combover Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 wiese was a waste of a contract. if diaz can make a clean tape to tape pass he'll be the only canuck d-man capable of that right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Weise is garbage, are you kidding me? Weise is a dime a dozen player that any team can pick up on the waiver wire. The fact that we got a return for Weise is amazing. I thought if Weise was waived, no one would pick him up. Plus we need a puck moving D-man especially with the loss of Bieksa. So Gillis did great here, so stop complaining. weise was/is one of the most productive players for his ice time and his status in the league. Don't kid yourselves there is/was people on both sides of the fence that were scratching their heads about this trade because nobody really knew anything about the other player. But after reading reports stats bio's and fan reaction it seems Vancouver came out on top. Just hoping Diaz is sturdy enough to handle the west For reference though, Weise 12 points Clarkson 8 points All for almost $5 million less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Well, we did start this off with one of the points being about how often he hits the net. How often he scores isn't really a good indicator of missed shots, well at least not as good a missed shots is. I mentioned it before, but if you want to look at what the missed shots as a percentage of total shots and compare that to a similar group, then it'd be more applicable. But for the other points (and since stats are rarely relevant I won't bother looking them up and pointing them out) I'd definitely argue he doesn't get turnstiled by average players, pass directly on the tape of the opposition players in his zone, fail to clear the zone any more than the other defenceman we have. None of our guys have been particularly good in those areas this year, with some generally poor play. Even still, I don't know if they'd be worse the median in the NHL for the most part. Giveaways and takeaways (which were mentioned earlier) along with corsi and other similar stats would give a decent indicator of that compared to other D. But as far as skating faster than you, that's pretty hard to prove - unless perhaps we held a "meaningless" skills competition to see how he ranks (and you rank) against other defencemen who play a similar role. Ah, from one side argument to another, and this really is a Weise/Diaz trade thread, so I should stop and get back on topic unless someone wants to provide more backup than their own opinion that will prove their assertions. If you come up with anything, feel free to make a thread on it. You, my friend, get a Wiser's slow clap for that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The falling C$ likely means it won't go up as much as previously thought. Granted players often get overpaid as UFA's like Clarkson but usually the players that get overpaid are the ones in their late 20's who are still in their prime, including all the ones you mentioned. Aging players rarely get big contracts, Also, the Sedins are a very unique situation in that I don't think any team would be interested in signing just one of them and they likely wouldn't want to play apart either. Given they must come as a package it really limits the number of suitors who could afford to take on two big contracts at once. Add to the fact they are both having off years and didn't play that well last year either and I really don't think they would be that hot of a commodity as UFA's. Look at Lecavalier last year. He is the same age as the Sedins and also seems to be declining. He got a 5 year $22M contract that sees his salary decline as it goes along. He also was one year younger when he signed that contract than the Sedins will be when they would have hit UFA status after this season. So after this season Vinny will be nearly the same age and essentially have a 4 years left on his contract at total of $16M. That would certainly be much more reasonable than what the Sedins are getting. You can insult me all you want but do you really think a pair of 34 year old players not in the top 50 in NHL scoring that must be signed as a duo would get 4 year $28M each as UFA's? Sorry but not even close. Gillis made a huge mistake in not letting the Sedins play out this season before discussing contract. I am amazed at how many people on here have no faith in the Sedins producing better ever again. The coaching style is different and they don't have a puck moving D back there making them a threat off the rush. They will be fine. The whole Damn team is struggling and until a dman who can skate the puck up off the rush and make quick passes up to the forwards, they won't break PPG totals and it's dumb to expect it of them. They are worth the 7 mil. I have faith they will prove it, but the right deal has to be made for a puck mover. The end. PS I totally agree with you on waiting til the season is over to deal with negotiations. This was a bit early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 weise was/is one of the most