-
Posts
2,086 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Harold Drunken
-
Totally, the length of the contract is suspect for sure. That's the part I'm not crazy about. At the very least. one can hope he can at least contribute into those contract years and actually play some minutes. That or Jim is going to have to get creative again or work with OEL to make it work...our cap situation will likely be much different in 4-5 years so we'll have to see.
-
OEL has had Vancouver on his list for a few years now, Garland is on record saying he believes the Canucks are one of the bright up and coming young teams in the league. They both sound very happy to be part of this team and that should make people pretty pumped. OEL is only 30 and still has some really good hockey in him.
-
He was a huge peice of it no argument there, it's just not a fair comparison Between him and OEL, different players with different skillsets. Tanev missed alot of hockey too, that was likey a big contribution to him hitting free agency. $4.5 million doesn't seem like alot of money for a guy like him but when you take into account injury history and fairly one dimensional I can see why they didn't resign him.
-
Different players, different skillets, different teams needs- the age correlation between the two is irrelevant. That likely means they thought Tanevs somewhat one dimensional skillet wasn't worth the money he was going to get in free agency...I certainly hope you're not comparing the skillsets and versatility of OEL and Tanev.....OEL much more dynamic player.
-
Agreed, Jim's been "rebuilding" this team for 7 years.....how long does he get? This is a get better now move - not loving getting rid of the 9th pick but we had to sweeten the deal for sure in getting rid of that many bad contracts. We are a better team now, this is a BOLD move but I'm ok with it too - those players grew too stale and weren't contributing much at all. Change needed, new blood and talent. OEL contract isn't great but Yotes retaining some salary but he'll likely play big minutes, unlike Loui. Garland is young at 25, coming off a 39 pts in 49 game season on a bad team. Hockey will hopefully be more entertaining to watch next year - Go Nucks.
-
[Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?
Harold Drunken replied to Me_'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
To me this doesn't make a lot of sense - Schmidt acknowledged it was a "weird" year and very difficult for many reasons. There were a ton of non-hockey challenges and those will likely be gone or less prominent next year. Nothing to suggest a change of scenery is the remedy. Unless this is a coach-player issue or he sincerely doesn't like either the city or organization, I don't see this being accurate. Since our back end lacks depth and experience, it would take something pretty sweet to move him - disgruntled or not. -
Jim Benning's Trade & Free Agents History
Harold Drunken replied to DelChristensen's topic in Canucks Talk
Jesus, you guys thought my take on Benning was skewed....I like to think mine was borderline coherent. -
I was only mentioning Hamonic as a depth D, 3rd pairing for the right price - not a savior or fix by any means. 30 years old doesn't really scare me, I'm not sure why you mention that as being a red flag - that's not old. Hamonic has a history of missing games - thus him being on the 3rd pairing would limit his ice time. Depth is king on the blueline: Larsson - 56 GP, 10 Points, +2 Hamonic - 38 GP, 10 Points, -3 There's not a big gap between the two, Hamonic would have averaged many more points (also with lower avg. ice time) if he played the same amount of games.. Two years separates them in age, your kinda comparing apples to apples and Hamonic would cost millions less, just saying.
-
I agree with what Jim said, we have skill on the back end who can move the puck....that being said - they are on the small side and continually lost puck battles in the defensive zone. They lost a lot of battles on the boards and were physically overwhelmed in many situations. We do need some size back there, I know Myers and Edler (if re-signed) are big d-men who are physical - but if Edler isn't back we are lacking.
-
I think he meant at #9 overall, you have a "chance" of drafting a player that can develop into one of those - of course that would likely take time to come to fruition. You can still add impactful players trading the #9 - perhaps not elite, but a high tier player...Elite players don't get traded for picks, they get traded for picks, prospects and roster pieces.
-
Well yeah, we've been rebuilding longer than they have (not a ton longer, but longer none the less). They were a 44 win team 2016-2017 and have wholesaled the team since then to start their rebuild. Comparatively, the Canucks have tried to stay somewhat competitive while rebuilding it seems, thus stretching the rebuild out over 7 + years. But I do 100% like our team better, more young talent although Chabot, Stutzle, Tkachuk, Batherson are nice young players.