-
Posts
8,240 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Gawdzukes
-
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Yeah they did, sorry got a little riled up there. -
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Thank you. I don't get it at all either. -
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Well this year certainly doesn't matter which is the only one he's signed for. I can't understand all the whining when it simply doesn't matter if Motte or some 37 year old journeyman plays out the last 18 games or not. He's not going to be on the team next year no matter what so this simply doesn't matter in any dimension but whatever keep crying over absolutely nothing I guess. How people don't understand what UFA means is perplexing. Carrying on with not caring. You do you. Fair enough you certainly have every right to be skeptical and question whatever you want. I think they actually meant they want to get younger and faster as a team but for guys like you they should have added [but obviously at times veteran players will be brought in if deemed necessary or they have high quality, and in a situation where we trade fourth liner at the TDL an older player may be brought in because they are free and we don't want blow a 2nd rounder or replace with a crappy young player just so we can satisfy a soundbite saying we'd like to get younger]. Man these press conferences would be dumb if they had to talk like that and provide caveats for every sentence they say. For some I guess that's where at though. Whatever, seems really silly when it's completely obvious to me that they're not planning on getting older despite taking on a free older player for 18 meaningless games. -
Yeah I agree. I'm loathe to get rid of any assets as well. We have so very few. I thought about a buyout as well I know a couple people have mentioned we should be dead cap free after next year so it would be nice to be completely free of wasted cap. This buyout isn't that much (thanks for the info) but it's 3 years of $1mil cap penalty (I think?). Not sure if that's worth it to PA. Conversely we could trade him with 50% retained at the end of next year and just owe him $1.325 for 23-24. Does that make any sense?
-
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Thank you. Bailey is absolute garbage. I see zero value in bringing them up. It's better to at least pretend with Richardson. At the end of the day whoooooooooooo caaaaaaaaaaaares though? Why do people keep bitching about meaningless stuff? It's like some dude is getting mad because the kids are wearing green bibbies instead of blue. Bailey, Di Guiseppe, Lockwood, a piece of garbage, Richardson. It's irrelevant. Why can't management just make a simple call without everyone immediately complaining? -
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Does it even matter though? -
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Yup, people should be ecstatic we dumped Hamonic for a third, no retention. We're lucky Chabot got hurt. I think that definitely helped that out. I know we were both desperately hoping/wondering how we get rid of one or two of he and Poolyman, especially moving forward next year. Dermott is exactly what we need there. A cheap player who can actually fill that role fulltime and has experience doing it, while still being young and mobile. I think we're so used to bitching we've somehow filled up 100 pages complaining on three player moves when nothing bad really even happened. -
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
This is the same crap people pulled with Benning. It's fine that people question things but when you bend their answers and moves to fit your own pre-conceived ill attitude that's not being fair, honest, correct, or helpful. How dumb to people sound when they keep talking about Benning running out of time? Very. It's super childish. Hopefully you can actually understand what's going on but if not the goal is to get younger OVERALL. It doesn't mean every single move we make has to be for a younger player until we only have 3 and 4 year olds on the team. Like c'mon man lol. Richardson was obviously brought in to be a stop gap until the end of the year and replace some of what Motte brought. He will be gone at the end of the year. Voila, younger. I get previous management said that so I can understand you may be apprehensive of mixed messages ... but we actually did get younger with Hoglander, Podkolzin, Lammikko, Highmore, Demko, and Burroughs while jettisoning LE, Roussel, Marky, and Beagle. A team can state that as there goal and still find it hard to accomplish. Why people immediately want to jump to pinning labels like liars and such is pretty disingenuous. -
Here here! Well said. It's days like this where I'm glad there are actual hockey people running the team. CDC has collectively shown how little they know about the game yesterday. This team needs to make some major decisions, not cave in to a 4th liner (not 3rd), and pay to keep him. He's the last thing we should be worried about. Especially a guy that has broke 10 points twice in 6 NHL seasons. I love the way Motte plays but people have to give their heads a shake. It's the least important position on the team. Motte for how aggressive and tenacious he is doesn't hit big and is pretty small for a fourth liner. Both BB and JR mentioned the desire to get some more toughness and beef on the fourth line. This would be an opportune spot to do it. At the end of the day we need to decide the direction of the club. Those major decisions should be made before we start blowing money on the fourth line. That was never the problem. I was mottled at first with the return as well with threads predicting a 2nd some a first lol. It turned out there were better players available and Motte was only worth a fourth. Regardless the playoff chase is all but over it doesn't really make a difference if he were to play the last 18 games or not. Like you said at least we made a move with the team in mind. Even if it doesn't move the needle much it's a mid round pick. Definitely a step in the right direction, in the right way of doing things. Holding on to a player out of spite because you wanted more just hurts our team, not the team that you refuse to trade with.
