Biff Tannen
-
Posts
631 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Biff Tannen
-
-
- Popular Post
3 minutes ago, JayDangles said:You don't trade guys like Motte. Pay him whatever he wants.
-
1
-
6
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
53 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:Keep the slamming coming...just typed what I was hearing about him being their to watch his BRO, my bad! Never change attacking people for being wrong fellow Canuck fans!
Have a wonderful day!
Maybe I missed something, but I can't see anyone attacking you. You called Quinn Hughes selfish without checking if he actually did the thing you were acusing him of and others fact checked it for you.
-
2
-
4
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
36 minutes ago, HKSR said:
Obtaining Schmidt for a 3rd round pick was a good trade. People all over the hockey world even said it was a great trade. It wasn't GMJB's fault that Green couldn't get anything out of Schmidt considering he was a top pairing defender on Vegas.
Are we judging these trades in hindsight or not? Seems you're doing both tbh. It seemed a good trade at the time, didn't work out and got an equivalent pick back but can't really give him 2 Ws for it. Ultimately Green being Schmidt's coach was Benning's fault, but I'll try and keep my crtique to trades.
36 minutes ago, HKSR said:By the time GMJB had to trade Schmidt, he was nowhere near the calibre of player he was on Vegas, yet he still got his 3rd round pick back. Hence a W.
It was only a year latter and Schmidt is still a very similar player. I've not followed him that closely, but IMO he was a 2nd pair offensive D-man in Vegas and is a 2nd pair offensive D-man in Winnipeg.
36 minutes ago, HKSR said:We can't cherry pick on draft picks. Fact is, that pick turned into McKeown. That is FACT. So there was no loss there, otherwise we could easily say every draft pick that VAN received COULD HAVE been this guy or that guy. It goes both ways.
The pick only turned into McKeown because LA had it. That too is a FACT. The loss was the % chance at a good NHL player.
If the Toffoli trade had been the other way around would you really call it a draw bordering on a loss?
You think Benning "won far more trades than he lost", I disagree but I doubt I can convince you.
-
Maybe if this was done more objectively it might be worthwhile, but as it is...
Get Schmidt for a 3rd = W
Sell Schmidt for a 3rd = W
A 2nd round pick for Linden Vey = D (sure McKeown is an AHLer but we could've picked Montour, Dvorak or Point. Obviously no guarantee but 1 in 20 shot at Point is >>>>>> Vey)
Bonino+ for Sutter = W (we added for a roughly equal player who we then overpaid and right now Bonino could be our 3rd line C and Sutter can't)
No idea how you can call the Toffoli trade a D. IIRC Boeser was injured just before the deadline and then the remaining regular season was cancelled so it kinda made sense and Benning can't be blamed for Covid, but if we're gonna judge it all in hindsight it's a massive L.
I'm not gonna go through them all, but my guess is his trades would come out around 50/50. He did okayish at trades, good at drafting, bad at FA and bad at hiring coaches. Overall I'm glad he's gone but don't think he pooped the bed as badly as some GMs.
-
Personally I'd lean towards trading Miller beacuse his value is high, he makes a lot of dumb mistakes, it kinda feels like he doesn't want to be here anymore, and there need to be changes. That said he's still one of the best players on the team and if there aren't any good enough offers then I'd keep him even if it means losing him for nothing at the end next season. I definitely wouldn't want to sign him 8x8 if that was what was needed to extend him.
I think I need a couple of dozen more Miller threads before deciding which side of the fence to fall.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Roberts said:
line combo predictions for tonight?
Petterson Horvat Chiasson
Podz Miller Chiasson
Pearson Chiasson Garland
Motte Lammikko Chiasson
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, AngryElf said:
The ghost of Travis Hamonic fuels the team in their quest for a playoff spot.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Plsdontdoit said:
thier a boneheaded play from miller we expect each game
Don't worry, they're gonna trade him to make room for Chiasson's extension
-
9 minutes ago, hero11 said:
If Canucks can trade away Garland, Pearson, Poolman and Dickenson that would free up $14-$15 million in cap space.
Valuable cap space!
Any pieces coming back would be a bonus.
Since when did just over 13 become 14-15? More to the point you'd have 4 holes you'd need to fill so that's at least 4 million back on the cap. All in you're probably left with less than 9 million and the team would be worse. Cap space is useful, but I'd want an actual return for Garland at least.
-
3 hours ago, hero11 said:
Hearing talks of Garland to NJ for Ty Smith and picks. More to come later.
Anonymous poster cites anonymous source.
-
1
-
-
-
With all due respect the thread title is far too long.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Goal:thecup said:
No there isn't.
3 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:Yes there is.