productive players for his ice time and his status in the league. Don't kid yourselves there is/was people on both sides of the fence that were scratching their heads about this trade because nobody really knew anything about the other player. But after reading reports stats bio's and fan reaction it seems Vancouver came out on top. Just hoping Diaz is sturdy enough to handle the west For reference though, Weise 12 points Clarkson 8 points All for almost $5 million less Ville Leino as well with 9 points (no goals) in 37 games. You, my friend, get a Wiser's slow clap for that one. No applause, just send money. I am amazed at how many people on here have no faith in the Sedins producing better ever again. The coaching style is different and they don't have a puck moving D back there making them a threat off the rush. They will be fine. The whole Damn team is struggling and until a dman who can skate the puck up off the rush and make quick passes up to the forwards, they won't break PPG totals and it's dumb to expect it of them. They are worth the 7 mil. I have faith they will prove it, but the right deal has to be made for a puck mover. The end. PS I totally agree with you on waiting til the season is over to deal with negotiations. This was a bit early. Daniel hasn't been as good, I don't think that's a question. Henrik has fallen off a bit as well, but how much of that is related to having anyone who can actually finish a play on his line. Burrows doesn't have a goal this year despite some very good chances. He's looked more dangerous than Daniel, who also hasn't been able to finish some very good chances. We've seen the D not converting on as many chances as well, particularly on the powerplay. Can they get back there? Henrik for sure, and Daniel to a point perhaps but until the other main pieces of the line up are clicking it's hard to lay the blame all on them. Hindsight's 20/20 and who would have predicted the whole team would struggle to this extent? More than a few thought we'd lose games against he tougher Pacific division, but I don't know of many that said we'd look so bad some nights while doing it. But again, this is a Weise/Diaz trade thread and I'm way off topic. After last night's lacklustre effort, if Diaz can at least rush the puck up the ice and get the puck going at more than 50% speed I'll be happy. Everyone looked like they were skating in a swamp through the last part of that game whenever we tried to advance the puck. A little infusion into our PP would certainly give us a spark as well, something we're sorely lacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Weise had a good start to the year, but hasn't done much of anything the last 20 games... But the overall stats may have increased his value. Similar situation with Garrison... any chance he might end up the odd man out when the smoke clears? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Weise had a good start to the year, but hasn't done much of anything the last 20 games... But the overall stats may have increased his value. Similar situation with Garrison... any chance he might end up the odd man out when the smoke clears? I don't think that's similar to Garrison at all. Garrison hasn't been worse than our other D, yet he is actually putting up points. He's a hometown guy with an NTC so I doubt he gets moved. Weise did have a bit of a high for value though, and the value we got back in Diaz certainly reflects that. If Garrison's value is increased somehow over where it has been (which was already pretty high) we'd be getting a significant return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Weise had a good start to the year, but hasn't done much of anything the last 20 games... But the overall stats may have increased his value. Similar situation with Garrison... any chance he might end up the odd man out when the smoke clears? I thought Vaulk's comment last night was pretty accurate. Weise was stuck on the 4th line getting less than 5 minutes a night on some nights. As a guy who has had success when played more he was probably at a crossroads as far as longevity in the NHL. He brought it to a head and was traded. I still think consistency is a issue with Weise but a 3rd line role might see him break out. I still have the opinion that on a CUP contending team the 4th line has to be playing at least 8 minutes a game. Van rarely does that with Torts or when AV was here. It is obvious that the Van identy is all about the Twins and their style of hockey. All the lines seem to focus on a east/west game. It appears to me that opposing teams are defensing Van better all the time by forcing them to the perimeter. Seriously? Torts said Booth was their best player last night. How many puck battles did I see Booth lose last night. I quit counting. Fans used to laugh at how easy Raymond went down. While Booth does hit he also goes down easily. Absolutely no doubt that Lack was Van's best player last night. I was stunned by Daniel's comments during the interview. He was talking about building on their effort. The Wings should/ could