Why didn't we trade Dana Murzyn? (Discussion)

[Amish Rake Fighter]

I stopped reading after you said Murzyn was a #5 or 6 D in his day; I guess you forget how he was paired with Lumme on our top pairing for about 5 or so seasons. He wasn't a bottom pairing defender in his day.

and any time Neely, Shanahan, Tkachuk, Lindros or Roberts were on the ice, so was Murzyn

[Ray_Cathode]

Oh FFS I am sooooooo tired of "There is no way we're going to win this year, let's just trade every player over 23 and start over".

IT IS NOT HOW SUCCESSFUL ORGANIZATIONS ARE RUN!

Lose the first two games of the season? ... tank

Lose a 1st round series? Not good enough yet.... Tank

Lose a mid season game to Buffalo at the end of the road trip? ... Tank

Let's just tank every single year because the Canucks will never go 82-0 then 16-0.

If we can't win it all then why even compete?

If we can't dominate then we might as well be the darlings of draft day, never mention the fact that our picks can never seem to develop because the get crushed in a mans league.

But we'll always have draft day.

Thinking I may have to avoid CDC for the next 48 hours or so.

Yes, it is how most recent Stanley Cup winners and contenders are run: Anaheim, LA, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburg, etc. They accept the fact that they are terrible, they trade off whatever values they have and they cut the payroll and draft and develop, until they are in a position to add key pieces with cap space or trading off some of the valuable pieces they have developed so that they can contend and take a serious run at the cup. Older players looking for big bucks who have avoided them for years then see two things, a lot of young talent that can carry them, and lots of money to overpay them - so the free-agents, being self-interested too - come running.

[Canuck_in_AB]

Bad title, wrong section, should be locked!

Where is Deb?

Now that they changed it to, "Why we didn't we trade Dana Murzyn? (Discussion)" I still don't understand. lol.

(looks like it's been fixed again)

[J.I.A.H.N]

Canuck in Alberta

Sorry if I made this post difficult...it is kind of a mess, but the point is.........

Today we are seeing teams that are near the top of the league, selling off prospects and picks for veterans, and what I have experienced here for the most part is people saying that we should not be selling.

To me this is confusing as we don't have a contending team, we don't have a second line, our team is aging, and we need to rebuild.

Everyone will throw insults and negative comments at any suggestion of trading Hamhuis, or Vrbata, yet Arizona just traded Yandle. Which goes to prove the idea has some merit. Arizona now has 4 picks in the next 2 years, plus prospects.

Yes we are not out of the playoffs, but anyone thinking we are a contender is just nuts......we will see what the next 24 hours brings, maybe nothing, but I hate the idea of assets just aging or as in UFA's, just walking away.

How this pertains to Murzyn is that he really was a crappy dman, but he had a good year and we should have gotten rid of him while his value was high because anyone that knew him did not consider him a good dman.....big.....not good!

So, I wanted to tell the Murzyn story because he is a perfect example of why you sell high, buy low..............because as with this year...team start chasing other teams after the first team gets a good player, the next team has to follow or it falls behind....so they spend too much.......a perfect time to sell

The story really didn't work all that well in trying to make my point, but I have tried every other way.

[pianoman13]

EDITED

[canacks1970]

Canuck in Alberta

Sorry if I made this post difficult...it is kind of a mess, but the point is.........

Today we are seeing teams that are near the top of the league, selling off prospects and picks for veterans, and what I have experienced here for the most part is people saying that we should not be selling.

To me this is confusing as we don't have a contending team, we don't have a second line, our team is aging, and we need to rebuild.

Everyone will throw insults and negative comments at any suggestion of trading Hamhuis, or Vrbata, yet Arizona just traded Yandle. Which goes to prove the idea has some merit. Arizona now has 4 picks in the next 2 years, plus prospects.

Yes we are not out of the playoffs, but anyone thinking we are a contender is just nuts......we will see what the next 24 hours brings, maybe nothing, but I hate the idea of assets just aging or as in UFA's, just walking away.

How this pertains to Murzyn is that he really was a crappy dman, but he had a good year and we should have gotten rid of him while his value was high because anyone that knew him did not consider him a good dman.....big.....not good!

So, I wanted to tell the Murzyn story because he is a perfect example of why you sell high, buy low..............because as with this year...team start chasing other teams after the first team gets a good player, the next team has to follow or it falls behind....so they spend too much.......a perfect time to sell

The story really didn't work all that well in trying to make my point, but I have tried every other way.

No offence here Janis but a few threads ago you said that maybe we should trade some of our youth like McCann. You make it sound like we have the same management team that had Dana Murzyn.