You're both wrong
-
1
-
-
Just now, Coconuts said:
The debates I've had with various different people regarding Miller over the last 2-3 months tells me otherwise
There are definitely two sides
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Canucks Curse said:
Miller to LA for Byfield or Kupari + Brock Faber + 2022nd 1st
Miller to LA for Kupari + Brandt Clarke + 2022 2nd
Miller 50% retained this year to NYR for Schneider + Lafreniere
Miller 50% retained this year for Rasmus Andersson + Connary Zary + 2022nd 2nd
Miller to BOS for Studnicka + Lysell + 2022nd 1st
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm fairly sure you have to retain for the remainder of a contract. Even with that in mind I think you're over-valuing Miller (or under-valuing everyone else?)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:
Why so defensive? Not all goalies become good NHL goalies. He's too small, doesn't matter how much they develop him. Unfortunate for him, good guy and all that.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, RolexSub said:
This is not the first time seeing our smaller player getting cheap shot on. As a matter of fact it happens so often the last 10yrs during the Sedin Era and our team is where we are today vs Tampa Bay and look at their sizeable team as they have all the right elements to be successful. How many cups have we won during the time in the league vs Tampa for example. I am just saying we need a change and having a smaller team will definitely not help us in the long run.
At the risk of going round in circles you're also saying you want to keep Garland, Motte, Hughes and Hoglander. All the other players on your list won't be on the team next year and they don't have any trade value. If Vancouver makes the playoffs this season they'll be in such good form this group deserves a shot. Obviously it's more likely that they won't so the options are trade someone (Miller, Boeser, EP, Hughes?) for size & quality, or get bigger bottom six players in FA.
In summary - I'm not convinced you've identified a problem, your solution isn't viable and this thread doesn't really add anything to your previous one on the same subject.
-
10 minutes ago, tas said:
my favourite thing in the world is when someone puts their foot in their mouth while trying to correct someone else's grammar. the irony is delicious.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, RolexSub said:
That is another reason why we are small and no one will step up and drop their gloves for their teammates.
Another reason for us to get bigger and tougher so no one will pick on our smaller guys.
I don't think any other player on the ice even realised what was happening and only noticed Highmore was down when they were about to re-enter the zone by which point the refs were standing over him. Drawing two cheapshot penalties was probably the best outcome in the circumstances.
-
1 hour ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:
The first step in Rutherford's plan to pry Lafreniere out of New York......?
Or Rooster out of Arizona?
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Drakrami said:
..? Teams aren't going to say oh $&!# I better have my head up, Tyler Motte's on the ice. Nor will Motte be dropping the gloves.
Motte is great, I hate to keep saying this, but we need a gritty checking line like what Tampa Bay had with the Goodrow line. Dickinson was supposed to be a move in that direction that has failed miserably.
And when your supposedly gritty 3rd/4th line Highmore gets ragdolled by a 5 feet 9 Torey Krug? Yes there's a problem.
Not sure I'd call that ragdolling and without it probably would've lost 3-0
-
1 hour ago, RolexSub said:
We average 6'1" probably with a big boost from Myer's 6'8" frame. But 1/3 of our line up every game in game out is we have smaller guys playing. If all you guys are so keen on keeping the same small line ups and continue to lose and not make a change and not noticing our team is on the smaller scale in the NHL its ok then I have nothing to say here in making suggestions in finding a potential route cause of losing. The team was built small from the Benning Era and I guess you guys are missing him lots still lol.
Jim Benning is 6'0" and Jim Rutherford is 5'8" in heels.
I'm not against having more big players with skill. The problem is you can't get them by trading a load of boarderline NHL/AHL players on expiring contracts.
-
1
-
-
Our average height and weight is pretty similar to most other teams in the NHL. Even if it wasn't your solution is to trade Dries, Dowling, Highmore and Hunt? Who would be trading for them and what would they give us?
I did some research of my own, a hockey puck is 1" thick so a stack of 84 would be 7 foot tall. If we package all 4 with a 2nd round pick I reckon you might pull it off.
-
1
-
-
The only players on your list contracted beyond this season are Dowling, Hogs, Hughes and Garland. Dowling is on league minimum for one more year, so not really an issue.
With that in mind...
Hughes for Oleksiak
Garland for Boyle
Hogs for Bjugstad
#plantheparade
almost no one contemplating a Miller trades factors in....
in Canucks Talk
Posted
Didn't he end up in Vancouver because Tampa needed the cap space? Canucks are up against the ceiling and need to make changes. Miller's age, value and contract status make him one of the most likely to be moved. Also, the cap's not really the same for everyone when you take factor in the tax rates.
This thread is dumb, I think everyone (apart from the OP) did factor in Miller being a UFA in 2023 and the fact Toffoli has one more year. A year and a half of one of the best players available should be pretty valuable and any team could extend him next season. We should get much more than Montreal did and if the offer isn't good enough we keep him which isn't too bad either.