have had half a dozen goals last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mispelled Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 And what do you think they would have gotten on the open market, huh? If we let them walk, then who is replacing them? What was he supposed to do? Give them a NTC, of course, as apparently, Luongo's contract was not a learning experience. Good luck to DW and here is to hoping Diaz can play a Tortz game. Tonight's game is going to be interesting on so many levels. I fear that our small D will be exploited and Boston's net-presence will be a side story. The boys need a break. I hope Diaz can offer something, anything, to help them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Similar situation with Garrison... any chance he might end up the odd man out when the smoke clears? I just don't see this happening. Bieksa and Garrison are as safe as can be. They are character players who contribute a lot (especially Bieksa on and off the ice). I do see Hamhuis being the odd man out though (aside from Edler/Tanev). The main reason for this is that I think Hammer would bring the greatest value back to the Canucks. He eats big, big minutes and will be an Olympian. Depending on how he plays, Gillis could/should sell high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 While I don't agree on all of that, I do agree to some extent on being able to sell high perhaps on Hamhuis. If there's interest and he'd like to go to a contender (he'd do well with Boston for instance and they have a need) I'd rather he get moved as an older D than Edler or Garrison. Boston is an interested option actually, assuming we can get pieces back we'd like. they have only $1.595M in cap space currently, but they do have Savard's cap hit available with LTI to go over (and Seidenberg's, who Hamhuis would be replacing). We wouldn't have to take cap back in that case and could just go after younger, affordable talent. They wouldn't move Krug or Hamilton back to us most likely, but Bartkowski is a maybe. Morrow would be preferable though, then I'd try and get one of Spooner/Kokhlachev, and their 1st. Not sure if they'd go for all that, but perhaps something secondary to even it out from our side. The attraction for Edler is he's a point producer and could garner a really nice offensive player in return, but Boston doesn't have a ready made player they'd give up I don't think. Something more like Kane would be my target, as he's a dynamic offensive threat, something we lack. If we can get a future left side guy back, we can certainly run with Garrison and Stanton plus whoever of Edler and Hamhuis remain as our top 6 on the left, and then have talent like Tanev, Bieksa and one of Diaz, Weber or Corrado filling in the last spot. It does weaken our D somewhat, but provides either immediate help up front, or a good future outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 vcrguy has actually descended into the dust of an actual thread. I thought all 400ish of your posts were attention seeking thread starts (not unlike the fail you recently posted in this forum). Try glimpsing the board rules before pretending to school a poster like Deniro about validity. If you paid much attention on these boards, you'd know that there are a whole lot of threads where people discuss what they think the team should do, what positions they think need to be upgraded, what players they are for or against moving, and who they think should be added to the roster. Imagine that. And remarkably, many of those discussions have actually included Dale Weise - some posters thinking he's a superstar that should be commanding third line minutes, some thinking he's an average fourth liner, some thinking the Canucks need to move him and upgrade. Your protest about the validity of other posters is entertaining though - by virtue of the audacity. No, no. Many of them are discussing how much better the Leafs are than the Canucks. In fact, most of his posts are solely for the purpose of trolling Canuck fans and painting them with a single brush as if we are a homogeneous whole. Anyone who is paying attention knows he isn't a Canuck fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpennyCanuck Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Ryan O'Reilly on the Colorado Avs. Isn't eligible to be traded until feb 27th, one yr after his offer sheet was matched. Thank You! