Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Jester13

Members
  • Posts

    5,817
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Jester13

  1. He was healthy last year and had a great year. He got injured during pre-season this year and has struggled since. Even so, he hasn't had that bad of a year, although it's certainly not his best. I just don't think he's regressing. But, having said all of this, he HAS to sign for a reasonable deal. If he thinks he's worth more than he is and decides to hold out again or something then I'm more than happy to trade him.
  2. He was our best forward last year and is having a down year, which everyone on the team is having aside from Miller, Demko, and Hughes. Please don't reply to my posts in the future.
  3. Let's not forget that he had another injury to start the year, likely a groin. If he rushed back to try and help the team but as a result never fully healed, a good offseason could very well see a new Brock next year. Having said this, he needs to sign for a reasonable deal in order to stay. He knows this and publicly said he wants to stay, so I hope it happens.
  4. We have cap space to sign him. It's about him willing to sign for what he's worth, as we can no longer overpay 4th line players.
  5. The TDL was yesterday, so I would imagine PA & Co were quite busy with that on their plate. We might very well see a deal by season's end. I just don't see Brock playing hardball like last time with him coming out and saying how much he wants to be here.
  6. With Brock saying twice how much he wants to be a Canuck, it wouldn't surprise me if Allvin and his agent have had talks and they have a "hand-shake deal" of what he will sign for, which will be less than his QO.
  7. I really feel like this swap of Ham for Dermott is going to be great for us. We get rid of someone who was apparently not very well liked in the room to someone who is extremely well liked in the room. Seeing what Shaw has been able to do for our dmen growth makes me excited to see what he can do with Dermott and his potential.
  8. Why would Motte be on their 4th line when he was playing 3rd line minutes with us and should be paid accordingly?!!! /sarcasm. When Kakko comes back, Motte might not even crack their lineup.
  9. Try to lock him in long term for 5.5-6 and then see him have a great offseason and comeback healthy, quicker, and playing above his pay grade. Win.
  10. This thread reminds me if a Jesus/hockey joke, but I don't want to offend anyone.
  11. Easy to say from the outside looking in. But it does sound like management tried to trade him, but no one apparently wanted him, which doesn't surprise me with how Halak has played and the known prickliness of his personality.
  12. One could argue that the team's lackluster play signaled to management that faith in them making the playoffs is not warranted.
  13. Maybe not many teams wanted to give anything up for a 4th line rental? Maybe Motte isn't as highly touted as Canucks fans think he is? Maybe management knew what he wanted and saw it as an opportunity to shed cap and gain a pick?
  14. $2m+ savings plus a 4th is at least something, so I'm not sure what you're getting at here? I'm guessing you're upset they didn't do more, in which case I already provided my thoughts to you in my other post on how I feel about that as well.
  15. There are people saying they didn't check in and people saying they have checked in for a while now. They knew what he wanted, tried to get him to sign for less, but his agent has said he wants 3rd line money as a 4th line player. It was time to move on.
  16. I think what we did was fine, but I would've liked to see them do more. I voted 2/10. We got whatever we could for a player that isn't re-signing with us, so it's certainly better than nothing.
  17. The bolded is the epitome of why we had to trade him for something (anything). I think where we differ is that you think having Motte in the lineup for the remaining 18 games means we still have a chance at the playoffs whereas I do not. It's time to accept that we aren't making the playoffs this year; nor should we, as we won't go far even if we do and all it'll do is see us end up with a worse draft pick.
  18. Motte is not the catalyst for us "winning now", and we 100% did have to trade Motte because we cannot afford what he's asking for and thus will not be re-signing him. No one "wanted" Motte to be traded - players, fans, coaches, etc. - but the writing was on the wall for having to make this trade. The cap space and pick in a deep draft are worth more than 18 games in a failed season, especially if it also means we hold back a budding prospect from making the jump. If you think otherwise then you're thinking with your heart and not your head. FWIW, agreeing to disagree means we agree to, well, disagree, so of course you don't have to agree with my position; therein lies the agreement.
  19. Motte is not going to make or break the rest of our season. We have to go 14-4 in order to have even a small chance of making the playoffs. It does matter that Motte was drafted in the 4th round because there are so many complaining that we won't find an NHL player in the 4th round; well, Motte is from the 4th round. We also have Lockwood knocking on the door, and he's apparently going to see games this year, as he's another Motte-type player. So, basically what you're saying is that you'd rather have Motte here for 18 games instead of clearing cap, getting a 4th round pick in a deep draft, and letting one of our best grinding-type player prospects get a chance at the end of a failed season. We will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
  20. How so? Motte was drafted in the 4th round. Plus, the 2023 class is supposed to be a deep one. You simply cannot let guys walk for nothing. Period.
  21. Is it hard to understand that he's a UFA, 4th line player, injury prone that comes with risk of more injury, and who wants more money than we can afford/he's worth?
×
×
  • Create New...