk involved. Unfortunately it didnt work out but you can see why MG would have thought Ballard might be able to be a top 4 D man. Booth's power forward potential and youth (and the 4th round pick thrown in) > Past-prime and struggling Sturm and Sammy Ballard was Top 4 at the time and we got him for a failed PF project in Bernier, a skilled winger prospect who had not earned a top 6 spot and didn't have a defensive game or physicality back then to play in the bottom 6, and a first round prospect that MG didn't want. Old/ failed/ mediocre pieces are worth moving to get potential that can pay off big time, and at Worst those trades are washes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 This. Before we praise MG too much ask yourself how Ballard worked out, how about Booth? Not to mention the whole Hodgson deal. That being said MG seems to have had a great off season this year (or so it appears so far) Richardson and Santorelli are looking like steals and Stanton and looking solid. The 2013 draft picks are all looking great so yes he deserves credit for a great 2013 off season but prior to the that the Ehroff trade was really his only positive move among a number of huge mistakes. I know for sure Florida is loving that Grabner deal, am I right? Honestly I'd love for Gillis to NOT make any more rental deals at least. We lost a 2nd rounder in a deep draft for a useless player. Hodgson trade wasn't a bust trade, Kassian is still young people just need to realize PWF don't develop over night. The Stanton pickup, I didn't know the guy at first but now, between him Tanev and Hammer. Really lovin' the defensive side of our D core. If Edler and Bieksa can keep their mistakes to a minimum, team's lookin' really good. Santo and Little Richie are amazing so far, goes without saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Only reason people think MG is bad at trades is because he has to take what others are willing to give, given the circumstances That applies to every other GM... And defending trades because they seemed like a good idea at the time is hogwash, Im sorry. The results are what matter, just like the OP is praising MG for the unexpectedly good results from his latest moves. And the thread title makes me want to puke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 MG is better than average if you look at the results but it's his lawyer speak that turns people off. I think for a hockey city you want both bark and bite... results alone have to be near perfection to make up for lack of sizzle. Very astute comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 MG is better than average if you look at the results but it's his lawyer speak that turns people off. I think for a hockey city you want both bark and bite... results alone have to be near perfection to make up for lack of sizzle. I think MG just knows that he's 'in' with the Aquilini's and doesn't want to rock the boat like Brian Burke did. Dave Nonis came up as Burke's right hand man but his GM style is nothing like Burke's. I remember when Nonis was GM and the trade deadline passed...he didn't make any moves and I was actually happy. I knew the state of the team at the time and we just weren't ready. But how hard is that decision to make for a GM in a hockey crazed market like Vancouver, full of fans that are ready to crucify you for not making a trade at the deadline because let's face it...whether we're seeded 1st or 8th, we still all cling onto that hope that this is the year we finally win the stanley cup. Dave Nonis checked his ego at the door! So I think Gillis just recognizes that he needs to be more like Nonis than Burke. Burke pushed his limits in both Van and TO and it ultimately led to his demise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 People need to stop going nuts over the pick up of Stanton. How could Chicago waive him!?!? How did he manage to fall into our lap!??? How did teams pass on this stud!?! No one knew who he was when we picked him up. Actin like he was an all star that got waived I pretty much agree with this. And here's a further news flash: there are a lot of guys in the AHL who could be solid NHLers if they're given the right chance with the right team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marleau_12 Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Wow...someones hard to please? Yes...how could Chicago waive him! Is their D that good that they could waive a player with his caliber and potential? Sure he's not a stud, but he's still young and comes with a cap friendly hit. CDC would explode if Gillis did this with one of our prospects with similar attributes... He's been a great acquisition and it didn't cost us a dime, he's got another year left at his meager salary and he brings a lot of what the Nucks need on the backend. He improves our D period. What's there to complain about? Just giving credit where it's due...Gillis and his scouts are doing their job and obviously a lot of other teams had a brain-fart on this one. I'd think every team...except Chicago (I guess)...are always looking to improve their D and some teams are desperate, like Edmonton. MacT obviously wasn't doing his job and MG was....why you so upset about giving him credit? And you even admitted this in your post, "No one knew who he was when we picked him up.", this is the point! No one knew who he was and MG and his scouts did...how can you not be happy about this? Come to think of it, if Gillis passed on him and the Sharks, Ducks, Yotes or Kings picked him up, I bet you'd the post the first thread trashing MG for not doing his job.... No one thinks he was an all star but obviously MG and co saw some talent there and good on them for picking him up. given how well it has worked out so far you can't help but say Mg & co did a great job. Perhaps you should go look up the interview Quenneville gave about it. Literally nobody is acting like an all star got waived. You all do not understand what I am saying. It's not some huge pickup that needs to be raved about all day. He's a steady defenseman, good on us for picking him