-
[Report] Canucks claim Brad Richardson off waivers
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
It's an expiring contract to replace Motte short term. It doesn't mean anything. The playoffs are over/whatever happens. The real moves will be made in the summer. It's silly when people say stuff like "well they said you wanted to get younger and faster". It's not like every single signing has to match that exact criteria, especially over an 18 game slate. It's not like they can never sign a veteran now. lol that's just being nitpicky to bitch about something. -
Unfortunately I'm thinking they can't and that's why they parted ways for only a fourth. I'd love to have him back too but if he has a playoff similar to what he had with us he'll be a $3 - $3.5m player. I'm exaggerating a bit but kind of not. If they were planning on re-signing him you would have thought they might have just kept him too. Either way we all love us some Motte! Sad day for Canuck fans. Not the greatest TDL lol. At least no big mistakes though. Didn't they tell us that some big changes/decisions needed to be made? Haha, that was intense. Whew! Afterthought: To be honest though if you look at his stat sheet he may not garner that much of a raise. It would be a nice little feather in Allvin's cap if he re-signed.
-
Lol, I was going to say thirds are garbage but it weakened my point. No I totally agree with what you're saying and I'm actually liking the direction. I think we're slightly better too but I'm pretty sure I've given up on the playoffs so this year it's irrelevant for me this year. If he solidifies himself as a regular contributing player for the 3 LD next year it's a win. It's not like it's big money either if it doesn't work out. Now we just need a quick 3 RD's and we're set. One thing I will mention is I was hoping in addition to getting younger adding multiple picks to stock the farm. It would be cool if nothing else to have like 10 picks in the top 3 rounds one year. I want it all. haha!
-
I don't like blocking people but I got 4 or 5 real winners on there right now. I don't have him blocked but if I see him in a thread spreading his lunacy and attacking people who don't agree with him I just leave. He wrote me a nice 4 page essay in drunken, broken, seemingly acid induced English condemning me to hell because I said Miller was a good leader but I thought he acted pissy at times. Haha Good memories!
-
Literally. We had a third rounder and 3 million in cap space yesterday from the trade. Now we have no 3rd rounder and 1.5 million in cap space. I would say that leaves us with 25% of the assets left from what we obtained in the Hamonic trade. That's how we got rid of the big win (75%). I think that's why people, myself included had the reaction they did. It was kind of like a gentle slap to the face. I guess it's debatable but does Dermott really move the needle here? We had an abundance of RD to begin with. We could have easily finished the season out with Myers, Poolman, Schenn, Juulsen, Bowey, Woo, or waiver pickups and saved both the third and the cap. That's the argument I guess. With regards to saying we didn't choose Dermott I hope we didn't just take him because he was some scrap laying on the sidewalk. I hope they actually did choose him to some degree and put a little effort into the deal. As far as third rounders go I agree they are not overly valuable so I'm not that bent out of shape or anything, and like I've mentioned before we need a cheap LD for sure moving forward anyway. I think that's the underlying thinking when you are seeing those comments. I don't disagree our D is garbage so yah he might be better than the guys you listed, but we certainly could have progressed without him and addressed that in some other way. I'm not really arguing with you I don't disagree with what you said or hate the trade.