Are we in the same situation as Arizona in right now. Where are they in the standings? So where is the merit to the Yandle trade. Why not trade him last year when they were in playoff contention. Look at Edmonton for a second here. Who do they have for Veteran leadership? Who can the young players lean on through the rough times? Its not like Benning is planning on keeping every aging Vet they have. Would you like Gillis where he wouldn't ask his players to waive their NTC. Then you would have something to complain about.

Be in Benning situation for a second here Janis. Do you know how many players turned down J.B request to waive their NTC last year? Do you know for a fact that players like Higgins and others were willing to waive their NTC? And if they do waive it how do you know the list of teams they offer are interested in them? Maybe nobody. Hey Kesler only gave two teams and Chicago couldn't afford him. How hard was it to move Loungo? Pretty hard to trade a players who isn't willing to be move that easily now doesn't it.

Maybe you should think of the things that have happened here since J.B has taken over..

J.B and T.L do not let fans on the message board make the decision of this hockey team Period!!

Management knows we are not in contention for a cup.

He had asked PLayers with Ntc if they were willing to waive it.

J.B has made more changes to the line up the past year then most Gm 's do in a season.

Hockey teams like Vancouver are in a transition period. Where they do have Vets,while slowly bringing in our youth . Its call bridging the gap. Giving our youth a winning environment will give them an idea what its takes to get to the next level.( playoff experience)

Again I will bring this up to you. Benning is well known for his scouting around the league.

We never had a scout as well known for a Gm before until Benning.

We also never had a Gm who had a hand in building a Stanley Cup winner before until J.B .

Benning and Linden has kept to their words from the day they got hired. They have a plan in place on how to rebuild this franchise ,something you and I have no experience in.

Some of us are trying to make a point to you and have tried every other way too.

[Patchoball Cannons]

The reason I bring up Dana Murzyn is that, Dana was not noted to be one our strongest Dman in his day, more of a 4/5.....mostly a 5. But in one glorious year Dana could not do anything wrong, and some of the fans were talking Norris Trophy winner......maybe be not, but man they were in love with Dana that year, he had " arrived"! He was voted best defenseman on the Canucks that year.

During a long walk with my father-in-law, I said we should trade him, he will never have better value, I pointed out that his career trend was that of a journeyman NHL Dman, and that he had played over his head all season.

Sure enough, next season, the old Dana showed up for the season and our opportunity was lost, everyone screamed we should have traded him last year! Those bone heads....everyone has career years!

My point to this sad story is that you are now seeing teams move older players for picks and prospects, they are either recognizing that they are not there yet and had better move some older assets, while they have value, or see them walk with no return, or they have recognized that they are close and are adding to bolster their line-up.

It should be one or the other, just not sitting in the middle of the road to get ran over!

I have read various posts, and most comments are either well we should be doing the same thing, and moving some players (aka "We are loosing out") and I wonder where you were over the last 2 months, when I was advocating moving out our older players or UFA's.............no don't be silly not all, but more than one, that is for sure.......but at the time of those posts....I was dirt.....a troll.....didn't love the Canucks..........well there is sure a lot agreeing with me in one way or another, now!

We needed to send out a clear message to TL and JB......and for the most part you did......."Don't trade anyone!" And they have listened!

Well lets wait and see what our future will bring, but don't whine about it , when we are still in the middle of the road 3 to 4 years from now....this is what you want!

Sorry about the title everyone.....yeah, pretty bad first attempt!

Yeah I'm sure Jim Benning and Trevor Linden spend most of there time reviewing what people are putting on the message boards on CDC, and making sure they uphold our wishes!

[Baggins]

Yes we are not out of the playoffs, but anyone thinking we are a contender is just nuts......we will see what the next 24 hours brings, maybe nothing, but I hate the idea of assets just aging or as in UFA's, just walking away.

Imagine if LA decided to be seller March 2012.

Playoffs teams, and teams in the hunt, don't tend to be sellers. Prospects and picks don't tend to be helpful for a playoff run. Such is life in the NHL.

[Bobby_Lu1ngo]

I'm going with Gillis was GM and gave him a no trade clause as my guess. FINAL ANSWER.

The point is we should try to sign Dana Murzyn and then trade him. Don't give him a NTC Benning.

Who's with me?

[Tragoedia]

Yes, it is how most recent Stanley Cup winners and contenders are run: Anaheim, LA, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburg, etc. They accept the fact that they are terrible, they trade off whatever values they have and they cut the payroll and draft and develop, until they are in a position to add key pieces with cap space or trading off some of the valuable pieces they have developed so that they can contend and take a serious run at the cup. Older players looking for big bucks who have avoided them for years then see two things, a lot of young talent that can carry them, and lots of money to overpay them - so the free-agents, being self-interested too - come running.

Hahaha. When did these teams tank in the last 8 years. Detroit hasn't missed the playoffs since Bush Sr. was president. Anaheim was in a tweener position for a couple of years (like us) until their youth showed up and they built around depth. Last time Boston was terrible was around the same time we were struggling as well in 07 (we missed in 06 & 08).

