TheRussianRocket. Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 17 minutes ago, coryberg said: Yeah they showed us... 3 players we could have easily signed already. One we tried to trade, one we waived and one that doesn't fit the description of the player the GM is looking to add. Has he taken the piss or the crap? Why do people get so sensitive lol, just accept the truth they got burned so stop pretending like they never or it wasn't a big deal. End of they day, Stars get the last laugh. > Canucks are looking to add a 4C (why they wanted Vermette but lost out on him), Cracknell could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another middle/top 6 winger as per management saying numerous times since the draft (with multiple reports having said JB had interest in Jiri), Hudler could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another 2nd/3rd pairing dman but can't since there aren't any left in FA. The fact of the matter is Hamhuis wasn't able to stay because we have Sbisa and his terrible contract/salary so there's that. ...if you can honestly say the Canucks are better off without these guys, then I got nothing to say other than take off the homer glasses.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captainhorvat Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Glad hudler is gone to dallas, all the speculation about this mutt signing here can finally come to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Decent move by Nill, I Mac on 1040 said Benn had surgury this off season. Getting Hudler in while Benn gets up to gear is probably the reason he got him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbdoubleu Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Great pick-up by Dallas. Really filling in their young talented roster with veteran guys that can still play. Hudler could be their Bonino/Cullen down the stretch. Now they just need a goalie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCK Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Too bad for us. The nucks could have used hudler's offensive skills. I personally dont think the nucks will have enough firepower to make the playoffs. I hope i'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 10 minutes ago, TheRussianRocket. said: Why do people get so sensitive lol, just accept the truth they got burned so stop pretending like they never or it wasn't a big deal. End of they day, Stars get the last laugh. > Canucks are looking to add a 4C (why they wanted Vermette but lost out on him), Cracknell could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another middle/top 6 winger as per management saying numerous times since the draft (with multiple reports having said JB had interest in Jiri), Hudler could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another 2nd/3rd pairing dman but can't since there aren't any left in FA. The fact of the matter is Hamhuis wasn't able to stay because we have Sbisa and his terrible contract/salary so there's that. ...if you can honestly say the Canucks are better off without these guys, then I got nothing to say other than take off the homer glasses.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Man Dallas is going to be fun to watch this year. I thought they were a good team last year but they have the pieces to totally dominate this year. I might switch "MY TEAM" to the STARS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 6 minutes ago, J.R. said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Stars aren't going anywhere if Lehtonen doesn't step up his performance and their D still needs improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 8 minutes ago, EdgarM said: Man Dallas is going to be fun to watch this year. I thought they were a good team last year but they have the pieces to totally dominate this year. I might switch "MY TEAM" to the STARS. Yes. A 34 year old winger with a massive head and a 33 year old defenseman who's best days are behind him are always the lynchpins in building a championship team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komodo0921 Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Hockey News has it posted. Hudler to Dallas- 1yr. 2mil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 2 minutes ago, Apple Juice said: Stars aren't going anywhere if Lehtonen doesn't step up his performance and their D still needs improving. True. All they need is one of Bishop/Fleury and they are set for a number of years. Young prime aged team that has it all. They have the organizational depth/assets to make a trade of that magnitude work too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 (Yes. A 34 year old winger with a massive head and a 33 year old defenseman who's best days are behind him are always the lynchpins in building a championship team. ) They are compliments to an ALREADY extremely competitive team. By the way, I see you mentioned the players ages, has this affected their play to date? What a weak excuse IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Darn eh, missed out on another big, strong, gritty forward........ oh right, Hudler's none of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpappy Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 whew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 (Darn eh, missed out on another big, strong, gritty forward........ oh right, Hudler's none of those things. ) OR........ a top six forward who can SCORE!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 23 minutes ago, TheRussianRocket. said: Why do people get so sensitive lol, just accept the truth they got burned so stop pretending like they never or it wasn't a big deal. End of they day, Stars get the last laugh. > Canucks are looking to add a 4C (why they wanted Vermette but lost out on him), Cracknell could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another middle/top 6 winger as per management saying numerous times since the draft (with multiple reports having said JB had interest in Jiri), Hudler could've been that for us. > Canucks are looking to add another 2nd/3rd pairing dman but can't since there aren't any left in FA. The fact of the matter is Hamhuis wasn't able to stay because we have Sbisa and his terrible contract/salary so there's that. ...if you can honestly say the Canucks are better off without these guys, then I got nothing to say other than take off the homer glasses.. One might argue that it is you who is having trouble letting go of the issue, but w/e. I liked Cracknell here. It wouldn't have hurt my feelings if he was re-signed by the Canucks. This being said, the team does have a number of up and coming guys who need to be exposed to the NHL, so I'm happier with the decision to give them that ice time. Hudler did a pretty good job in Calgary. This does not mean that he would do the same job here. Also, as with the 4C position, I'm more about giving that ice time to younger players so the team can see what they have in these assets. I like Hamhuis. I would have liked to see him re-signed. So who sits/plays in the AHL/gets waived in favour of having Hamhuis on the roster? All three of these guys might indeed make the Canucks "better", at least in the short term. Longer view, I'm good with what the team has chosen to do. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 6 minutes ago, EdgarM said: (Yes. A 34 year old winger with a massive head and a 33 year old defenseman who's best days are behind him are always the lynchpins in building a championship team. ) They are compliments to an ALREADY extremely competitive team. By the way, I see you mentioned the players ages, has this affected their play to date? What a weak excuse IMO. Outside of Klingberg, how good is the defense? Really. Dallas, while on the rise, still has deficiencies that weren't addressed in the offseason. And age matters in sports. The older you get, the harder it is to compete at the same level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kakanucks Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 MEH....good for Hudler to getting a contract. For the Canucks, don't really see this as a big loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, Gollumpus said: One might argue that it is you who is having trouble letting go of the issue, but w/e. I liked Cracknell here. It wouldn't have hurt my feelings if he was re-signed by the Canucks. This being said, the team does have a number of up and coming guys who need to be exposed to the NHL, so I'm happier with the decision to give them that ice time. Hudler did a pretty good job in Calgary. This does not mean that he would do the same job here. Also, as with the 4C position, I'm more about giving that ice time to younger players so the team can see what they have in these assets. I like Hamhuis. I would have liked to see him re-signed. So who sits/plays in the AHL/gets waived in favour of having Hamhuis on the roster? All three of these guys might indeed make the Canucks "better", at least in the short term. Longer view, I'm good with what the team has chosen to do. regards, G. True. Introduce youth to the rigors of the NHL, and let them establish chemistry as an emerging young core. I would have been fine with Hamhuis retiring a Canuck, as well. Benning had other ideas. He wanted a younger defensive core to begin to take shape. I'm thinking he viewed Gudbranson as the type of player than could lead the defense, not necessarily by points, but more so by how to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.