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wshdrvvn Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 weise wasn't meant to last here. less than half the fans on CDC were able to spell his last name correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Solid pick up for for only giving up Weise. We essentially got someone who could fix/help our PP and create offense for free because we had better options for the fourth line than Weise already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 weise was/is one of the most productive players for his ice time and his status in the league. Don't kid yourselves there is/was people on both sides of the fence that were scratching their heads about this trade because nobody really knew anything about the other player. But after reading reports stats bio's and fan reaction it seems Vancouver came out on top. Just hoping Diaz is sturdy enough to handle the west For reference though, Weise 12 points Clarkson 8 points All for almost $5 million less Weise was a 4th liner and is still a 4th liner. Don't kid yourself. You make him sound like Crosby or as they call him, Dutch Gretzky. Weise can't fight and barely hits for a 4th liner yet you put so much importance in his measly 12 points. If he was such a superstar he would be playing on the 2nd or 3rd line, not the 4th line. I would've been disappointed if we had traded Sestito but not Weise. Not a special player by any standards and am sure we could find an even better 4th liner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 While I don't agree on all of that, I do agree to some extent on being able to sell high perhaps on Hamhuis. If there's interest and he'd like to go to a contender (he'd do well with Boston for instance and they have a need) I'd rather he get moved as an older D than Edler or Garrison. Boston is an interested option actually, assuming we can get pieces back we'd like. they have only $1.595M in cap space currently, but they do have Savard's cap hit available with LTI to go over (and Seidenberg's, who Hamhuis would be replacing). We wouldn't have to take cap back in that case and could just go after younger, affordable talent. They wouldn't move Krug or Hamilton back to us most likely, but Bartkowski is a maybe. Morrow would be preferable though, then I'd try and get one of Spooner/Kokhlachev, and their 1st. Not sure if they'd go for all that, but perhaps something secondary to even it out from our side. The attraction for Edler is he's a point producer and could garner a really nice offensive player in return, but Boston doesn't have a ready made player they'd give up I don't think. Something more like Kane would be my target, as he's a dynamic offensive threat, something we lack. If we can get a future left side guy back, we can certainly run with Garrison and Stanton plus whoever of Edler and Hamhuis remain as our top 6 on the left, and then have talent like Tanev, Bieksa and one of Diaz, Weber or Corrado filling in the last spot. It does weaken our D somewhat, but provides either immediate help up front, or a good future outlook. So you'd rather trade our #1 defenseman and the only defenseman who isn't a liability in the defensive zone (aside from Tanev)? Keeping Garrison or Edler over Hamhuis is asinine. We should be improving the D core, not downgrading by trading a Team Canada defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I just don't see this happening. Bieksa and Garrison are as safe as can be. They are character players who contribute a lot (especially Bieksa on and off the ice). I do see Hamhuis being the odd man out though (aside from Edler/Tanev). The main reason for this is that I think Hammer would bring the greatest value back to the Canucks. He eats big, big minutes and will be an Olympian. Depending on how he plays, Gillis could/should sell high. Hamhuis is safer than Bieksa and Garrison, to the point where if we traded all our D except one, Hamhuis would be the one remaining. He has an NTC and he signed in Vancouver for a discount because he is from BC and wants to play here. All the "character player" BS is a cop out and don't tell me Garrison is a character player (Bieksa I do agree). Character players don't necessarily win cups if they aren't great at what they do. Edler is the odd man out since he can bring the most value aside from Hamhuis and we wouldn't be hurt defensively due to his departure. Hamhuis stays unless Gillis is targeting another #1 defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 He has an NTC and he signed in Vancouver for a discount because he is from BC and wants to play here. Same can be said for Garrison as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 So you'd rather trade our #1 defenseman and the only defenseman who isn't a liability in the defensive zone (aside from Tanev)? Keeping Garrison or Edler over Hamhuis is asinine. We should be improving the D core, not downgrading by trading a Team Canada defenseman. Actually, Hamhuis has more turnovers per game than Edler. He's hardly been stellar this year, and if people want to slag Edler for the reasons they are Hamhuis isn't exempt from that. What I did say though was other teams would see Hamhuis as a more reliable piece (regardless of his play this year) and would fit well in a trade with someone like Boston who doesn't need an offensive D but rather a responsible replacement for Seidenberg. With his value up considering how he's valued around the league and earning the Olympic nod, we could sell high on him as one of our two D over 30. Hamhuis would bring more value back than Garrison, I think, and the teams going after Edler would be different than the ones interested in Hamhuis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.