Pittsburgh's tank was gift wrapped through luck (Crosby in the lockout draft) and was before and right after the CBA was initialized.

LA's success has not been through tanking.

But yes, let's tank! Forget the youth we have currently in the lineup right now. Horvat, Vey, Clendenning, Kenins, et al don't deserve to be brought up through a successful system. Let's rebuild EDM style. They've got it made baby.

[dura_mater]

Wrong place to post this. Also Dana was a pylon, everyone skated around him with ease. I say he was one of the worst d men in Canuck history.

And I imagine that's the whole point of her thread. As in we should have traded him...

[dura_mater]

Oh FFS I am sooooooo tired of "There is no way we're going to win this year, let's just trade every player over 23 and start over".

IT IS NOT HOW SUCCESSFUL ORGANIZATIONS ARE RUN!

Lose the first two games of the season? ... tank

Lose a 1st round series? Not good enough yet.... Tank

Lose a mid season game to Buffalo at the end of the road trip? ... Tank

Let's just tank every single year because the Canucks will never go 82-0 then 16-0.

If we can't win it all then why even compete?

If we can't dominate then we might as well be the darlings of draft day, never mention the fact that our picks can never seem to develop because the get crushed in a mans league.

But we'll always have draft day.

Thinking I may have to avoid CDC for the next 48 hours or so.

In the past 10+ years this is the first season a good chunk of fans are in favour of a tank. Not sure why you're panties are in a bunch.

[Industrious1]

All right, recently we've had a Slegr thread, now we got a Murzyn one.

Next up...Jim Sandlak? Maybe Oksiuta?

[Standing_Tall#37]

Edler reminds me of him.

[grandmaster]

and any time Neely, Shanahan, Tkachuk, Lindros or Roberts were on the ice, so was Murzyn

And every time pylon Murzyn was on the ice, those players you listed scored a plethora of goals. Murzyn was horrible

[grandmaster]

And I imagine that's the whole point of her thread. As in we should have traded him...

And get what? A bag of pucks? All the teams knew how slow Murzyn was, he was perfect to stay where he was so they could easily skate around that pylon and score on us.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

And every time pylon Murzyn was on the ice, those players you listed scored a plethora of goals. Murzyn was horrible

Obviously Pat Quinn didn't think so and he used to leave things in the toilet that were probably better judges of talent than you.

If Murzyn was anywhere near as bad as people say he was, he never would have played in the league. The fact is that, back then, there were literally dozens of pretty much the exact same type of player all over the NHL.

[hlinkas wrister]

Obviously Pat Quinn didn't think so and he used to leave things in the toilet that were probably better judges of talent than you.

If Murzyn was anywhere near as bad as people say he was, he never would have played in the league. The fact is that, back then, there were literally dozens of pretty much the exact same type of player all over the NHL.

Quote of the year IMO.

Back to the OP- Jan, no offense but I usually avoid your topics as they all tend to be about the exact same thing ( this one included ) but you try to fool people into responding by couching your "sell the team" slant with a new intro. I will however respond to this one as you raise a valuable point- selling when market value is high. Who, pray tell, is punching above their weight and should be sold before they crash down to their normal production levels ? I honestly can't think of anybody on the Canucks who fits that description right now. If anything we have an excess of players on the downside of their careers who are packing NTC's or LNTC's. And to another of your points- sorry, Benning and Linden don't do anything in their lives or jobs because of what people post on CDC, that is just a patently ridiculous belief.

[TheAntar]

Fan opinion matters. No a few forum posts don't do anything but you really think Luongo leaves if fans arent overwhelmingly hard on him?

Murzyn was actually a good partner for lumme and a big reason he got to play his game was murzyns stay home approach.

I'm not opposed to trading an aging vet for youth but I really like the recent approach of going after 20-22 yr olds ready to start playing in the NHL vs simple draft picks. Though I might change my tune if we'd ever picked up a Jamie Benn or shea Weber or pekka with random relatively low draft picks.

[hlinkas wrister]

Fan opinion matters. No a few forum posts don't do anything but you really think Luongo leaves if fans arent overwhelmingly hard on him?

Murzyn was actually a good partner for lumme and a big reason he got to play his game was murzyns stay home approach.

I'm not opposed to trading an aging vet for youth but I really like the recent approach of going after 20-22 yr olds ready to start playing in the NHL vs simple draft picks. Though I might change my tune if we'd ever picked up a Jamie Benn or shea Weber or pekka with random relatively low draft picks.

Spot on about Dana playing with Jrki. As for Luongo leaving, I don't think fan sentiment had anything to do with it, but having a coach who didn't trust him and a family living 4 thousand kilometers away did. I too wish we had a little more flexibility to move veterans, hopefully JB bucks the Canucks trend of giving out NTC's in the future.