up. When he got waived, I doubt any of you even gave a second glance to his name. Now that he's playing a pretty good game, it's all "oh my god stanton stanton stanton thank god for MG where would we be without him". OP: - I can't believe MG got Stanton???? How did Chicago let him go??? I know that that their D is pretty solid...but there's no way someones gonna convince me that their best option was to waive Stanton??? Thanks Chicago Think it's fair to say he may think Stanton is an all star lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 You all do not understand what I am saying. It's not some huge pickup that needs to be raved about all day. He's a steady defenseman, good on us for picking him up. When he got waived, I doubt any of you even gave a second glance to his name. Now that he's playing a pretty good game, it's all "oh my god stanton stanton stanton thank god for MG where would we be without him". OP: Think it's fair to say he may think Stanton is an all star lol I absolutely understood what you were saying and what I'm saying is nobody said he picked up an all star. Nobody took a second glance at Stanton when MG picked him up however Gillis picked him up. Give credit where credit is due. J.Q. mentioned he was sorry to have to put Stanton on waivers and Gillis saw an opportunity to improve the depth of this team and picked him up. And no that guy didn't come close to implying Stanton was an all star. At the time it was the best option for Chicago but with the way he's playing I would bet they'd rather have Stanton in than say Roszival and friends filtering in and out of the line up every few games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcrguy Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Like the initial posted noted, how did 22 other teams let Stanton pass by them on the waiver wire. You can see immediately why the Oilers , as an a example, are floundering when quality players are passed up on by the brass. Unbelievable The Oilers are a less skilled version of the Canucks. They overrate every player on their team, which is why, even when they say they are going to make some bold moves they can't pull the trigger. They always feel they aren't getting enough for their player because every player on the team is worth a 1st, a prospect and a player. If other teams don't agree (and often they shouldn't) you get the Luongo fiasco, the non-trading of Mason Raymond, Booth, Ballard, etc. If you have 5 cents in your hand and try to trade it for a quarter, you're never going to make a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck luck Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 You all do not understand what I am saying. It's not some huge pickup that needs to be raved about all day. He's a steady defenseman, good on us for picking him up. When he got waived, I doubt any of you even gave a second glance to his name. Now that he's playing a pretty good game, it's all "oh my god stanton stanton stanton thank god for MG where would we be without him". OP: Think it's fair to say he may think Stanton is an all star lol Well...at least you can agree he was a great pick up. However, I disagree with you on your assumption that I think Stantons an all star. I never mentioned that and I don't even think I implied that....I said I'm surprised, even shocked, that no other GM had him in their radar and he brings a lot of attributes that this team needs. Great fit for our bottom D and I think he has a ton of potential, low cap hit for 2 years, he can fight (what other Dman other than Bieksa brings this?...who is not a liability), he improves our D and he didn't cost us any players or prospects. THAT is why I'm so excited about us picking him up...not because I think he's an all star and should be on the 1st pairing. Also, nothing mentioned that is similar to, "...it's all "oh my god stanton stanton stanton thank god for MG where would we be without him".", so please try and refrain from putting words in my mouth....if this is really what you got out of my post than your comprehension abilities need to be addressed. If fans get excited over a player it doesn't mean that he's an all star....lots of talk about Tanev since his first game with the Nucks. Lots of fans appreciating his skills and abilities, the fact that he didn't cost us anything, and he immediately improved our D and depth...but I don't think anyone thinks he's "all star" material. Serious hockey fans should appreciate the small tangibles that make the difference from an average hockey team to an elite team and not focus on just improving a team with big name trades or all stars. After watching Stanton play....yes, I didn't know much about him in the beginning either....I am just as excited about having him on our team as I am with having Tanev. At worst, our depth is improved at Chicago's loss, other teams like Edmonton are in desperation mode having to rely on a big trade to improve their D.....at worst, Stanton gives us the option to trade him or another Dman/prospect for that top 6 forward.....why not just enjoy that? AND....I am in no way insinuating that Stanton, alone, is worth a top 6. Just thought I'd clarify that because you might assume that I think Stantons an all star, I would expect a package deal to bring in that top 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck luck Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 I pretty much agree with this. And here's a further news flash: there are a lot of guys in the AHL who could be solid NHLers if they're given the right chance with the right team. You seem to be overlooking the whole picture.....there are plenty of other teams in the league trying to improve their D and we are not close to the bottom of the league, so there's little to no chance that MG would have the option to pick up a 'well known' D prospect. For us to pick up one of these solid NHLers in the AHL, from another team, would cost us one of our solid prospects or a current roster player. The real news flash: We improved our team at no cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.